# Covid-19--Exposes our Health Care System’s Weaknesses.



## 127.72 MHz

I found this article in "STAT".

STAT is a media company focused on finding and telling compelling stories about health, medicine, and scientific discovery.

STAT is produced by Boston Globe Media.

In medical parlance, "stat" means important and urgent. "STAT" lab tests are to be resulted in an hour or less,...

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/02...h-care-systems-weaknesses-we-can-be-stronger/
I'll avoid any personal commentary but my hope is that citizens will become better informed to how public health policy is arrived at.

Best regards,


----------



## Oldsarge

It's a coronovirus. So is the common cold. Unless you are elderly and in seriously poor health, you really have nothing to worry about. It's all a "the sky is falling, we must go and tell the king" sort of panic-without-reason. Probably hundreds of thousands of people have already caught it and gotten over it without being aware that they had (gasp!) COVID-19! Wash your hands and quit hyperventilating.


----------



## Peak and Pine

"_Probably hundreds of thousands of people have already caught it and gotten over it without being aware that they had (gasp!) COVID-19! Wash your hands and quit hyperventilating._"

Around 50,000 non-elderly, very healthy young Americans, my grandfather among them, lost their lives to the Spanish Flu In France in 1918, an amount about equal to all the combat deaths of the previous year and a half that we were involved in WWI. You're sounding an awful lot like You Know Who.


----------



## Peak and Pine

^.

UPDATE. The figures I gave above were from memory. I just now Googled for assurance. I was close: 53,000 American combat deaths, 45,000 to the flu. The reason I've bothered to update this arcane stuff is that on the Google trip I found out that the entire number of American *deaths* from the Spanish Flu, most here in the US which was one-third the size it is now, was *675,000*. Gawd. Including my mother's two older sisters, the aunts I never knew. So wash your hands, and pray while doing so.


----------



## Big T

This thread has the potential to explode on a very enjoyable site to visit, turning political, with vitriol ready to infect one and all. Some will succumb to the siren call to express/argue their views, others, simply taking precautions to not let their emotions take over.

For me, I have a mild interest (otherwise I would not have responded!), but I shall wash my hands, cover my mouth and lay low, avoiding those known to be infected.


----------



## eagle2250

^^ Big T has shared with us what
sounds like a workable plan and one that I certainly intend to follow. Take reasonable precautions and respond without undue emotion, should we be touched by the bogeyman! Stay healthy, my friends.


----------



## challer

Oldsarge said:


> It's a coronovirus. So is the common cold. Unless you are elderly and in seriously poor health, you really have nothing to worry about. It's all a "the sky is falling, we must go and tell the king" sort of panic-without-reason. Probably hundreds of thousands of people have already caught it and gotten over it without being aware that they had (gasp!) COVID-19! Wash your hands and quit hyperventilating.


This. If it wasn't reported, you'd never notice it. Very different than the Spanish flu which caused cytokine storms in the body. COVID19 is just the Corona Virus 209. It is also in the SARS class. The big outbreak in China is pollution-induced respiratory problems.


----------



## Howard

Is this virus worse than the virus from The 1920's?


----------



## Dhaller

COVID-19 is far more lethal than the common cold, or most flus. It's a mistake to panic, but it's also a mistake to be blasé about it.

The lethality figures in China are outsized (there are other complicating factors, like air quality and "China being China"), but even removing that data and reassessing, you're looking at an infection with lethality 10-50x that of the flu.

Also, it appears able to reinfect recovered patients, AND be carried by unaffected children, AND be carried by dogs and probably other animals, AND lie dormant in a transmitting carrier. That's a lot of "bonus powers" for one virus.

It's probably seasonal (meaning we can expect this every winter now, until either we develop enough immunity or there's a vaccine), but I imagine by summer it will be a memory. We shall see.

Upside might be that everyone is so terrified now that they'll practice what *should* be normal procedures; maybe we'll see drops in rates of regular flu and cold.

Right now, my biggest worry is allergies, but my wife and daughter plan on spending the whole summer abroad - at our second house in Japan, and traveling to Singapore - so we're "assessing". I'm the scientist in the house - my wife is NOT - so those plans are likely to be based on perceptions of risk rather than measures of risk (I think they should proceed; my wife is more circumspect... and we know which argument usually wins!)

Of course, now everyone on social media is an infectious diseases expert, so expect plenty of advice in the coming weeks!

DH

PS. Yes, some common colds are coronaviruses (about 20%; most are rhinoviruses). "Coronaviridae" is a categorical family of enveloped, single-strand RNA viruses (Group IV viruses). It's more generally accurate to say that the common cold is caused by Group IV viruses, but then, rabies and polio are also Group IV viruses. Trying to make coronavirus look "less serious" by comparing it to the common cold is a bit disingenuous, because it's cherry picking. We might more accurately look at the "whole basket" of COVID-19, rhinovirus, polio, rabies... oh, hepatitis A, rubella, dengue fever (which I have had, no fun), and hantavirus. Happy little family! As you can see, cross-viral comparisons aren't useful.


----------



## Oldsarge

Howard said:


> Is this virus worse than the virus from The 1920's?


Circumstances are different. In the 1918 influenza, people didn't even know what a virus was or how to deal with them. Even so, the mortality rate was not a whole lot higher than 2%. The reason that it killed 50-80 million people is that it infected billions. Now? Wash your hands, don't smoke or vape and avoid being old and in poor health.


----------



## Dhaller

Howard said:


> Is this virus worse than the virus from The 1920's?


This is far, far more *directly* lethal than the 1918 "Spanish" influenza virus.

The 1918 flu was H1N1 ("swine fu"); COVID-19 is probably about 10x more lethal, just based on viral load alone.

The reason for the many deaths in 1918 was that 27% of the entire global population was infected; it was a serious pandemic affecting 500 million people. There were no vaccines. There were no antibiotics. There was poor hygiene in hospitals, and no logistics available to handle infection surges. Probably more people died of untreatable superinfection (the so called "death bed phenomenon") than of direct viral infection.

My great grandmother died during that pandemic.

Now, hopefully, we have better systems in place to handle pandemic surges and prevent complications. Still... we're seeing the advent of resistant bacterial strains and so on, so *eventually* we certainly have a "Spanish Flu 2.0"... but not today.

I don't think so, anyway?

DH


----------



## irish95

Great job Dhaller. I wanted to chime in myself, but it appears unnecessary after your comments. I'm not sure facts will work though on a certain segment. It will continue to be called the same as the "common cold".


----------



## ran23

My Liposomal vitamin C was $18.89 in mid February, almost double that now (ebay prices).


----------



## challer

COVID19 is far LESS lethal than the spanish flu. SF caused cytokine storms which killed most people regardless of health. COVID19 is a SARS virus. If you are old, immune challenged, or have cardiopulmonary problems, you almost certainly will not be in any trouble.


----------



## vonSuess

Had breakfast at the senior center this morning and we were talking about all this. Of course, all of us lived through the polio epidemic - including a couple of us who had it hit our own households. So indeed we talked about the current virus, but we didn't talk about it much...


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

My SWMBO is an infectious disease expert with 30 years experience in the us and overseas.

Here is what our family is doing....

Don’t panic, wash your hands, stay home if you feel ill, don’t send sick kids to school, if you are immune compromised stay at home, if you are elderly best to lay low for a while.

Rinse, repeat.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## momsdoc

My concern is a logistical one. As a primary care physician, I and all the other healthcare workers are on the front lines, and the most likely to be exposed. 

But thanks to the hoarding by the masses we do not have protective gear. We were informed yesterday by our Mothership health system, that no offices will be receiving protective gowns, goggles or N95 masks. The little supply available is being diverted to the hospitals, and ERs.

Yet the policy is that we must evaluate patients before referring them to the ER, so as to not overload the facilities. 

To do this, policy requires that patients not be allowed in the building without staff placing an N95 mask on them (while in protective gear), then hustle the patient into an isolation room in the office, evaluate and send to the ER if suspect, or treat as usual if not suspect. 

Then and only then an we leave the isolation room and doff our protective gear, which of course we cannot get because of the shortage caused by civilian hoarding. A Catch 22.

N95 masks are of no use to those trying to protect themselves in the community, they need to be put on the sick individuals, not the healthy.

I fear the exposure of healthcare workers, and their subsequent quarentine will break the system and lead to excess loss of life.

Personally, my wife is on immunosuppressants due to her recent transplant. Out of an abundance of precaution, as I will surely be exposed at some point (if not already), I have self isolated in the other half of our Mother/Daughter house since the confirmed arrival of the virus in NJ. 

I will hopefully be able to see her again in the summer if this virus acts like other Coronaviruses and goes dormant in the warm weather. Hopefully by next Fall we will have enough protective supplies so as not to repeat this cycle.


----------



## drlivingston

Good tracker for routinely updated info.

https://www.worldometers.info/coron...lgVjr-XVJZ2brXdN3LcL627t11rgB86DH3hH0Iu2Ej9Og


----------



## Oldsarge

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-d...rs-produce-new-coronavirus-fatality-estimate/
Using really advanced statistical methods, the University of Bern estimates that the mortality rate for COVID-19 is about 1.6%. Wash your hands.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Oldsarge said:


> ...the *University of Bern* estimates that the mortality rate for COVID-19 is about 1.6%.


Sanders has a. University? Better be free.


----------



## Oldsarge

Oy!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

momsdoc said:


> My concern is a logistical one. As a primary care physician, I and all the other healthcare workers are on the front lines, and the most likely to be exposed. But thanks to the hoarding by the masses we do not have protective gear. We were informed yesterday by our Mothership health system, that no offices will be receiving protective gowns, goggles or N95 masks. The little supply available is being diverted to the hospitals, and ERs.
> Yet the policy is that we must evaluate patients before referring them to the ER, so as to not overload the facilities. To do this, policy requires that patients not be allowed in the building without staff placing an N95 mask on them (while in protective gear), then hustle the patient into an isolation room in the office, evaluate and send to the ER if suspect, or treat as usual if not suspect. Then and only then an we leave the isolation room and doff our protective gear, which of course we cannot get because of the shortage caused by civilian hoarding. A Catch 22.
> N95 masks are of no use to those trying to protect themselves in the community, they need to be put on the sick individuals, not the healthy.
> I fear the exposure of healthcare workers, and their subsequent quarantine will break the system and lead to excess loss of life.
> Personally, my wife is on immunosuppressants due to her recent transplant. Out of an abundance of precaution, as I will surely be exposed at some point (if not already), I have self isolated in the other half of our Mother/Daughter house since the confirmed arrival of the virus in NJ. I will hopefully be able to see her again in the summer if this virus acts like other Coronaviruses and goes dormant in the warm weather. Hopefully by next Fall we will have enough protective supplies so as not to repeat this cycle.


I work at a level I trauma center and the panic buying and hording by the masses has caused the same shortages at our institution that you have described.

I am immunosuppressed and my trauma R.N. wife is diabetic,.....

I will continue to focus my due diligence on my department's infection control routine.

Regards,


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Best wishes to the AAAC brethren in the front lines of this medical crisis.

Your work, and the risks involved, is greatly appreciated. You remind us that the veneer of civilization is tenuously thin!

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## challer

N95 and N100 masks certainly protect the wearer. That's why they were invented. They are not medical focused but there are sterile versions of them - to protect the Dr. If they do not have 1 way valves, they can help protect the patient from the doctor. Many have these one way valves to make them cooler to wear - they only protect the wearer. Yes, viruses are smaller than any particles but all filters take some viruses out of the air.


----------



## Howard

Always wash your hands and buy plenty of hand sanitizer.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> Always wash your hands and buy plenty of hand sanitizer.


Can you believe they sell gallon jugs of that stuff. Finding oneself in a crowd these days, it smells like the masses have bathed in rubbing alcohol and bleach! Be sensible folks.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

From today's New York Post. the reason I take this account with a bit more than a grain of salt is because he's a Physician's Assistant.

I guess it's a nasty bug,.... I'll be working my normal hours at an institution that has recently announced that we have covid-19 patients. I'm Immunosuppressed, I hope I'm doing the right thing.

https://nypost.com/2020/03/09/new-j...nt-thinks-he-caught-it-at-times-square-hotel/


----------



## challer

Flying today. Airports are empty for no reason. Just lots of hand washing and the world is fine. Many thousands have died from the "normal" flu this season and it hasn't set everyone's hair on fire. This shouldn't either.


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> Can you believe they sell gallon jugs of that stuff. Finding oneself in a crowd these days, it smells like the masses have bathed in rubbing alcohol and bleach! Be sensible folks.


And what's with toilet paper too? Now how is one going to wipe their rear end?


----------



## Oldsarge

People just love being scared. If they weren't, horror movies and roller coasters would have no appeal at all.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> And what's with toilet paper too? Now how is one going to wipe their rear end?


People are prone to over react and it shows.A few weeks of that shortage and we will all be running around looking like a troop of 'out of sorts' red bottomed baboons. That's going to stink, for sure! LOL.


----------



## Big T

I heard the CDC is recommending alcohol cleansing from the inside out. I think Glennfiddich 18 will work nicely.


----------



## ran23

I was reading some reports (American Doctors) in China, they are using intravenous Vitamin -C to treat their patients. As a precaution, take 2000mg of Vit-C . I use Liposomal Vit-C (fat based--goes into the blood stream--next best thing to intravenous).


----------



## Oldsarge

Hmpf! I'm just staying home. I have a pantry and a freezer stuffed to bulging with things to eat. Why go out? My wine cellar just got restocked, too.


----------



## challer

eagle2250 said:


> Can you believe they sell gallon jugs of that stuff. Finding oneself in a crowd these days, it smells like the masses have bathed in rubbing alcohol and bleach! Be sensible folks.


Buy Mediclean (it's for real and I have). Under the radar for now


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Unfortunately for me, I have given up booze for the Lenten season.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

I gave up tobacco for Lent about forty-six years ago and have stuck to it resolutely ever since.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oregon Live is the web site connected to Portland Oregon's largest newspaper, "The Oregonian".

https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavi...-down-italy-bug-boat-docks-in-california.html
In the article a user in Italy wrote:

A Twitter user with the handle Zìbora has suddenly become a star on the social-media platform by providing regular updates, commentary and video about the situation in Italy. Zìbora is begging the U.S. and the rest of the world to avoid the missteps that has led to Italy's crisis:

"Please, please guys," pleaded a tweet on Monday.* "Here in northern Italy we made one big mistake. Everybody kept saying 'It's just flu' and now our intensive care units are collapsing. Everybody kept going outside like nothing happened and now our grandparents and parents are dying."*

Perhaps it is "Just the Flu,..."


----------



## Oldsarge

The loss of a few ancient politicians might not be a bad thing, you know.


----------



## Big T

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Unfortunately for me, I have given up booze for the Lenten season.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


For me, it is a vow to remove cursing from my language repertoire. I am putting an extra $5.00 into my weekly contribution for each curse, andsince Ash Wednesday, I have given an extra $35.00. An additional upside, is far more thinking before speaking.

Amazing what you can do, when you force yourself to be fully aware of actions! A few months ago, I could easily top several hundred per day!


----------



## Big T

Oldsarge said:


> I gave up tobacco for Lent about forty-six years ago and have stuck to it resolutely ever since.


I was never a smoker in earlier life, but several decades ago, I discovered my liking on occasional cigars. I'm good for one every two weeks, until weather improves enough for the back deck and fire pit, then all bets are off.


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> People are prone to over react and it shows.A few weeks of that shortage and we will all be running around looking like a troop of 'out of sorts' red bottomed baboons. That's going to stink, for sure! LOL.


I understand hand sanitizer but running out of toilet paper is ridiculous.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> I heard the CDC is recommending alcohol cleansing from the inside out. I think Glennfiddich 18 will work nicely.


Inside one's rear end? NO!


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> Inside one's rear end? NO!


I believe the ingestion of Glennffiddich 18 is traditionally done from the northbound end of one's southbound butt, cleansing one's body from the mouth to the.... well you know, as it passes through the body! LOL


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Traveling today. ATL airport was below 50% normal. JFK is practically empty compared to how it usually is.

Lots of folks in masks. I am wearing leather gloves except when washing my hands...or on the phone  .

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## SG_67

It’s not the common cold, but it’s not some kind of super virus. The level of panic is on par with Godzilla invading Tokyo harbor. 

When the final numbers are in we will see that the mortality rate is really not much different than the seasonal flu which, by the way, has killed an estimated 20,000 Americans (per CDC). But no one is talking about that.


----------



## Dhaller

The flu has killed 20,000 people because it has infected about 20 million.

Thus far, mortality of COVID-19 is shaking down to be about 3.6%, compared to 0.1% for influenza; COVID-19 is about 36x more lethal than influenza, which I'd hardly characterize as "not much different".

COVID-19 hasn't killed so many yet because *actual measures have been taken* to stop it! I mean, the stunning failure of logic of "lol hardly anyone has died of COVID-19 dudes like seriously look at the flu" is, well, I was going to say "incredible" but really it's "wholly predictable". Perhaps I can be kinder and simply call it a "failure of mathematical acumen" or "ignorance of statistical theory".

I have been saying "people shouldn't panic", but that presupposes that people can actually approach this infection with intelligence and reasonable caution... but maybe not. Maybe a panic is actually fairly useful, and inciting panic a good strategy for containing pandemics?

DH

PS: here's some math - if everyone who got the flu this year had gotten COVID-19 instead, we'd be looking at about 800,000 deaths. That would certainly be noticeable.


----------



## SG_67

Dhaller said:


> PS: here's some math - if everyone who got the flu this year had gotten COVID-19 instead, we'd be looking at about 800,000 deaths. That would certainly be noticeable.


except the problem is we don't know how many people actually have it. That's the problem with cases like this and why people shouldn't be hitting the panic button. So 800,000 assumes we know who is infected and have an accurate count.

Covid-19 is from a family of viruses well known already. It's lethality is also somewhat predictable and thus far, the numbers are looking to show that. Most who have died, in this country, have been already compromised somehow.

Obviously we need to be aware of it and employ best practices to minimize the spread is key. It's one thing to have a robust public health response. It's a whole other thing to lock down an entire country like Italy has.


----------



## Dhaller

Just FYI, that "family of well-known viruses" includes rabies, which has the rare honor of being the *deadliest virus* (~100% fatal without treatment), so looking at Group IV membership as "somewhat predictable" lethality is a bit disingenuous.

Basically, what we have is a panic (over the possibility of a COVID-19 pandemic), and then a panic about the panic (I jokingly suggested to a CDC epidemiologist just this morning that they need to look into "pandemic metapanic"! Morning wordplay is good for you.)

The irony of all this public health awareness is that we may have fewer influenza or other deaths this year because COVID-19 worries might *accidentally* prevent influenza transmission...)

DH


----------



## Troones

I'll be honest and say that COVID-19 has been worrying me, but what I have found comforting in the last couple of days is the reporting of how many patients have recovered. Being reminded of the "light at the end of the tunnel" is a good thing. I'm hoping more of this in the news may at least reduce panic buying. 

Reading, and seeing daily news reports of how the virus has spread, its easy to forget that people actually do recover! Its not a matter of every single person on earth eventually getting it and being sick at the same time. Stay healthy everyone.


----------



## Oldsarge

Even though I am well within the at risk demographic, my most serious concern is my Mother in Law who is 93. Fortunately, she lives in a very upscale retirement community that seems to have perfected the techniques of keeping people alive for a very looooooonnnnnnnggggggg time. A full third of the residents are over 90. So she is probably in the safest place she could be.


----------



## SG_67

This is probably the most responsible and straightforward story I've seen on covid-19. It pretty much sticks to facts, science and is devoid of the politics that permeates the current discussion (on whole...not here specifically).

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-flu.html


----------



## RogerP

Dhaller said:


> The flu has killed 20,000 people because it has infected about 20 million.
> 
> Thus far, mortality of COVID-19 is shaking down to be about 3.6%, compared to 0.1% for influenza; COVID-19 is about 36x more lethal than influenza, which I'd hardly characterize as "not much different".
> 
> COVID-19 hasn't killed so many yet because *actual measures have been taken* to stop it! I mean, the stunning failure of logic of "lol hardly anyone has died of COVID-19 dudes like seriously look at the flu" is, well, I was going to say "incredible" but really it's "wholly predictable". Perhaps I can be kinder and simply call it a "failure of mathematical acumen" or "ignorance of statistical theory".
> 
> I have been saying "people shouldn't panic", but that presupposes that people can actually approach this infection with intelligence and reasonable caution... but maybe not. Maybe a panic is actually fairly useful, and inciting panic a good strategy for containing pandemics?
> 
> DH
> 
> PS: here's some math - if everyone who got the flu this year had gotten COVID-19 instead, we'd be looking at about 800,000 deaths. That would certainly be noticeable.


Spot on in every respect. I can't think of a single source advocating panic or hysteria as a reasoned response. But I can think of some advocating that it's no big deal / all under control / nothing to worry about and that is definitely part of the problem.

Oh - and in breaking news the NBA (pro basketball) has suspended play indefinitely.


----------



## challer

No, Dhaller, I work with virologists and physicians daily. 

We called Italy - The reason the system is overloaded, is because the media has caused 100,000s of people to go to the hospital when there are only about 9000 cases. 

People are dying by avoiding surgery (even in the US). People are afraid of hospitals. Doctors in the US are already cancelling patient visits. 

In China, nearly every person was over 80, affected by long term smoking and heavy pollution. Same as in Italy. Except in China it was Chinese New Year and culturally, everyone seems to spit in public regardless of location or situation. 

The NYT is not a great source of medical information- and it said nothing about COVID19 being any worse. To compare it to Spanish flu was reprehensible. 

Current US strategy is to spread out the number of cases but not reduce the overall exposure - cancelling class just delays the inevitable. 

If you are in the affected criteria, stay inside, avoid people, maintain a good protocol.


----------



## SG_67

I think some comments are more a reflection on certain biases rather than facts. 

No one is advocating for panic. No one is saying, “meh, it’s just the flu”. We just don’t know the full scale yet. 

Different countries have different public health systems, and to look at the Chinese numbers is unreliable to say the least. The government is opaque at best and more interested in the appearance of being competent than actually doing something. 

When you arrest the person who brought it to the worlds attention and make him sign a confession that he exaggerated the findings, I think you’ve just disqualified yourself from further involvement.

Here’s what we do know SO FAR:
-There are around 1300 cases in the US thus far. 

- there have been 38 deaths, 23 of which are from a nursing home in WA. Excluding that, it means the virus has killed about 15 people.

-The nursing residents, as tragic and sad as it is, are not a representative sample so even though mathematically significant, for the purposes of studying how the virus affects the general population, somewhat unreliable. 

As for comparing it to pandemics from >100 years ago, this is somewhat laughable. Mind you viruses were barely known by then, let alone understanding how they spread, their genetics and actual physical modeling.


----------



## RogerP

SG_67 said:


> No one is saying, "meh, it's just the flu".


This is patently false. I'd happily point out examples disproving your claim, but as they tend to have a commonality of origin, doing so would no doubt contravene the no politics rule.


----------



## Oldsarge

RogerP said:


> This is patently false. I'd happily point out examples disproving your claim, but as they tend to have a commonality of origin, doing so would no doubt contravene the no politics rule.


And since we all know the origin, naming it is unnecessary, anyway.


----------



## Oldsarge

Anyway, two responses, one vintage 1919 and one suggested by Big T



















Oh, and wash your hands.


----------



## challer

Yes, wash your hands, don't touch your face and eyes and distance. And alcohol needs to be at least 70%/140 proof to sanitize. On the other hand, alcoholism and alcohol deaths increase substantially and in a measurable way during events of this nature.


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> I believe the ingestion of Glennffiddich 18 is traditionally done from the northbound end of one's southbound butt, cleansing one's body from the mouth to the.... well you know, as it passes through the body! LOL


Does it have to go there?


----------



## Howard

Stop N Shop went crazy yesterday, bottled water, toilet paper and hand sanitizer were off the shelves.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> Does it have to go there?


I'll make you a deal...I will wash my hands with the first couple of shots and consume the remaining shots in the more traditional way! BTW, Glenfiddich 18 is pretty expensive hand sanitizer LOL.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ Sir, you are among a few fellows here at AAAC whom I would greatly enjoy tipping one back with.

I'm much more of a slow sipper though!


----------



## iam.mike

eagle2250 said:


> I will wash my hands with the first couple of shots and consume the remaining shots in the more traditional way


If you're buying, I'm flying 

If you run out of hand sanitizer, and you've got some high-proof vodka handy...


----------



## Flanderian

momsdoc said:


> My concern is a logistical one. As a primary care physician, I and all the other healthcare workers are on the front lines, and the most likely to be exposed.
> 
> But thanks to the hoarding by the masses we do not have protective gear. We were informed yesterday by our Mothership health system, that no offices will be receiving protective gowns, goggles or N95 masks. The little supply available is being diverted to the hospitals, and ERs.
> 
> Yet the policy is that we must evaluate patients before referring them to the ER, so as to not overload the facilities.
> 
> To do this, policy requires that patients not be allowed in the building without staff placing an N95 mask on them (while in protective gear), then hustle the patient into an isolation room in the office, evaluate and send to the ER if suspect, or treat as usual if not suspect.
> 
> Then and only then an we leave the isolation room and doff our protective gear, which of course we cannot get because of the shortage caused by civilian hoarding. A Catch 22.
> 
> N95 masks are of no use to those trying to protect themselves in the community, they need to be put on the sick individuals, not the healthy.
> 
> I fear the exposure of healthcare workers, and their subsequent quarentine will break the system and lead to excess loss of life.
> 
> Personally, my wife is on immunosuppressants due to her recent transplant. Out of an abundance of precaution, as I will surely be exposed at some point (if not already), I have self isolated in the other half of our Mother/Daughter house since the confirmed arrival of the virus in NJ.
> 
> I will hopefully be able to see her again in the summer if this virus acts like other Coronaviruses and goes dormant in the warm weather. Hopefully by next Fall we will have enough protective supplies so as not to repeat this cycle.


Late to the dance, I am grateful for all contributions to this thread, but particularly so to you as a physician, as well as member 127.72 mhz for his report as another health practitioner. I empathize with your plight as front line combatants who by the very nature of your service are made most vulnerable to this disease, and for having that risk aggravated by public panic. I thank you for offering your care to us despite your personal risk in doing so.

Excepting its rich fodder as a source of gallows humor, I have little practical interest in any political "Who shot john" as that offers no practical benefit. Like others here, for various reasons my wife and I are also among the most vulnerable population. In the last few days I have sought to gain better insight into the actual circumstances from sources I consider likely to be most reliable. And based upon this information to better manage risk through modified behavior by my wife and I.

Unfortunately, the situation is somewhat grim, and is sobering. To summarize, this is our situation as I now understand it: The World Health Organization has publicly estimated that eventually 40% to 70% of the world's population will be infected.

This not the flu, it is a very severe disease. Some false comfort was initially perceived when it was speculated that roughly 80% of those infected would only experience "mild" symptoms. But mild symptoms were defined to include patients with everything up to, and including, mild pneumonia. And these can be very sick patients. The remaining 20% are likely to experience severe respiratory distress and other extremely severe symptoms, and will require hospital level care. Tony Fauci and the CDC have estimated that Covid-19 is roughly 10 times more lethal than the flu.

Currently, the U.S. is reported to have roughly 1,900 confirmed cases. But because of a lack of reliable testing resources, an infectious disease specialist from Harvard has speculated that the actual number of infected individuals in the U.S. is likely to be between 5 and 10 times that number. And that current recommendations, if practiced assiduously, will not halt the spread of the disease, but rather only slow it. But this could be an invaluable outcome, as currently the U.S. does not have the medical capacity to effectively treat a massive increase in severely sick patients.

So, given this situation, the question then becomes how can the U.S. realistically begin to prepare to treat what will ultimately become a massive number of extremely sick patients? And what is the most effective way to manage this national health emergency? I have some thoughts, but as I notice I have run on, I will consider this issue further, and perhaps offer some thoughts subsequently as to what I think might be beneficial.


----------



## iam.mike

Just watching the announcement of about the declaration of a National Emergency.

Here are some of the details:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/13/...rump-national-emergency-pandemic-announcement
I don't know what the general sentiment would be related to this announcement from a health-care profession pov, but it seems to me like positive next steps.


----------



## Flanderian

mikel said:


> Just watching the announcement of about the declaration of a National Emergency.
> 
> Here are some of the details:
> https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/13/...rump-national-emergency-pandemic-announcement
> I don't know what the general sentiment would be related to this announcement from a health-care profession pov, but it seems to me like positive next steps.


Earlier would have been better, but late is better than not at all. Understanding its importance, it allows access to additional funding, and gives government broader discretion in its actions, both of which could be valuable.


----------



## Oldsarge

It not only demonstrates the holes in our health care, it demonstrates the holes in the citizenry's heads! Toilet paper? Really? This is a respiratory infection, not explosive diarrhea. And if you're going to hoard something, wouldn't canned produce and meats be a good idea? But no, the tuna and sardine shelves were well stocked while the mayonnaise was . . . gone! Mayonnaise? MAYONNAISE? It's a shame this virus won't selectively target the dim.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> It not only demonstrates the holes in our health care, it demonstrates the holes in the citizenry's heads! Toilet paper? Really? This is a respiratory infection, not explosive diarrhea. And if you're going to hoard something, wouldn't canned produce and meats be a good idea? But no, the tuna and sardine shelves were well stocked while the mayonnaise was . . . gone! Mayonnaise? MAYONNAISE? It's a shame this virus won't selectively target the dim.


Speak for yourself!


----------



## Big T

Lucido said:


> Must admit that there was little to no talk of this nonsense at Cheltenham this year. Alcohol with an ABV of 60%+ kills all known coronavirus. Rx a healthy dram of Laphroaig or Talisker cask strength twice daily until spirits improve and no signs of ill-health are observed.


Wel, I'm reading this on the internet, so it must be factual! I don't believe I have any spirits with 60% ABV, but plenty of 40%, so I will drink 133% of he lower ABV to get the 60% effects!

Seriously, local school cancelled, so SWMBO is home and daughter's PSU spring break is extended, so I'm dealing with something that may be more dangerous, that being the feared female cabin fever!


----------



## ChrisRS

I am re-reading Camus to mentally prepare myself, The Plague.


----------



## RogerP

Flanderian said:


> Currently, the U.S. is reported to have roughly 1,900 confirmed cases. But because of a lack of reliable testing resources, an infectious disease specialist from Harvard has speculated that the actual number of infected individuals in the U.S. is likely to be between 5 and 10 times that number. And that current recommendations, if practiced assiduously, will not halt the spread of the disease, but rather only slow its spread. But this could be an invaluable outcome, as currently the U.S. does not have the medical capacity to effectively treat a massive increase in severely sick patients.
> 
> So, given this situation, the question then becomes how can the U.S. realistically begin to prepare to treat what will ultimately become a massive number of extremely sick patients? And what is the most effective way to manage this national health emergency? I have some thoughts, but as I notice I have run on, I will consider this issue further, and perhaps offer some thoughts subsequently as to what I think might be beneficial.


The continued lack of sufficient testing kits is.... oh dear..... best choose my words VERY carefully.... apparently....... suboptimal?


----------



## Oldsarge

I LIKE suboptimal! I can think of so many things to apply it to. Or persons, for that matter.


----------



## Big T

RogerP said:


> The continued lack of sufficient testing kits is.... oh dear..... best choose my words VERY carefully.... apparently....... suboptimal?


But, we have our regulations and procedures we must follow!

I have a lot of confidence in Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx (particularly Ms. Birx). Both will emerge as stars as the virus is brought under control and shame on our government, if the deficiency of the test kit issue is not fully addressed for the future.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

No doubt, by the time we have finally ramped up testing every last hoof in the barn will be long gone,.... All this from the "Finest healthcare system in the world!" The USA was offered the sequencing to develop testing but "We" refused preferring to do it ourselves. Pathetic it is.

As reported by Canadian health officials, children display little or no symptoms and they may be highly contagious,.....

Another article from Portland's largest newspaper. (The web site is called "Oregon Live")

https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavi...onavirus-response-as-too-little-too-late.html
Faced with questions about her leadership in the unfolding coronavirus crisis, Gov. Kate Brown on Friday sounded a far different tone than she has previously, *blaming unfulfilled promises by Vice President Mike Pence and the federal government for Oregon's shortcomings in testing and medical preparedness.*

During a Friday call with reporters, Brown said she made clear Oregon's need to Trump administration leaders in a March 3 letter, then reiterated it when Pence called her on March 4.

"He said we're on it," Brown said. "He said they had stockpiles."

Then the state didn't hear anything back, despite daily calls, Brown said. *On Tuesday, the governor said she called Alex Azar, the secretary of health and human services, and told him "we have not received a frickin' response to our request."*

The response came Thursday: Oregon would receive about a tenth of the 400,000 masks, gowns and gloves it requested.

Brown said she did not know when the supplies would arrive. "We have received zip, zero, nothing from them," she said.

"The response has been extremely inadequate and absolutely unacceptable," Brown said.


----------



## Oldsarge




----------



## Oldsarge

127.72 MHz said:


> No doubt, by the time we have finally ramped up testing every last hoof in the barn will be long gone,.... All this from the "Finest healthcare system in the world!" The USA was offered the sequencing to develop testing but "We" refused preferring to do it ourselves. Pathetic it is.
> 
> As reported by Canadian health officials, children display little or no symptoms and they may be highly contagious,.....
> 
> Another article from Portland's largest newspaper. (The web site is called "Oregon Live")
> 
> https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavi...onavirus-response-as-too-little-too-late.html
> Faced with questions about her leadership in the unfolding coronavirus crisis, Gov. Kate Brown on Friday sounded a far different tone than she has previously, *blaming unfulfilled promises by Vice President Mike Pence and the federal government for Oregon's shortcomings in testing and medical preparedness.*
> 
> During a Friday call with reporters, Brown said she made clear Oregon's need to Trump administration leaders in a March 3 letter, then reiterated it when Pence called her on March 4.
> 
> "He said we're on it," Brown said. "He said they had stockpiles."
> 
> Then the state didn't hear anything back, despite daily calls, Brown said. *On Tuesday, the governor said she called Alex Azar, the secretary of health and human services, and told him "we have not received a frickin' response to our request."*
> 
> The response came Thursday: Oregon would receive about a tenth of the 400,000 masks, gowns and gloves it requested.
> 
> Brown said she did not know when the supplies would arrive. "We have received zip, zero, nothing from them," she said.
> 
> "The response has been extremely inadequate and absolutely unacceptable," Brown said.


What do you expect for a blue state? This administration wouldn't lift a finger for the West Coast, no matter what the problem was.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> What do you expect for a blue state? This administration wouldn't lift a finger for the West Coast, no matter what the problem was.


----------



## Big T

We're out of terlet paper, here in Pennsyltucky! Skunk cabbages leaves would work, but they won't be in bloom for six weeks!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oldsarge said:


> What do you expect for a blue state? This administration wouldn't lift a finger for the West Coast, no matter what the problem was.


I 'd hate for such a productive thread to go purely political but there's no doubt that public policy is influenced by differing points of view.

I would love to believe that in a time of national emergency, where we "Officially" are now, that political persuasion is a distant second to everyone being American. But perhaps I'm wrong.

I tend to believe that the shortages of test kits and other logistics are uniform for red and blue states alike. A case of pure incompetence verses political spite.

If the statistical modeling that NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D has laid out comes to pass with a possible spike in cases of COVID19 that immediately overwhelm our hospital's ability to treat them, how are people going to conduct themselves?

But since it was brought up and speaking of public policy,....

Since Portland has announced that police will not be responding to many calls I'm sure that we will all pull together to help our fellow citizens right? :icon_scratch: How is one to protect themselves if our police cannot help? We live in a civilized society.

https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavi...-threatening-citing-coronavirus-concerns.html


----------



## R S W

Coronavirus and Clothes:
1. Can the coronavirus live on clothes?
2. If so, what alternatives are there to waiting for the virus to die on the clothes -- or to buying new clothes?
3. Will laundering clothes kill COVID-19? If so, does the method of laundering matter? Detergent used? Temperature of water?
4. Will drying clothes kill COVID-19? If so does the temperature/time of the drying matter?
Note: A search of this thread did not show any answers to any of these questions. Nor has a search of the CDC webpage. Why not?
Thanks to all in advance.


----------



## Big T

On a lighter note, what are us 60 something couples to do, if restrained to our homes? We already had a bumper daughter (17 years between the next child)! Will there be a rash of miracle births to 60 something moms?


----------



## icky thump

Oldsarge said:


> this Coronavirus information from our hospital Board Member. (3-12-20)
> 
> The Coronavirus may not show sign of infection for many days. How can one know if he/she is infected? Typically, by the time people show the usual symptoms of fever spike and/or dry cough and go to the hospital, the lung is already 50% Fibrosis and this is very problematic.
> 
> Taiwan doctors pass along this lesson learned:
> 
> It's a simple self-check to do every morning. Take a deep breath and hold your breath for more than 10 seconds. If you complete it successfully without coughing, without discomfort, stiffness or tightness, etc., it proves there is no Fibrosis in the lungs, basically indicating no infection.
> 
> Japanese doctors pass along these preventative lessons learned:
> 
> Ensure that your mouth & throat are always moist, never dry. Take a few sips of water every 15 minutes at least. Why? Even if the virus gets into your mouth, drinking water or other liquids will wash them down through your throat and into the stomach. Once there, your stomach acid will kill all the virus. If you don't drink enough water more regularly, the virus can enter your windpipe and into the lungs. That's the danger.
> 
> LEARNED FACTS (to date)
> 
> If you have a runny nose and sputum, you have a common cold.
> 
> 2. Coronavirus pneumonia is a dry cough with no runny nose.
> 
> 3. This new virus is not heat-resistant and will be killed by a temperature of just 26 C, 79 F degrees. It hates the sun.
> 
> 4. If someone sneezes with it, it takes about 10 feet before it drops to the ground and is no longer airborne.
> 
> 5. If it drops on a metal surface it will live for at least 12 hours - so if you come into contact with any metal surface - wash your hands as soon as you can with a bacterial soap.
> 
> 6. On fabric it can survive for 6-12 hours. normal laundry detergent will kill it.
> 
> 7. Drinking warm water is effective for all viruses. Try not to drink liquids with ice.
> 
> 8. Wash your hands frequently as the virus can only live on your hands for 5-10 minutes, but - a lot can happen during that time - you can rub your eyes, pick your nose unwittingly and so on.
> 
> 9. You should also gargle as a prevention. A simple solution of salt in warm water will suffice.
> 
> 10. Can't emphasis enough - drink plenty of water!
> 
> SYMPTOMS
> 
> 1. It will first infect the throat, so you'll have a sore throat lasting ¾ days
> 
> 2. The virus then blends into a nasal fluid that enters the trachea and then the lungs, causing pneumonia. This takes about 5/6 days further.
> 
> 3. With the pneumonia comes high fever and difficulty in breathing.
> 
> 4. The nasal congestion is not like the normal kind. You feel like you're drowning. You must seek immediate attention.
> 
> So, yes, laundry soap will kill the virus. Clean hands, clean clothes and we'll get through this.


Not entirely true. 
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/taiwan-experts-self-check/


----------



## medhat

Thankfully late to this thread, which IMO represents both a mix of the true, untrue, and wishful thinking. 

Rather than pile on, I'd suggest as far as reputable sources, Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIH (Head of Infectious Disease Section, the shorter guy on the podium with a New York/Jersey accent). He's been around since the AIDS crisis, and through multiple administrations. Not his first rodeo. 

That, and he's on TV almost daily. (personally, and I've been following this a lot for work, but I'd say you could pretty much dismiss every other person at the podium). 

Next, official documents from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (the "CDC"). 

But in this climate, and if you have the time, I'd actually read them for yourselves, and not what some talking head (including talking head doctors) say what it said. It's getting to be that bad.

That's it. That's the list. Fauci and the CDC.


----------



## R S W

Troones said:


> Has this really now been confirmed as fact? I thought there was still a lot of uncertainty about it. If it's confirmed, that is tremendous news.


Please remove the Oldsarge post! It contains inaccurate information with a false attribution. (As another poster identified citing Snopes.)

Note: A widely distributed email about COVID-19 that is attributed to a "Stanford Hospital board member" contains inaccurate information.

It did not come from Stanford Medicine.
https://stanfordhealthcare.org/stanford-health-care-now/2020/novel-coronavirus.html. Please remove!


----------



## Oldsarge

Thank-you for that update! I'll pull it myself.


----------



## Oldsarge

Okay, I checked the provenance on this one from NPR back to the CDC and UCLA Med school. COVID-19 is tough!

https://www.npr.org/sections/health...surfaces-for-2-3-days-heres-how-to-clean-them
Don't worry about toilet paper, stock up on alcohol?


----------



## Troones

I pulled my post where I posed the question. Apologies everyone, I was just trying to cling to any positive news I could. I'm an at risk individual due to a medical condition and I tend to get anxious. I won't be posting further in this thread other than to wish us all good health.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Troones said:


> I pulled my post where I posed the question. Apologies everyone, I was just trying to cling to any positive news I could. I'm an at risk individual due to a medical condition and I tend to get anxious. I won't be posting further in this thread other than to wish us all good health.


You do not owe anyone an apology. Many of us are medically compromised placing us in a high risk group. Your posts are welcome.

As we all receive new information we can update what we have collectively learned.

Best wishes brother,


----------



## medhat

Troones said:


> I pulled my post where I posed the question. Apologies everyone, I was just trying to cling to any positive news I could. I'm an at risk individual due to a medical condition and I tend to get anxious. I won't be posting further in this thread other than to wish us all good health.


IMO no apologies necessary. It is a scary time, and for the vast majority of us, in the medical profession and otherwise, it's uncharted territory, in particular from a first-hand experience.

We collectively have in many ways NOT been aided by the proliferation of so-called news sources, as evidenced by this overall constructive discussion, as there are more than a few "sources" peddling opinions as facts.

I have my own opinions as well, which is why I cited other researchable sources rather than my own soapbox.

But I think clarifying posts when they're discovered to be in err is admirable, and should be acknowledged. 👍


----------



## Oldsarge

Now I don't want this to imply that I don't take the virus seriously, but . . .


----------



## guitone

Peak and Pine said:


> "_Probably hundreds of thousands of people have already caught it and gotten over it without being aware that they had (gasp!) COVID-19! Wash your hands and quit hyperventilating._"
> 
> Around 50,000 non-elderly, very healthy young Americans, my grandfather among them, lost their lives to the Spanish Flu In France in 1918, an amount about equal to all the combat deaths of the previous year and a half that we were involved in WWI. You're sounding an awful lot like You Know Who.


That last sentence was uncalled for.


----------



## Peak and Pine

^
Please take some time to learn how to properly post your comments. The mis-mash of stuff you've quoted makes it look like I'm saying something attributed to someone else and your own response occurs in the body of the quote and looks like I said what you are saying.

I gather your single contribution was the very last line concerning my last line and you think mine was uncalled for. I understand now where you're coming from, but bear in mind this whole virus thing is fluid and the remark upon which you object was posted nine days ago. I have zero interest in your political take on this and suggest you take a similar tact concerning mine. Please limit your vitriol to a PM. I don't want to take up other member's time with the likes of what I'm writing now, especially since the core topic here is so important.


----------



## Flanderian

medhat said:


> I'd suggest as far as reputable sources, Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIH (Head of Infectious Disease Section, the shorter guy on the podium with a New York/Jersey accent). He's been around since the AIDS crisis, and through multiple administrations. Not his first rodeo.


Hear! Hear! For Tony Fauci! 👍 👍 👍

(Who could also be identified as the shorter guy who alternately looked like he wanted to smack a certain someone, and biting his lip to keep from laughing! )


----------



## Flanderian

While a Flanderian, I am no "homer" regarding the foibles and deficiencies of my home State. And I am skeptical regarding much about government in general, and New Jersey's in particular. But the New Jersey Department of Health has created a truly marvelous interactive website containing information and recommendations based upon those from the CDC and WHO.

It's remarkably simple to use, and easy to understand by anyone. This should be the standard for all such sites, but sadly they are usually the opposite. While you are likely not a NJ resident, you still might find this site both informative and beneficial for your own personal use. -

https://www.nj.gov/health/cd/topics/ncov.shtml


----------



## Oldsarge

I checked out the most recent map I could find. Oregon may be a pretty good place to wait this thing out. Only 32 cases and no deaths . . . so far!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^
But you will also notice that "Officials" will not comment on how many test kits that we *do not* have,....

I realize that now is not the time for finger pointing but how can one reliably comment on the number of cases when testing is not currently covering the numbers of people that should be tested?

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-coronavirus-testing-problems-timeline-2020-3
Not for the sake of placing blame, but for future best practices, it is importaint that the highest levels of our government recognize that this was our catastrophic failure.


----------



## Big T

In the closing hours of 2019, all but a few had even heard of Covid19, yet here we are at the Ides of March, and it is all you now hear about. It is truly remarkable that this behemoth, called the United States of America, was able to mobilize and begin to hit this virus between the eyes. Less than three months, and only our Creator would have known were we would be on 1/1/20, let alone on 3/15/20.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Big T said:


> It is truly remarkable that this behemoth, called the United States of America, was able to mobilize and begin to hit this virus between the eyes.


I am truly glad you have the ability to believe what you just said.


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> While a Flanderian, I am no "homer" regarding the foibles and deficiencies of my home State. And I am skeptical regarding much about government in general, and New Jersey's in particular. But the New Jersey Department of Health has created a truly marvelous interactive website containing information and recommendations based upon those from the CDC and WHO.
> 
> It's remarkably simple to use, and easy to understand by anyone. This should be the standard for all such sites, but sadly they are usually the opposite. While you are likely not a NJ resident, you still might find this site both informative and beneficial for your own personal use. -
> 
> https://www.nj.gov/health/cd/topics/ncov.shtml


My friend, you are spot-on with your assessment. That is indeed a an easily understandable and very informative web site. Thanks for sharing it with us.


----------



## Oldsarge

More on the lighter side of morbidity.


----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> More on the lighter side of morbidity.
> 
> View attachment 41206


Indeed, it appears that at least the railroad has the threat contained?


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> We're out of terlet paper, here in Pennsyltucky! Skunk cabbages leaves would work, but they won't be in bloom for six weeks!


So what will use for your butt?


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> So what will use for your butt?


Perhaps it's time to invest in a bidet?


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> Perhaps it's time to invest in a bidet?


I own a regular toilet.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Howard said:


> I own a regular toilet.


Most of us own regular toilets. We will just have to make do Howard. Maybe there are some old telephone books laying around?


----------



## Peak and Pine

Howard said:


> So what will use for your butt?


What I usually use, the bathroom curtains. (Hey, I wash 'em every Spring.)


----------



## momsdoc

Well it’s been two weeks as of today since I’ve touched my wife or been within 10 feet of her. My hands are raw from washing and my nose is red from the N 95 masks I wear all day to protect her and my patients.
I awake each day and go to sleep each night expecting some symptoms. I don’t know when I will become infectious, but it is inevitable. I just hope I can keep my wife and patients safe during the incubation and acute phase.
When the time comes that I have it, I’m fine with that. Even if it kills me. I bought into this risk when I decided to become a doctor. I went thru this before, doing surgery and bloody deliveries in the 80’s and 90’s. What’s not fair is that my wife didn’t sign up to risk her life. .


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ God bless you momsdoc. You are doing all that you can do. 

You are an example that life is full of heroism.

My trauma R.N. wife retired last year. (She is type one diabetic)

I am Immunosuppressed having been on Humeria for a couple of years,.... I am semi retired working in a research center two days per week. Thankfully our institution has shut down our research imaging center completely.


----------



## Oldsarge

^^ Momsdoc, you are walking in great footsteps. I found the following quote:

."I shall ask God mercifully to protect us. Then I shall fumigate, help purify the air, administer medicine and take it. I shall avoid places and persons where my presence is not needed in order not to become contaminated and thus perchance inflict and pollute others and so cause their death as a result of my negligence. If God should wish to take me, he will surely find me and I have done what he has expected of me and so I am not responsible for either my own death or the death of others. If my neighbor needs me however I shall not avoid place or person but will go freely as stated above. See this is such a God-fearing faith because it is neither brash no foolhardy and does not tempt God."

- Martin Luther, during the time of the Black Death


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ That is beautiful Sarge.


----------



## Flanderian

eagle2250 said:


> My friend, you are spot-on with your assessment. That is indeed a an easily understandable and very informative web site. Thanks for sharing it with us.


Glad it might have been of use.



momsdoc said:


> Well it's been two weeks as of today since I've touched my wife or been within 10 feet of her. My hands are raw from washing and my nose is red from the N 95 masks I wear all day to protect her and my patients.
> 
> I awake each day and go to sleep each night expecting some symptoms. I don't know when I will become infectious, but it is inevitable. I just hope I can keep my wife and patients safe during the incubation and acute phase.
> 
> When the time comes that I have it, I'm fine with that. Even if it kills me. I bought into this risk when I decided to become a doctor. I went thru this before, doing surgery and bloody deliveries in the 80's and 90's. What's not fair is that my wife didn't sign up to risk her life. .


Bless you sir, I pray you may be spared. While not a physician, I acutely empathize with your conflict between practical concerns and ethical duty. The young evidently may be be only lightly touched by this affliction, but those more senior may not fare as well. And since my own internist is a septuagenarian, I think often what he must be feeling as he goes about his practice.


----------



## RogerP

You are very courageous Momsdoc - we are all grateful for your selfless efforts.


----------



## Howard

127.72 MHz said:


> Most of us own regular toilets. We will just have to make do Howard. Maybe there are some old telephone books laying around?


What the hell am I supposed to do with a telephone book, PAP?


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> What the hell am I supposed to do with a telephone book, PAP?


A fresh corn cob might do the trick.


----------



## Big T

You can tell Howard has never had to use a privy whilst growing up....


----------



## Dhaller

eagle2250 said:


> Perhaps it's time to invest in a bidet?


We have three in the house, or more specifically, three Neorests (which have integral bidets).

At the time, one of my wife's sillier demands (I'm fine with a hundred-buck porcelain throne), but in hindsight (hah!) perhaps well worth it.

(Heated seats are always appreciated, as well.)









DH


----------



## Flanderian

This from a consolidated on-line version of NJ local newspapers (Otherwise not confirmed.) -

"New Jerseyans should not leave their homes from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m., as Gov. Phil Murphy announced an extraordinary action of recommending a statewide curfew for his 9 million residents to attempt to contain the spread of the novel coronavirus.

*All casinos, restaurants, bars, movie theaters and gyms must shut down *at 8 p.m. Monday and will remain closed until further notice in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut, the three governors announced Monday. *These businesses should not reopen until the administration gives the okay.*"

Edit: NJ schools closing Wednesday until further notice.


----------



## iam.mike

Flanderian said:


> *All casinos, restaurants, bars, movie theaters and gyms must shut down *at 8 p.m. Monday and will remain closed until further notice in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut, the three governors announced Monday. *These businesses should not reopen until the administration gives the okay.*"


Very similar announcements in SoCal too. Gov. Newsome ordering people over 65 to self-isolate.

Tried to buy some essentials on Amazon this morning -- practically everything is sold out.

Very interesting times.


----------



## Flanderian

mikel said:


> Very similar announcements in SoCal too. Gov. Newsome ordering people over 65 to self-isolate.
> 
> Tried to buy some essentials on Amazon this morning -- practically everything is sold out.
> 
> Very interesting times.


Same here, gotta find some cabbage leaves!


----------



## Flanderian

Reviewing the statistics reported around the world for Covid-19 raises some interesting questions, the answers to which may offer added insight into better and worse ways to manage our response to this pandemic within the U.S.

One such question is posed by the reported statistics for two European countries, France and Germany, which share a common border. Germany is reported to have roughly 7,000 infections and France only 5,500.

Yet France is reported to have suffered 127 fatalities, whereas Germany only has 14. While understanding that the number of cases reported in France may be less than the actual number, this is still a startling difference which may reflect both more and less efficacious treatment of infected individuals.

Germany has had a standing common national pandemic plan, the first two elements of the plan are:

reduce morbidity and mortality
ensure treatment of infected persons
At the beginning of World War 2, the U.S. had comparatively few military aircraft. The first full year of the war for the U.S. industrial effort produced almost 47,000 planes, and trained 10's of thousands of pilots and other aircrew.

This was the result of the U.S. Government's policy of massively increasing production and training to meet our national crisis.

The current U.S. national policy is banking on "flattening the curve" of the spread of Covid-19 as currently the U.S. does not have enough materials and staff to treat the likely surge in acutely ill patients.

This presupposes two assumptions;

that all such acutely ill patients must be treated with *the full panoply of ICU capability*, and that
the U.S. can't or shouldn't attempt to manufacture or otherwise secure the equipment and supplies most critical to the *specific treatment* of this *specific disease.*
As a non-medical professional, my very limited understanding of the disease and its treatment is that the primary source of distress and fatality is respiratory failure, and the primary treatment for this is the use of a ventilator.

If true, it seems that "flattening the curve" is an unnecessarily risky and possibly unworkable sole strategy that may result in numbers of deaths that is frightening to consider.

And that a more effective strategy necessitates immediate efforts to manufacture or otherwise secure ventilators and any other absolutely needed devices and materials, and providing specific minimal training in their use to as many technicians or para-medics as could be required.

I would much prefer that the U.S. imitate the evident success of Germany in treatment, rather than learn too late from examples such as Italy.


----------



## Oldsarge

One of my neighbors reports that the local restaurants are carding everyone. If you're over 65 they won't admit you.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Reviewing the statistics reported around the world for Covid-19 raises some interesting questions, the answers to which may offer added insight into better and worse ways to manage our response to this pandemic within the U.S.
> 
> One such question is posed by the reported statistics for two European countries, France and Germany, which share a common border. Germany is reported to have roughly 7,000 infections and France only 5,500.
> 
> Yet France is reported to have suffered 127 fatalities, whereas Germany only has 14. While understanding that the number of cases reported in France may be less than the actual number, this is still a startling difference which may reflect both more and less efficacious treatment of infected individuals.
> 
> Germany has had a standing common national pandemic plan, the first two elements of the plan are:
> 
> reduce morbidity and mortality
> ensure treatment of infected persons
> At the beginning of World War 2, the U.S. had comparatively few military aircraft. The first full year of the war for the U.S. industrial effort produced almost 47,000 planes, and trained 10's of thousands of pilots and other aircrew.
> 
> This was the result of the U.S. Government's policy of massively increasing production and training to meet our national crisis.
> 
> The current U.S. national policy is banking on "flattening the curve" of the spread of Covid-19 as currently the U.S. does not have enough materials and staff to treat the likely surge in acutely ill patients.
> 
> This presupposes two assumptions;
> 
> that all such acutely ill patients must be treated with *the full panoply of ICU capability*, and that
> the U.S. can't or shouldn't attempt to manufacture or otherwise secure the equipment and supplies most critical to the *specific treatment* of this *specific disease.*
> As a non-medical professional, my very limited understanding of the disease and its treatment is that the primary source of distress and fatality is respiratory failure, and the primary treatment for this is the use of a ventilator.
> 
> If true, it seems that "flattening the curve" is an unnecessarily risky and possibly unworkable strategy that may result in numbers of deaths that is frightening to consider.
> 
> And that a more effective strategy necessitates immediate efforts to manufacture or otherwise secure ventilators and any other absolutely needed devices and materials, and providing specific minimal training to as many technicians or para-medics in their use as could be required.
> 
> I would much prefer that the U.S. imitate the evident success of Germany in treatment, rather learn too late from examples such as Italy.


I agree, and I don't think the "curve flattening" and "capacity increasing" strategies are mutually exclusive. We should do both and the better we are at the latter the the less important will be the former, exactly as you suggest.

I do worry that the normal 90 day retooling normally required by manufacturers in order to dramatically increase production capacity might be paralyzing experts who fail to test such assumptions. As you point out we can move mountains once we put our mind to it.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> I agree, but I don't think the "curve flattening" and "capacity increasing" strategies are mutually exclusive. For instance a quick Google search reveals an international effort to dramatically increase the production and distribution of ventilators. Manufacturers are already ramped up and in overdrive. I seriously doubt this aspect has been overlooked by the various experts dealing with this.


Absolutely! I didn't intend to suggest they were. Rather that it should not be viewed as adequate of itself. Anything that positively affects the issue is welcome.

Edit: Thanks, Mike, I have amended my post to better reflect my intent.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Absolutely! I didn't intend to suggest they were. Rather that it should not be viewed as adequate of itself. Anything that positively affects the issue is welcome.


More research on my part suggests that they in fact might not be doing enough, so I edited my post accordingly. We are in complete agreement.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> More research on my part suggests that they in fact might not be doing enough, so I edited my post accordingly. We are in complete agreement.


Ships passing in the night! (See above.)


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> A fresh corn cob might do the trick.


I'd rather eat one that stick it up my "you know what".


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> You can tell Howard has never had to use a privy whilst growing up....


What's a privy, Big T?


----------



## Howard

Dhaller said:


> We have three in the house, or more specifically, three Neorests (which have integral bidets).
> 
> At the time, one of my wife's sillier demands (I'm fine with a hundred-buck porcelain throne), but in hindsight (hah!) perhaps well worth it.
> 
> (Heated seats are always appreciated, as well.)
> 
> View attachment 41239
> 
> DH


How much is it to install one?


----------



## Dhaller

Howard said:


> How much is it to install one?


Well, I installed ours myself (I'm what they used to call "handy" which is how I've stayed married for 20 years!), but I don't think it's too much more that whatever plumbers ask for installing toilets in your area. There is some specialized hardware, which is included, since there are some differences in flow rates and things (all US standard). It also requires power, so if you don't have a nearby outlet, you'd need an electrician (I needed power run to them, and even though I *could* do that, I use electricians for electrical work. And I'm a physicist! That's just one area I leave it to the technicians.)

The actual units themselves are, well, an investment... let's say, as much as a good bespoke suit (they start at just under $5000): https://www.totousa.com/products/neorest

DH


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> What's a privy, Big T?


Howard, Howard, Howard! What a sheltered life you've lived, being raised in the city!

A privy is an outdoor toilet! If you were luck you had a roll of toilet paper, If not, maybe a discarded Sear or Montgomery Ward catalog (for wiping!).


----------



## medhat

Howard said:


> How much is it to install one?


Check out the great review in thewirecutter.com. They review the kind that replace the toilet seat on a "regular" toilet. I've not (yet) pulled the trigger (or flushed the handle, to keep the metaphor intact), but am intrigued.


----------



## ran23

Interesting site, thanks


----------



## Andy

I'm not one for adventure.

Camping - I once stayed at a motel without room service. Biggest out of comfort zone exploit was, under force, a hot air balloon ride in Cappadocia, Turkey. It was a wonderful, _one time _escapade !

But today I ventured out to two grocery stores for a few basics. The stores were packed with people, no shopping carts available, and lots and lots of empty shelves. NO toilet paper!*

It was like shopping in a Soviet bloc store just after WWII.

*I understand there is some available on the "brown" market!!


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Andy said:


> I'm not one for adventure.
> 
> Camping - I once stayed at a motel without room service. Biggest out of comfort zone exploit was, under force, a hot air balloon ride in Cappadocia, Turkey. It was a wonderful, _one time _escapade !
> 
> But today I ventured out to two grocery stores for a few basics. The stores were packed with people, no shopping carts available, and lots and lots of empty shelves. NO toilet paper!*
> 
> It was like shopping in a Soviet bloc store just after WWII.
> 
> *I understand there is some available on the "brown" market!!


The old eastern block feeling is what I got at the local grocery yesterday as well. It was my first shopping venture since returning from being out of the country the past 2 weeks.

I left Tbilisi, Georgia on Monday. The shops were full, people were coping well, and the number of cases has flatlined in the low 30s due to the government health department getting an early jump on the situ. The contrast with America is striking. If not for my daughter, my wife and I would have preferred to shelter in Tbilisi for the next two months vs. returning home.

The panic buying is shocking. The store was completely devoid of paper products and fresh chicken. Strangely, items like racks of pork ribs, salted country ham, Power Aide Zero, and calf liver were in ample supply. There is plenty of food if one is willing to move toward less popular items. Tripe, marmite, and salted herring are looking better each day.

In times of crisis, it pays to be an adventurous omnivore!

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## eagle2250

^^
The wife and I made our monthly sojourn to the Patrick AFB Commissary yesterday afternoon and indeed, face masks, hand sanitizers and latex gloves were sold out, but toilet paper and MRE's (Meals Ready to Eat, AKA: Emergency rations) were available at $118 per case. That works out to be about $10 per meal. In terms of meats, as member BSR states above chicken and beef cuts were pretty much unavailable, but pork cuts were still available. The Commissary was very crowded and you had to wait outside the entrance for a shopping cart to begin shopping! Egad, society's "The Greatest Generation" seems but a rapidly fading memory. :crazy:


----------



## Flanderian

eagle2250 said:


> toilet paper . . . . . were available


As a senior member of AAAC, isn't it your responsibility to share your bounty with the remainder? 

TP more than a week ago disappeared from store shelves, and has also become unavailable from on-line sources. Since the growing season has not yet begun to furnish cabbage leaves, I anticipate disaster profiteers will begin hawking TP roadside for around $.25 a sheet!


----------



## Oldsarge

They'll have to roadside it. A couple of greed heads bought up huge squantities of toilet paper and hand sanitizer with the intent of gouging their fellow citizens on Amazon and eBay. Both merchants immediately clamped down on the idea refusing to assist in the heist. Every once in a while I can manage a warm feeling toward our corporate masters.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> They'll have to roadside it. A couple of greed heads bought up huge squantities of toilet paper and hand sanitizer with the intent of gouging their fellow citizens on Amazon and eBay. Both merchants immediately clamped down on the idea refusing to assist in the heist. Every once in a while I can manage a warm feeling toward our corporate masters.


Leaving aside complexities associated with the potential benefits of allowing pricing mechanisms to work, for every American trying to figure out a way to exploit the crisis to his benefit, there are at least ten hoarding out of simple fear and selfishness, and for every hoarder there are a hundred fellow Americans doing their best to be responsible and caring neighbors and friends. Gotta look big picture.


----------



## Peak and Pine

^

I like that thinking, wishful though it is.


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> As a senior member of AAAC, isn't it your responsibility to share your bounty with the remainder?
> 
> TP more than a week ago disappeared from store shelves, and has also become unavailable from on-line sources. Since the growing season has not yet begun to furnish cabbage leaves, I anticipate disaster profiteers will begin hawking TP roadside for around $.25 a sheet!


LOL. Nobody, but NOBODY lays hands on my Charmin. Jeez Louise I bought only a single case and that is only 30 rolls! You must realize that as we age, the nature of our preferred security blankets changes with the times.


----------



## Flanderian

eagle2250 said:


> LOL. Nobody, but NOBODY lays hands on my Charmin. Jeez Louise I bought only a single case and that is only 30 rolls! *You must realize that as we age, the nature of our preferred security blankets changes with the times. *


As can the frequency with which we resort to them!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Peak and Pine said:


> ^
> 
> I like that thinking, wishful though it is.


Based only on personal observation. Neighbors are bringing soup to elderly shut-ins and teens offering to do whatever is necessary. Folks on the local Nextdoor forum offering everything from sanitizer to TP to neighbors in need. Humans are inevitably imperfect, but I remain proud to be an American.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Lat time I visited my Dad he told me that he had begun using these:

https://www.amazon.com/Cottonelle-F...T0PQQCCW0T1&psc=1&refRID=EFZMC0ARET0PQQCCW0T1
While I haven't converted I must admit that Dad didn't steer me wrong!


----------



## Peak and Pine

Mike Petrik said:


> Based only on personal observation. Neighbors are bringing soup to elderly shut-ins...


I could use some of that soup.
Is it the chunky kind or that condensed slop? It's fun being an elderly shut-in. I've been practicing this since I was teenager. Skiping school, watching tee vee all day. Nowadays I only go out to get the newspaper, which they quit printing five years ago, but old habits die hard.


----------



## Oldsarge

I got chewed out by my physical therapist for not properly sequestering my aging bod so I succumb to the pressure of the medical profession. Today decided that since I wasn't going anywhere for while, I'd just have my local grocer deliver a few things. Tomorrow I shall be canning butter/onion pasta sauce. If you've never made this one, you're in for a treat. Even if you think you can't cook you can make this one. Heck, TJ is only 6 1/2 and _he_ could make it.


----------



## 215339

Howard said:


> I own a regular toilet.


There are sub $100 attachments you can get for your toilet.


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> As a senior member of AAAC, isn't it your responsibility to share your bounty with the remainder?
> 
> TP more than a week ago disappeared from store shelves, and has also become unavailable from on-line sources. Since the growing season has not yet begun to furnish cabbage leaves, I anticipate disaster profiteers will begin hawking TP roadside for around $.25 a sheet!


:crazy: A quick check with UPS reveals that, based on dimensions of the box to hold it and an estimated weight of one pound, it will cost me close to $8 to ship a role of toilet paper to New Jersey (and I assume New York would be about the same). LOL, I'm just not quite that benevolent!


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> Howard, Howard, Howard! What a sheltered life you've lived, being raised in the city!
> 
> A privy is an outdoor toilet! If you were luck you had a roll of toilet paper, If not, maybe a discarded Sear or Montgomery Ward catalog (for wiping!).


That would be the same as a porta-potty, Am I right T?


----------



## Howard

Flanderian said:


> As a senior member of AAAC, isn't it your responsibility to share your bounty with the remainder?
> 
> TP more than a week ago disappeared from store shelves, and has also become unavailable from on-line sources. Since the growing season has not yet begun to furnish cabbage leaves, I anticipate disaster profiteers will begin hawking TP roadside for around $.25 a sheet!


Even bottled water disappeared from the shelves too!


----------



## drpeter

I did not want to start a new thread on my story, so I am fitting it in here, since it, too, is a story about our "viral" times.

I have known my alterations tailor for almost 30 years. He is an excellent tailor, attentive to one's requirements and skilled enough to pick the shoulder of a sports jacket and reconstruct it -- in my opinion, that is beyond impressive. He, like me, is an immigrant -- a Hmong from Laos. We're very good friends and he started calling me brother some years ago, and I do the same with him.

Yesterday, I went to see him since I had to pick up an old but loved pea jacket that he was working on to fix the lining. I walked in and was shocked to see him sitting there looking exhausted and completely worn out. I had never seen him in such bad shape, and so dejected (he is a great optimist, usually). I found out from him and his wife that he had spent the last week in hospital, being treated for pneumonia. He can barely talk even now. My immediate question was whether the doctors had tested him for Covid-19. His wife said they were both tested for the virus and the tests came back negative. I was glad to hear that since he has Type 2 diabetes, which is a risk factor with the new virus -- and he is in his early sixties.

So today, I am going to take him a batch of my special chicken curry, loaded with protective Indian spices like cumin, turmeric and Kashmiri red pepper, plus generous amounts of fresh ginger and garlic. It's the Indian equivalent of the classic chicken soup we prescribe here in this country for everything that ails you. The law is that when one brother is ill, the other must supply chicken curry. So I am off to the market to see if I can scrounge up some chicken...

As for the pea jacket, my tailor informed me that it was beyond salvaging. My local dry cleaner said she could clean it and donate it for free, so I bid farewell to the jacket.

Echoing the great novelist Garcia Marquez, we can call this story "Love in the time of the coronavirus" LOL.


----------



## Big T

Is concern or mass hysteria approaching critical ma


Howard said:


> That would be the same as a porta-potty, Am I right T?


Might be, but a privy would be an outhouse, an enclosure with dumping holes. A porta-potty might just be an empty five gallon bucket, or a very elaborate portable enclosure!


----------



## Peak and Pine

drpeter said:


> I did not want to start a new thread on my story, so I am fitting it in here, since it, too, is a story about our "viral" times.
> 
> I have known my alterations tailor for almost 30 years. He is an excellent tailor, attentive to one's requirements and skilled enough to pick the shoulder of a sports jacket and reconstruct it -- in my opinion, that is beyond impressive. He, like me, is an immigrant -- a Hmong from Laos. We're very good friends and he started calling me brother some years ago, and I do the same with him.
> 
> Yesterday, I went to see him since I had to pick up an old but loved pea jacket that he was working on to fix the lining. I walked in and was shocked to see him sitting there looking exhausted and completely worn out. I had never seen him in such bad shape, and so dejected (he is a great optimist, usually). I found out from him and his wife that he had spent the last week in hospital, being treated for pneumonia. He can barely talk even now. My immediate question was whether the doctors had tested him for Covid-19. His wife said they were both tested for the virus and the tests came back negative. I was glad to hear that since he has Type 2 diabetes, which is a risk factor with the new virus -- and he is in his early sixties.
> 
> So today, I am going to take him a batch of my special chicken curry, loaded with protective Indian spices like cumin, turmeric and Kashmiri red pepper, plus generous amounts of fresh ginger and garlic. It's the Indian equivalent of the classic chicken soup we prescribe here in this country for everything that ails you. The law is that when one brother is ill, the other must supply chicken curry. So I am off to the market to see if I can scrounge up some chicken...
> 
> As for the pea jacket, my tailor informed me that it was beyond salvaging. My local dry cleaner said she could clean it and donate it for free, so I bid farewell to the jacket.
> 
> Echoing the great novelist Garcia Marquez, we can call this story "Love in the time of the coronavirus" LOL.


Great tale, enjoyed it muchly.
A couple of incidental points. Was your pea coat USN issue? If so, don't believe there's any such thing as an unsalvageable one. And Marquez's novel, wonderful, but a very poor movie.


----------



## drpeter

Peak and Pine said:


> Great tale, enjoyed it muchly.
> A couple of incidental points. Was your pea coat USN issue? If so, don't believe there's any such thing as an unsalvageable one. And Marquez's novel, wonderful, but a very poor movie.


Thank you.

The pea coat was not USN issue ( I do have one of those, it's excellent and in fine nick). It was an old Lands' End model made of soft wool, not as stiff as the Navy's. The best part is that it was also a great blanket to put over one's knees when watching a film in a less-than-ideally-heated movie theatre! My tailor kept fixing and patching the lining until it grew too ragged. Relining the coat was simply not worth the expense.

I agree about Marquez: The novel was wonderful, the movie, not so much! I think it is not easy to translate the magical realist style onto the screen. I did see the film version of another magical realist novel, Salman Rushdie's old novel _Midnight's Children_, which was quite well done, surprisingly.


----------



## Mr Thorvald

Mike Petrik said:


> Based only on personal observation. Neighbors are bringing soup to elderly shut-ins and teens offering to do whatever is necessary. Folks on the local Nextdoor forum offering everything from sanitizer to TP to neighbors in need. Humans are inevitably imperfect, but I remain proud to be an American.


You obviously don't live in New York City.


----------



## Oldsarge




----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> View attachment 41365


OK, I'll try *anything!* :crazy:


----------



## Flanderian

From chemisier parisien, D. Levy - speaks for itself -


----------



## Big T

Peak and Pine said:


> Great tale, enjoyed it muchly.
> A couple of incidental points. Was your pea coat USN issue? If so, don't believe there's any such thing as an unsalvageable one. And Marquez's novel, wonderful, but a very poor movie.


There most certainly is an unsalvageable USN issued pea coat! I wore my father's pea coat when I was in college (early '70s). A few years back, while my siblings and I were cleaning out my deceased parent's home, I came across that pea coat: it had shrunk far smaller than it would ever be able to be rescued! How does that happen to something that did not leave a closet for more than 45 years?


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> That would be the same as a porta-potty, Am I right T?


Out here in the sticks we call it the Outhouse. :amazing:


----------



## Big T

eagle2250 said:


> Out here in the sticks we call it the Outhouse. :amazing:


You're not in the "sticks" now, are you? But, back here in Pennsyltucky, you might have been!

We retrieved my daughter's belongings from her dorm/apartment (PSU owned), and State College/University Park was/is a ghost town. Classes now suspended through the end of the spring semester.


----------



## iam.mike

Somewhat optimistic, though measured, update from the Coronavirus task force today.

Existing malaria meds may be a possible treatment:
https://www.google.com/search?q=malaria+drug+coronavirus
N95 masks not originally earmarked for medical use, now can be distributed to medical community.

Department of Treasury released stage 3 proposal for the appropriation to the Exchange Stabilization Fund. (attached PDF)

Interesting to hear what others think of the news.


----------



## Oldsarge

The possibility of using one already approved treatment for this current disease is hopeful but having lived with a clinical bacteriologist for 46 years, I am less than sanguine. 

Likewise any enthusiasm for the proposed vaccine about to enter human trials in Washington state.

Unless the FDA suddenly throws out all the protocols regarding safety of treatment procedures, it's going to be 12-18 months before we can comfortably say we have this thing licked. 

The problem with 'cure' is that it's always more expensive than prevention and, to make things worse, the pathogen is smarter than we are. 

We have to go 20-30 years between generations. Viruses happily change their genetic code in a month. 

So do bacteria because a month is 20-30 generations for them. 

Stay hunkered down, gents, we're in for quite a ride.


----------



## iam.mike

Just ran across this information.

This research company is also working on an antibody, based off of the SARS antibodies.






Company is hoping to have a treatment in place for millions of people, via the "Compassionate Use" program by September.

Interesting info -- though I don't know how to asses the viability of the claims.

*More Info:*
The complete interview with Dr. Jacob Glanville. The streaming show 'Pandemic' has been getting a lot of attention lately. The documentary series focuses on the doctors and scientists on the front lines battling influenza and trying to prevent a worldwide pandemic from happening.

Dr. Jacob Glanville, a computational immuno-engineer is part of the series.


----------



## Oldsarge

Fingers crossed.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Japanese flu drug: favipiravir sold under the name "Avigan"

Infected patients who were given the drug in Wuhan and Shenzhen tested negative for the virus after a median of 4 days compared with a median of 11 days for those who were not treated with the drug.

The lung condition improved in about 91% of the patients who were given the medicine compared to 62% of those who did not receive the drug.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-effective-in-treating-coronavirus-says-china
https://www.livescience.com/flu-drug-could-treat-coronavirus.html
This will definitely help.


----------



## Oldsarge

127.72 MHz said:


> Japanese flu drug: favipiravir sold under the name "Avigan"
> 
> Infected patients who were given the drug in Wuhan and Shenzhen tested negative for the virus after a median of 4 days compared with a median of 11 days for those who were not treated with the drug.
> 
> The lung condition improved in about 91% of the patients who were given the medicine compared to 62% of those who did not receive the drug.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-effective-in-treating-coronavirus-says-china
> https://www.livescience.com/flu-drug-could-treat-coronavirus.html
> This will definitely help.


Seriously good news.


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> Out here in the sticks we call it the Outhouse. :amazing:


If need be, I would go into a porta - potty if it was an Number 1 or 2 emergency.


----------



## Howard

Oldsarge said:


> View attachment 41365


Wow, that's so cool.


----------



## eagle2250

^^
Agreed!


----------



## Oldsarge

You know, one must pity those poor souls who are self-quarantined, voluntarily or otherwise, who don't have AAAC to help pass the dull hours. All they can do is (shudder!) work.


----------



## Dhaller

Oldsarge said:


> You know, one must pity those poor souls who are self-quarantined, voluntarily or otherwise, who don't have AAAC to help pass the dull hours. All they can do is (shudder!) work.


Probably languishing in a poorly coordinated dressing gown (sorry, I mean "robe") and slippers combo, drinking the wrong Scotch whiskey from the wrong glass, and listening to contemporary music.

DH


----------



## Peak and Pine

^

Ah, but Lizzo, Post, Capaldi and 5 Seconds of Summer sound so much better in tweed with a double night cap, one in the glass, one on the head with a swinging tassel interupting this cell board typing thing, social distancing myself from myself and putting another, okay three, logs on/in the fire/stove before turning in (to a nice guy, someday).


----------



## drpeter

Flanderian said:


> From chemisier parisien, D. Levy - speaks for itself -
> 
> View attachment 41374


_Quand tout ira mieux? Vraiment, vous êtes un optimiste formidable, Monsieur!_


----------



## drpeter

Big T said:


> There most certainly is an unsalvageable USN issued pea coat! I wore my father's pea coat when I was in college (early '70s). A few years back, while my siblings and I were cleaning out my deceased parent's home, I came across that pea coat: it had shrunk far smaller than it would ever be able to be rescued! How does that happen to something that did not leave a closet for more than 45 years?


Hmm. Something doesn't compute here! Unless the coat got waterlogged or was stored in a space that got very warm, it shouldn't have shrunk just by hanging in a closet. Some questions about how you determined that the coat had actually shrunk: Did you rely on your memory of its size from 45 years ago? Or was it because it does not fit you 45 years after you last wore it during your college years? I'm just trying to get more information about this puzzle.


----------



## drpeter

For yours truly, the best part of the daily administration press briefings on the Covid-19 virus is seeing the highly reputed Dr Deborah Birx with her calm, scientific attitude toward the problems caused by the virus. She has done a great deal in the fight against HIV/AIDS. She is also a very elegant, tastefully attired woman, and I, for one, look forward to seeing what sort of scarf or shawl she is sporting with her outfit each day. I suppose one must seek such small details that provide some furbelow of pleasure in a situation that is otherwise almost uniformly grim.


----------



## Big T

drpeter said:


> Hmm. Something doesn't compute here! Unless the coat got waterlogged or was stored in a space that got very warm, it shouldn't have shrunk just by hanging in a closet. Some questions about how you determined that the coat had actually shrunk: Did you rely on your memory of its size from 45 years ago? Or was it because it does not fit you 45 years after you last wore it during your college years? I'm just trying to get more information about this puzzle.


I believe the cause of the coat not fitting any longer, was not it getting water-logged, but perhaps my coming of age and getting fluid-logged frequently!

Weight sneaks up on you so stealthfully-one day you are 120 pounds, and it seemsthe next, you are 180!


----------



## drpeter

Big T said:


> I believe the cause of the coat not fitting any longer, was not it getting water-logged, but perhaps my coming of age and getting fluid-logged frequently!
> 
> Weight sneaks up on you so stealthfully-one day you are 120 pounds, and it seemsthe next, you are 180!


I am well aware of it, and that's why I wanted to put it to you as delicately as possible. At 25, believe it or not, I was 5'-8" and 115 lbs -- many folks thought I had a disease! Over the years it went up slowly and steadily to 184 lbs, believe it easily, LOL. Quite a bit of the weight was after I started working out, so it wasn't just fat but muscle mass too. But then, with the family illness of type 2 diabetes upon me, I had to cut back on sugar, carbs and food generally. I switched to no sugar, very few carbs, and half the food I consumed at mealtimes, and I lost thirty pounds in four months. I had twice the energy on half the food, and many of my old clothes (34" waist, size 40 jackets) began fitting perfectly. So yes, I am with you, brother!


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Dhaller said:


> Probably languishing in a poorly coordinated dressing gown (sorry, I mean "robe") and slippers combo, drinking the wrong Scotch whiskey from the wrong glass, and listening to contemporary music.
> 
> DH


Me, this past Friday. BB seersucker robe and Draper of Glastonbury slippers.

No contemporary music though. Since moving back to the states, I haven't acquired a new music system. I fell in love with a McIntosh system that was in the hotel lobby during my stay in Tbilisi last week....
























Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Me, this past Friday. BB seersucker robe and Draper of Glastonbury slippers.
> 
> No contemporary music though. Since moving back to the states, I haven't acquired a new music system. I fell in love with a McIntosh system that was in the hotel lobby during my stay in Tbilisi last week....
> 
> View attachment 41506
> View attachment 41508
> View attachment 41510
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


That is one fine system for a Tbilisi hotel lobby!


----------



## icky thump

One thing about being shut in-- I am determined to watch every Twiight Zone, man did the men dress nice.


----------



## eagle2250

Gyms are closed and rumored to remain so for at least the next six weeks. That kind of complicates the completion of our 2hour resistance workouts scheduled for Monday, Wednesday and Friday mornings. Although we still have our 5 mile fitness walks on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday mornings. Perhaps we should go to six days of fitness walks? Geez Louise, old, well established habits are hard to break! :angry:


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> That is one fine system for a Tbilisi hotel lobby!


Tbilisi was spectacular. And the Georgians were so kind. As my wife has work there, I hope to return to see more of the country in the near future.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Dhaller

eagle2250 said:


> Gyms are closed and rumored to remain so for at least the next six weeks. That kind of complicates the completion of our 2hour resistance workouts scheduled for Monday, Wednesday and Friday mornings. Although we still have our 5 mile fitness walks on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday mornings. Perhaps we should go to six days of fitness walks? Geez Louise, old, well established habits are hard to break! :angry:


I have this same issue.

I've been on a serious lifting program for about 6 months, and I actually decided against installing a power rack at home because I have an excellent powerlifting gym minutes from my house. Alas.

Now I'm alternating road running/cycling/trail running daily, shifting from gains to cutting (I did fatten up a bit on a strength regimen, because I ate everything in sight), and looking into either ordering some kettlebells or doing a bodyweight program.

(My wife is stressed enough without me commandeering a room and outfitting it with a power rack, rubber floor, and weights!)

DH


----------



## Oldsarge

I had intended to become the Senior Master Powerlifting champ of Oregon. Then I hurt my back. Now I can barely get from one end of the house to the other. Be careful out there! My therapist thinks I should be all back together in 6-8 weeks. I sure hope so . . .


----------



## Dhaller

Oldsarge said:


> I had intended to become the Senior Master Powerlifting champ of Oregon. Then I hurt my back. Now I can barely get from one end of the house to the other. Be careful out there! My therapist thinks I should be all back together in 6-8 weeks. I sure hope so . . .


I live in healthy terror of deadlifts.

I was injured once (bad form), recovered, progressed too rapidly and was injured again (too heavy), then finally deloaded, perfected my form, and progressed slowwwly.

One of the interesting things about heavy lifting is that you become *very aware* of every musculoskeletal failing and fault you have. For me, it's my right lower back, left knee, right shoulder, and (recently) the inner part of my right elbow. I expect to collect more with time!

DH


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> ^^
> Agreed!


Like the saying goes, if you gotta go then you gotta go!


----------



## Howard

Oldsarge said:


> You know, one must pity those poor souls who are self-quarantined, voluntarily or otherwise, who don't have AAAC to help pass the dull hours. All they can do is (shudder!) work.


No need to pity them there's probably other forms of entertainment.


----------



## challer

Oldsarge said:


> The possibility of using one already approved treatment for this current disease is hopeful but having lived with a clinical bacteriologist for 46 years, I am less than sanguine.
> 
> Likewise any enthusiasm for the proposed vaccine about to enter human trials in Washington state.
> 
> Unless the FDA suddenly throws out all the protocols regarding safety of treatment procedures, it's going to be 12-18 months before we can comfortably say we have this thing licked.
> 
> The problem with 'cure' is that it's always more expensive than prevention and, to make things worse, the pathogen is smarter than we are.
> 
> We have to go 20-30 years between generations. Viruses happily change their genetic code in a month.
> 
> So do bacteria because a month is 20-30 generations for them.
> 
> Stay hunkered down, gents, we're in for quite a ride.


based on industry calls Friday, throwing the rules is exactly what is taking place. I'm 35 years medtech/wife 35 years pharma. Stuff is being rushed very quickly past all the normal hurdles


----------



## Andy

Here in California, as in at least 4 other states (and more to come) we have been strongly requested to stay at home. They've closed the golf courses, restaurants (except for take out and deliveries), bars!!, all sporting events, concerts, etc.

My wife and I have started walking in the afternoon just for fresh air (maybe a bad idea  ) and we do laundry on Saturday. Funny I didn't have the usual amounts, mostly all sweat pants and sweat shirts!

A friend picked up her grandson in Los Angeles the last day of school which is now closed and ask him "What are you going to do for the next few weeks?". He said "Watch sports", and then they both laughed!

Which is worse The Virus or Cabin Fever?


----------



## Mike Petrik

Andy said:


> Here in California, as in at least 4 other states (and more to come) we have been strongly requested to stay at home. They've closed the golf courses, restaurants (except for take out and deliveries), bars!!, all sporting events, concerts, etc.
> 
> My wife and I have started walking in the afternoon just for fresh air (maybe a bad idea  ) and we do laundry on Saturday. Funny I didn't have the usual amounts, mostly all sweat pants and sweat shirts!
> 
> A friend picked up her grandson in Los Angeles the last day of school which is now closed and ask him "What are you going to do for the next few weeks?". He said "Watch sports", and then they both laughed!
> 
> Which is worse The Virus or Cabin Fever?


Well, cabin fever is annoying but not lethal. If the Greatest Generation can sacrifice the best years of their lives to defeat Communism and Fascism, I would think we can all sit on our collective butts for a month or two watching old movies to defeat this virus.

As for taking walks outside, the CDC protocols do not discourage this at all as long as social distancing is maintained.


----------



## Oldsarge

challer said:


> based on industry calls Friday, throwing the rules is exactly what is taking place. I'm 35 years medtech/wife 35 years pharma. Stuff is being rushed very quickly past all the normal hurdles


An ounce of prevention . . . This is not good news and so typical. There is an opinion in the body politic that any governmental activity that doesn't show an obvious immediate benefit (read 'profit') is a waste of the taxpayer's money and probably an unwarranted intrusion into private life (read 'keeping all my money). After all we defeated Hitler by coming in late and out-producing him. Naturally we can do this to the coronavirus.


----------



## Oldsarge

I couldn't resist this.


----------



## Dhaller

Mike Petrik said:


> Well, cabin fever is annoying but not lethal. If the Greatest Generation can sacrifice the best years of their lives to defeat Communism and Fascism, I would think we can all sit on our collective butts for a month or two watching old movies to defeat this virus.
> 
> As for taking walks outside, the CDC protocols do not discourage this at all as long as social distancing is maintained.


Having never experienced the pitch of battle, the terror of jumping from a flak-imperiled plane or rushing from an amphibious transport into machine-gun fire, I do understand human nature enough to understand one thing: at some level, it's "easier" (not really the right word) to *take action* to defeat a threat than it is to defeat it by *doing exactly nothing*.

It kind of reminds me of Bush's exhortation to "keep shopping" after 9/11. Come on, I can handle a bit more in the way of heroic demands than that!

I really can't imagine what life must have been like during, say, WW2 - the rationing, the buying of war bonds, keeping lips-zipped, seeing one's self or one's loved ones ship off to war, and so on, but there must have been a sense of *involvement*. Of *contribution*, even in small things like saving foil, or jars.

I wonder if a smart play would be to give people a *mission*? Like "turn in all empty bottles!" or whatever, just something which arrests the attention and makes people feel like An American Citizen (heaven knows, that's a rare state of being these days). It could even be "busy work" which serves other problems (recycling all the bottles is a good thing).

Any parent knows that you get a child to behave by *giving her something to do*, not by telling her to sit still!

DH


----------



## Mike Petrik

Dhaller said:


> Having never experienced the pitch of battle, the terror of jumping from a flak-imperiled plane or rushing from an amphibious transport into machine-gun fire, I do understand human nature enough to understand one thing: at some level, it's "easier" (not really the right word) to *take action* to defeat a threat than it is to defeat it by *doing exactly nothing*.
> 
> It kind of reminds me of Bush's exhortation to "keep shopping" after 9/11. Come on, I can handle a bit more in the way of heroic demands than that!
> 
> I really can't imagine what life must have been like during, say, WW2 - the rationing, the buying of war bonds, keeping lips-zipped, seeing one's self or one's loved ones ship off to war, and so on, but there must have been a sense of *involvement*. Of *contribution*, even in small things like saving foil, or jars.
> 
> I wonder if a smart play would be to give people a *mission*? Like "turn in all empty bottles!" or whatever, just something which arrests the attention and makes people feel like An American Citizen (heaven knows, that's a rare state of being these days). It could even be "busy work" which serves other problems (recycling all the bottles is a good thing).
> 
> Any parent knows that you get a child to behave by *giving her something to do*, not by telling her to sit still!
> 
> DH


Those are fair observations, but I'm honestly not sure what that mission would be. Fabricating a phony mission would end up being a very bad idea. But in concept I agree with you, assuming a mission can be identified that would really, on balance, improve things. Meanwhile, folks can suck it up and watch old movies and play board games with family. For the most part I think Americans are doing a good job, with notable exceptions of course.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Andy said:


> Here in California, as in at least 4 other states (and more to come) we have been strongly requested to stay at home. They've closed the golf courses, restaurants (except for take out and deliveries), bars!!, all sporting events, concerts, etc.
> 
> My wife and I have started walking in the afternoon just for fresh air (maybe a bad idea  ) and we do laundry on Saturday. Funny I didn't have the usual amounts, mostly all sweat pants and sweat shirts!
> 
> A friend picked up her grandson in Los Angeles the last day of school which is now closed and ask him "What are you going to do for the next few weeks?". He said "Watch sports", and then they both laughed!
> 
> Which is worse The Virus or Cabin Fever?


At work I have been designated as one of the staff that will go into work on an abbreviated schedule. I'm happy to say that I will not be seeing patients.

On the way back home a few minutes ago, even though Portland residents have been strongly encouraged to STAY HOME, unbelievable numbers of people out with the family.

A group of approximately 40 people in far too close proximity standing outside Otto's sausage house in Woodstock waiting for a grilled sausage. :fool:

It's not my aim to be Mr. Negative but for Pete's sake people,....

My grandfather used to tell my brother and I that, in groups, people are worse than sheep,.....Now that I'm nearing the age that he was when he used to tell us that I find it difficult to disagree with him.

My guess, actually it is a bit more reliable than a guess, is that Portlander's are due for an announcement tomorrow about social distancing. (And I certainly can understand why.)

Post Script: FINALLY!

*https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavi...to-stay-home-as-people-crowd-coast-gorge.html*
Okay now back to the positive.

Regards,


----------



## Howard

Andy said:


> Here in California, as in at least 4 other states (and more to come) we have been strongly requested to stay at home. They've closed the golf courses, restaurants (except for take out and deliveries), bars!!, all sporting events, concerts, etc.
> 
> My wife and I have started walking in the afternoon just for fresh air (maybe a bad idea  ) and we do laundry on Saturday. Funny I didn't have the usual amounts, mostly all sweat pants and sweat shirts!
> 
> A friend picked up her grandson in Los Angeles the last day of school which is now closed and ask him "What are you going to do for the next few weeks?". He said "Watch sports", and then they both laughed!
> 
> *Which is worse The Virus or Cabin Fever?*


both.


----------



## AndrewO

I have recently read CBD news about some interesting snippets about the Covid -19 virus and the anti inflammatory properties of CBD. It is something a few of my friends have sworn by for chronic muscular and skeletal pain, so I’m not surprised at all about its therapeutic qualities in the respiratory space.


----------



## challer

Mike Petrik said:


> Those are fair observations, but I'm honestly not sure what that mission would be. Fabricating a phony mission would end up being a very bad idea. But in concept I agree with you, assuming a mission can be identified that would really, on balance, improve things. Meanwhile, folks can suck it up and watch old movies and play board games with family. For the most part I think Americans are doing a good job, with notable exceptions of course.


It was a bit ambiguous. I do live in DC and mingle with both government and industry crowds as well as media types you would all know from TV. The message was varied and a bit inconsistent. No doubt they are going to get vaccines through without the same standards normally used and several are in some sort of trial. The desire for testing is revitalizing the LDT industry despite the fact that testing thrown together for SK was demonstrated to have very high false positives and negatives. For things like ventilators and drugs, the same FDA inspections and approvals, particularly for manufacturing lines, needed historically are being abbreviated or ignored by the agencies. Government funding for anything other than Covid-19 will not get funding anytime soon. which has a certain death toll associated with it. On the other hand, even "hail Mary" projects for Covid-19 ideas are getting funding. "Not quite there technically" projects were openly encouraged for funding submittals, and approvals are planned to be a few days to 10 days. If you ever wanted a grant, you know that is in Pigs Flying territory.


----------



## eagle2250

Yesterday my wife and I kept our Sunday as normal as possible, We left the house early, 0800 hrs, went to a local grocery to pick up a few essentials during the hour designated for senior citizens, moved on to a local family restaurant, The Koffee Kup, to pick up breakfast orders, that we had previously phoned in for an 0900 hour pick-up, and then returned home to enjoy our breakfast and attend Sunday Services. It does seem a bit odd participating in Church services online, but such are the times we live in. Later in the day we hosted the family dinner, which is what we do on Sunday evenings. In keeping with the call for social distancing, we limited the attendees to just family. In keeping with the late, great Winston Churchills sage advice, "Never, never, never give up!"


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I prepped this weekend...










Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> I prepped this weekend...
> 
> View attachment 41614
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


My house always looks like that.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Oldsarge said:


> My house always looks like that.


I was out of .30-06 and I was running low on bird shot after shooting clays. Good to go if a cockfight breaks out....






Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Big T

I have very little at home, but I have a warehouse for my business, where I have a single lane indoor shooting range, and my reloading room (incidentally, if any here have any Lee reloading equipment, I make a few parts for their presses).


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ No chance of anything breaking out,....If so our government will take care of us, right? :icon_scratch:

The Portland Police Bureau announced on Oregon Live about a week ago that they would not be showing up for many calls. But they did specify that if it was violence *with* a weapon they would respond. Since they did specify *with* a weapon I guess they might not respond if there is no weapon involved,...

One could place a call and let the police dispatcher know that the individual who was about to victimize you had a weapon and wait for law enforcement to arrive or I guess one could make an attempt to defend one's self.

This AM Portland local news showed images of stores on Northwest 23rd avenue, (A trendy shopping district) had boarded up their windows.

Perhaps our society is not quite as civilized as some politicians and their supporters suggest.


----------



## eagle2250

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> I prepped this weekend...
> 
> View attachment 41614
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR





127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ No chance of anything breaking out,....If so our government will take care of us, right? :icon_scratch:
> 
> The Portland Police Bureau announced on Oregon Live about a week ago that they would not be showing up for many calls. But they did specify that if it was violence *with* a weapon they would respond. Since they did specify *with* a weapon I guess they might not if there is no weapon involved,...
> 
> This AM Portland local news showed images of stores on Northwest 23rd avenue, (A trendy shopping district) had boarded up their windows.
> 
> Perhaps our society is not quite as civilized as some politicians and their supporters suggest.


I knew there was a reason for keeping the weapon safes in my nest so well stocked! We are prepared for whatever might come. We even have 60 double rolls of toilet paper, bye gawd. LOl.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

In my experience around the world, I have learned that the veneer of civilization is razor thin, and it only requires a little heat and steam to get it to begin to unpeel. 

I tend to hedge when it comes to the ability of the lawful authorities to maintain order when the poop hits the fan. I saw the impact and breakdown cause by Hurricane Katrina first hand, and that was enough for me to always keep a long gun or two near by.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> I knew there was a reason for keeping the weapon safes in my nest so well stocked! We are prepared for whatever might come. We even have 60 double rolls of toilet paper, bye gawd. LOl.


Cause you never know when you have the urge to go!


----------



## Big T

To all my chums here, thanks for keeping this place a refuge for sanity, trying to be as non-political as we can, even though many have a private life that pulls in one direction or the other. It is refreshing to see non-partisan comments, some serious and some with humor.


----------



## Oldsarge

Some of us are not only non-partisan, but anti-partisan. 😁 Of course, we are fully pro-party's-on!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

But on a serious note,.....Of course a pandemic is not political in nature but it can easily be turned into politics as usual.

I too am "Anti-Partisan." True it's funny, good one Sarge. While we argue about who's right and left my opinion is that we live in a plutocracy and the fabulously wealthy, the corporations, as well as the career politicians, must smile from time to time as we natives thrash about among ourselves.

Does it count as political if one feels that both sides are hopelessly corrupt?



Oldsarge said:


> Some of us are not only non-partisan, but anti-partisan. 😁 Of course, we are fully pro-party's-on!


----------



## Dhaller

As soon as you have an issue which (1) affects a population and (2) is subject to differing perceptions, you have politics.

I was once chided for having "that liberal look" - I think it was my glasses at the time - and I was so amused, because *absolutely* you can take one look at someone and glean their political leanings. Fashion (1) affects a population and (2) is subject to differing perceptions.

Quick test: who is more likely to enjoy arugula in their salads? A liberal? or a conservative?... see? I don't even need to provide an answer. It's that obvious.

OF COURSE a pandemic will be political.

DH


----------



## eagle2250

127.72 MHz said:


> But on a serious note,.....Of course a pandemic is not political in nature but it can easily be turned into politics as usual.
> 
> I too am "Anti-Partisan." True it's funny, good one Sarge. While we argue about who's right and left my opinion is that we live in a plutocracy and the fabulously wealthy, the corporations, as well as the career politicians, must smile from time to time as we natives thrash about among ourselves.
> 
> Does it count as political if one feels that both sides are hopelessly corrupt?


Yours strikes me as a pretty reasonable conclusion, my friend. The forefathers of this beloved Republic of ours forget to disallow politics as a persons life work. Consequently, far too many lose sight of that cardinal rule that one must be a committed successful citizen first and then contribute to politics, rather than the other way around.


----------



## eagle2250

Early this AM we ventured out to visit a local supermarket, Publix, during the hours that had been set aside for seniors. Traffic at all points along our eight mile route could be counted on the fingers of just our hands, no toes necessary . Once at the store, unlike a number of others in the store we went about picking up just a few necessary items, observing minor struggles as shoppers battled over the last large bag of frozen vegetables and the apparent last bottle of Lysol or Clorox Spray cleaner. People are behaving nuttier than they have done in the past three hurricanes we have lived through here in central Florida. Prior to returning home we swung by one of our favorite local eateries to pick up the breakfast order we had phoned in ahead of time, for curbside pickup. After graciously bumping elbows and paying for our food, we returned home to the relative sanity and safety of our nest! Life is good, but disturbingly reminiscent of life in America after a weaponized virus runs rampant and the few remaining survivors struggle to keep on going on in Stephen King's book (and movie created thereof) The Stand. Jeez Louise, I wish I hadn't watched that damn DVD again last night! And then there was the will Smith movie, I Am Legend! LOL. :icon_scratch:


----------



## Flanderian

eagle2250 said:


> and safety of our nest!


Shouldn't that be *love* nest!? :loveyou:


----------



## Flanderian

And Charles too -

_"They arrived on Friday and Charles, known as the Duke of Rothesay when in Scotland, is said to have become unwell with mild coronavirus symptoms over the weekend ."_

https://tweedlandthegentlemansclub.blogspot.com/2020/03/royals-practise-physical-distancing-as.html


----------



## Mr Thorvald

I'm still at work, hoping to get sick so my boss will let me work from home. It's pretty pressurized around here now days. The pressure is starting to get to people. I work in a mid-sized nonprofit healthcare org in NYC that does a variety of gov programs, including direct medical care. We are trying to get regulatory approval to do videoconferencing with patients so our doctors don't all get sick. Thankfully our president has put the fear of God in the regulators and they are bending the rules to let us do the work, but they just seem to not like it at all letting us children bend the rules. and no I don't have to wear one of those horrid white smocks. As an essential worker I can't stay home. The subways are empty, very strange. I took a walk through Soho today at lunchtime, all the stores are not only closed, but they've taken all the close out of the stores. Like some kind of movie.


----------



## smmrfld

Mr Thorvald said:


> I'm still at work, hoping to get sick so my boss will let me work from home.


And you're in healthcare? With that nonsensical attitude, I hope you don't have any contact or influence around anyone I care about. SMH.


----------



## Dhaller

My wife was freaking out about food security yesterday, so I found a farm which would sell me a pig and a quarter of a cow... couple hundred, maybe three-hundred pounds of meat. So I decided to buy a freezer chest (~11 cu.ft), but there are NONE. 

Count freezers among the panic casualties of retail.

Then I finally went to a huge international grocer which primarily serves immigrant/ethnic communities (The Buford Highway Farmer's Market, for those in Atlanta) and came away with loads of meats, eggs, whatever. Well, except toilet paper. Still, apparently these communities are less inclined to panic and hoarding (or maybe the BHFM just has an amazing supply chain.)

So, larders full.

DH


----------



## Oldsarge

Gosh, I keep my larders full. I've got shelves of home canned goods, a deer and a pair of big ducks in the freezer, flour, eggs. I don't understand people who shop from week to week and don't have any reserves.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Oldsarge said:


> I've got shelves of home canned goods, a *deer* and a pair of big ducks in the freezer...I don't understand people who shop from week to week and don't have any reserves.


Probably because most of us don't have a dead deer in the cupboard, necessitating trolling the aisles weekly looking for beans, bananas and, on occasion, babes.


----------



## Big T

At 67, raised in a small town, in a rural county, hunting was normal, in season and out. What was never accepted, was not eating your harvest!

My grandfather had a small grocery store and butcher shop, with a side of venison hanging in the cooler a normal sight. I was maybe 4 or 5 with my dad and an uncle, butchering a deer, & being the nib I heard I was, I deserved some special treatment when I was making a fuss about being hungry. My dad cut the windpipe from the deer, cut a piece off, washed it and gave it to me, saying it was a piece of macaroni. I remember walking around, chewing on that piece of pasta, before spitting it out, mainly because I was being laughed at.


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> Shouldn't that be *love* nest!? :loveyou:


LOL. I would Oh-So-Like to agree with your suggestion, but to tell the truth, SWMBO gets a little testy when she's cooped up with my twisted sense of humor for too long at a time! LOL.


----------



## Howard

Oldsarge said:


> Gosh, I keep my larders full. I've got shelves of home canned goods, a deer and a pair of big ducks in the freezer, flour, eggs. I don't understand people who shop from week to week and don't have any reserves.


Don't forget toilet paper and hand sanitizer too, Sarge.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Oldsarge said:


> Gosh, I keep my larders full. I've got shelves of home canned goods, a deer and a pair of big ducks in the freezer, flour, eggs. I don't understand people who shop from week to week and don't have any reserves.


An interesting question....

Over the last 12 years I have lived in densely populated urban areas with food stores on every corner and within a 2 minute walk. As a result there was no need to stock up on items. We bought fresh daily. Nothing canned or pre prepared.

Also, I have found that most people who live in dense urban apartment situations don't have a lot of room to store extra stuff. Some of my kitchens barely had room to store basic kitchen stuff as most folks in my social group went out to eat every night or picked picked up to go orders. My current apartment does not have a full size fridge or freezer to save space. Plus a lot of Emory students live(d) in my complex, and kids don't cook, so no need for huge kitchens.

I am a country boy, so I know the value of preparing. I am having to dust off my skills!

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Dhaller said:


> My wife was freaking out about food security yesterday, so I found a farm which would sell me a pig and a quarter of a cow... couple hundred, maybe three-hundred pounds of meat. So I decided to buy a freezer chest (~11 cu.ft), but there are NONE.
> 
> Count freezers among the panic casualties of retail.
> 
> Then I finally went to a huge international grocer which primarily serves immigrant/ethnic communities (The Buford Highway Farmer's Market, for those in Atlanta) and came away with loads of meats, eggs, whatever. Well, except toilet paper. Still, apparently these communities are less inclined to panic and hoarding (or maybe the BHFM just has an amazing supply chain.)
> 
> So, larders full.
> 
> DH


Love Buford Highway!

I had never seen a full hide chicharonnes before I went there.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

Even though both my children live in apartments, it's easy for me to forget that so many of us live in minimal space accommodations. I only lived in an apartment for a few very circumscribed times in the first few years of marriage and have been a low-status suburbanite for decades. I've always had a garage (never with a car in it) and one sort of pantry or another. Being (as all here can easily attest) obsessed with food, gardening, fishing, hunting, canning and freezing are second nature to me. I do it for fun. That, on occasion, it turns out to have been prudence, is just a side benefit.


----------



## Flanderian

For any who might find it helpful to have a current table of the Covid-19 pandemic by U.S. state, I've found the table at the following link to be generally accurate, and reasonably up to date -

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Edit: Preliminary observation suggests that population density may be a significant factor in the spread of the disease. I.e., the denser the population, the quicker it spreads and the more people are affected. Some studies have already suggested this, though it's unknown whether this will result in a smaller percentage of the total population infected in less dense areas, or simply delay the progress. I have a suspicion that a smaller percentage will ultimately be infected in more sparsely populated regions.


----------



## Dhaller

Flanderian said:


> For any who might find it helpful to have a current table of the Covid-19 pandemic by U.S. state, I've found the table at the following link to be generally accurate, and reasonably up to date -
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
> Edit: Preliminary observation suggests that population density may be a significant factor in the spread of the disease. I.e., the denser the population, the quicker it spreads and the more people are affected. Some studies have already suggested this, though it's unknown whether this will result in a smaller percentage of the total population infected in less dense areas, or simply delay the progress. I have a suspicion that a smaller percentage will ultimately be infected in more sparsely populated regions.


Absolutely, population density is a factor.

I mean, consider the limiting case of a man who lives alone on an island. He can't get it.

Well... unless it comes in on a parcel. Rural folk still need to take precautions with mail and packages. While rural infections might be rarer, those people also have less access to emergency medical care (respirators and such). There is always a trade off.

I shudder to think of what might happen in May, when the cold/flu season begins in the Southern Hemisphere/equatorial region. India, Africa, and so on - dense populations, poverty, failed states. It is going to be *horrific*.

I plan on sitting down to do some modeling this evening (I'm work occasionally with a risk-analysis group usually focused on modeling terrorism, and now we're developing some pandemic forecasting models).

Right now I'm guessing ~75 million deaths globally by the time this runs its course.

Probably Italy will briefly take the reins as #1 infection site by tonight, and the USA will lap them by Saturday, at which point the USA will be the worst-hit country until India takes over in May(ish).

It's breathtaking, the degree to which the USA has failed to respond to this pandemic.

DH


----------



## Big T

eagle2250 said:


> LOL. I would Oh-So-Like to agree with your suggestion, but to tell the truth, SWMBO gets a little testy when she's cooped up with my twisted sense of humor for too long at a time! LOL.


Don't they all! My wife is a teacher (schools all cancelled) and today the teachers have Skype programs to get them all on the same page for at home teaching of the kids and to say she was testy, would be an understatement!


----------



## Mr Thorvald

Flanderian said:


> And Charles too -
> 
> _"They arrived on Friday and Charles, known as the Duke of Rothesay when in Scotland, is said to have become unwell with mild coronavirus symptoms over the weekend ."_
> 
> https://tweedlandthegentlemansclub.blogspot.com/2020/03/royals-practise-physical-distancing-as.html


Are they sure its not just a bad haggis? That stuff is nasty. 
FOLLOW FOLLOW RANGERS!


----------



## Flanderian

Flanderian said:


> For any who might find it helpful to have a current table of the Covid-19 pandemic by U.S. state, I've found the table at the following link to be generally accurate, and reasonably up to date -
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
> Edit: Preliminary observation suggests that population density may be a significant factor in the spread of the disease. I.e., the denser the population, the quicker it spreads and the more people are affected. Some studies have already suggested this, though it's unknown whether this will result in a smaller percentage of the total population infected in less dense areas, or simply delay the progress. I have a suspicion that a smaller percentage will ultimately be infected in more sparsely populated regions.


Just announced by Governor, NJ cases now 6,876, more than only 10 countries worldwide.


----------



## Flanderian

Dhaller said:


> Absolutely, population density is a factor.
> 
> I mean, consider the limiting case of a man who lives alone on an island. He can't get it.
> 
> Well... unless it comes in on a parcel. Rural folk still need to take precautions with mail and packages. While rural infections might be rarer, those people also have less access to emergency medical care (respirators and such). There is always a trade off.
> 
> I shudder to think of what might happen in May, when the cold/flu season begins in the Southern Hemisphere/equatorial region. India, Africa, and so on - dense populations, poverty, failed states. It is going to be *horrific*.
> 
> I plan on sitting down to do some modeling this evening (I'm work occasionally with a risk-analysis group usually focused on modeling terrorism, and now we're developing some pandemic forecasting models).
> 
> Right now I'm guessing ~75 million deaths globally by the time this runs its course.
> 
> Probably Italy will briefly take the reins as #1 infection site by tonight, and the USA will lap them by Saturday, at which point the USA will be the worst-hit country until India takes over in May(ish).
> 
> It's breathtaking, the degree to which the USA has failed to respond to this pandemic.
> 
> DH


One set of modelling from a government website projected that New Jersey could ultimately experience as many as 2 million cases, and 20,000 to 50,000 deaths.

Sobering.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> One set of modelling from a government website projected that New Jersey could ultimately experience as many as 2 million cases, and 20,000 to 50,000 deaths.
> 
> Sobering.


Be careful about relying on modeling. The model that has by far received the most public exposure is the COVID Act Now model, the purpose of which was to present a worst case scenario as an advocacy case to political leaders.

Based on a paper published by the Imperial College of London, the model has proven wildly inaccurate* chiefly because it was not designed to actually be predictive since it assumed no behavioral changes by either the public or the medical community, which would be a ridiculous assumption for a predictive model.

The chief author of that model is publicly walking back his model's predictions and is now trying to regularly update it based on new data, though even the most recent version still relies on rather pessimistic assumptions, to put it charitably -- see link below.

The chief use of that model frankly has not been by the medical community for scientific purposes but by certain policy advocates to induce political action and certain politicians to induce public compliance.

I'm 100% for compliance with CDC recommendations as this is a serious virus warranting serious protocols, but when "experts" trifle with the truth they risk credibility.

https://www.wusa9.com/amp/article/n...-now/507-eec2b1be-499b-4216-9506-02a067941e05
*For instance the model predicted 260,000 UK deaths, while the author acknowledged yesterday that it will actually likely be less than 20,000.


----------



## Oldsarge

And speaking as a Psychological Operations professional of many years, once you lose credibility, you're toast. No one will ever believe what you say again, ever. Never, ever lie.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> And speaking as a Psychological Operations professional of many years, once you lose credibility, you're toast. No one will ever believe what you say again, ever. Never, ever lie.


Well, even this serious Catholic is reluctant to be that dogmatic (think lying to a terrorist to save innocents), but if temporary behavioral and legal changes are justified -- as they are with this pandemic -- skillful communicators ought to be able to support those changes without resorting to deceit.


----------



## Oldsarge

Oh, quite so. Always tell the (carefully edited) truth. A Psychological Operative isn't in the business of saving innocents from terrorists. That's for snipers. Our job it to change the behavior of populations. Large populations or small ones, the techniques are the same.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Be careful about relying on modeling. The model that has by far received the most public exposure is the COVID Act Now model, the purpose of which was to present a worst case scenario as an advocacy case to political leaders. Based on a paper published by the Imperial College of London, the model has proven wildly inaccurate* chiefly because it was not designed to actually be predictive since it assumed no behavioral changes by either the public or the medical community, which would be a ridiculous assumption for a predictive model. The chief author of that model is publicly walking back his model's predictions and is now trying to regularly update it based on new data, though even the most recent version still relies on rather pessimistic assumptions, to put it charitably -- see link below. The chief use of that model frankly has not been by the medical community for scientific purposes but by certain policy advocates to induce political action and certain politicians to induce public compliance. I'm 100% for compliance with CDC recommendations as this is a serious virus warranting serious protocols, but when "experts" trifle with the truth they risk credibility.
> 
> https://www.wusa9.com/amp/article/n...-now/507-eec2b1be-499b-4216-9506-02a067941e05
> *For instance the model predicted 260,000 UK deaths, while the author acknowledged yesterday that it will actually likely be less than 20,000.


The reality is, IMHO, that at present no model is likely to predict the future given so many unknowns. I was recalling from faulty memory one statistic I read in passing from a link provided via my State's info hub. And the figure I quoted was the top of a range, the lower figure, I think, being several hundred thousand. And that isn't quantified as to period, so I would assume that could be over years.

However, I still find that sobering, particularly given the rapid increase in my part of the world, and the apparent lack of cooperation on behalf of some segments of the population to retard the spread.

https://covid19.nj.gov/
https://covid19.nj.gov/faqs/coronavirus-information


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> The reality is, IMHO, that at present no model is likely to predict the future given so many unknowns. I was recalling from faulty memory one statistic I read in passing from a link provided via my State's info hub. And the figure I quoted was the top of a range, the lower figure, I think, being several hundred thousand. And that isn't quantified as to period, so I would assume that could be over years.
> 
> However, I still find that sobering, particularly given the rapid increase in my part of the world, and the apparent lack of cooperation on behalf of some segments of the population to retard the spread.
> 
> https://covid19.nj.gov/
> https://covid19.nj.gov/faqs/coronavirus-information


Of course -- this is a bad one. But even official state governments have been touting numbers from discredited models, so one really must examine data carefully, especially their assumptions.

For example, the 40% to 80% infection rate asserted repeatedly by Governor Cuomo assumes (i) no alteration to the virus's high r0 from governmental or citizen reaction to the virus (i.e., nobody socially distances or isolates) and (ii) multiple cycles (exactly as you suspect).

Similarly some CFR predictions assume (i) worst case scenario hospital situations nationally and (ii ) zero improvement in COVID-19 treatment options.

These are unlikely assumptions indeed. The virus is bad enough - they do not need to spin or exaggerate.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I am very concerned for rural communities where people might think they are immune from big city problems and decide to ignore the social distancing directive.

Many counties in the south, the poorest and most unhealthy region of the country, have no hospitals and only limited medical care. If 100 people in a rural community become ill, there is no system to support them.

This is why when I hear the POTUS say he wants to dial down the current distancing directive in areas that are less impacted, my hair stands on end.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ I share your concerns.

My family's roots lie in the San Luis Valley of southern Colorado. My father still spends his Summers there. Many of the residents are lifelong and of humble means. If this virus takes hold I shutter to think of the potential results.

Working in the healthcare field for my career I know first hand what these small community hospitals can, and cannot, deal with.

There are small communities like this all across "Fly over" country in our nation. My deepest hope is with them.


----------



## Oldsarge

Indeed, the idea that since they are remote from the major centers of infection somehow isolates them from the disease is nothing less than a recipe for disaster. However urban/social my personal ideas may be, I am very fond of small towns and very sympathetic to their traditions and beliefs whether I hold them or not. The thought that because of the lack of medical care available might lead to a modern Black Death across rural America is the stuff of nightmares.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Of course -- this is a bad one. But even official state governments have been touting numbers from discredited models, so one really must examine data carefully, especially their assumptions.
> 
> For example, the 40% to 80% infection rate asserted repeatedly by Governor Cuomo assumes (i) no alteration to the virus's high r0 from governmental or citizen reaction to the virus (i.e., nobody socially distances or isolates) and (ii) multiple cycles (exactly as you suspect).
> 
> Similarly some CFR predictions assume (i) worst case scenario hospital situations nationally and (ii ) zero improvement in COVID-19 treatment options. These are unlikely assumptions indeed. The virus is bad enough - they do not need to spin or exaggerate.


Mike, I truly hope you are correct in the belief that the worst case scenarios are unlikely to come to pass. But given that my state of residence has in about a week gone from a couple hundred confirmed cases to almost 7,000, which is more than most countries, and that the rate is accelerating, it is discomforting.

Added to this is that NJ's health care capacity is already beginning to be taxed, despite seemingly positive actions by the state government. (Rare almost to exception!) And I hope that the actions taken by this state's government succeed in slowing the spread.

But the state's orders concerning distancing, staying at home and the closure of business are often flouted and lack significant enforcement. A local TV news crew was interviewing the many residents wandering about casually without concern in a quarantine area in a NJ city. When asked why, the response was "To enjoy the nice weather." It was cold, and raining.

But whatever NJ's difficulty, NY's has already become tragic with 39,000 confirmed cases. One doctor at a hospital treating these patients was asked what it was like inside while taking a break outdoors. His response was, "It's hell. Literally hell. Patients come in, I intubate them, they die, and then the next one comes in. "


----------



## Mike Petrik

^^
Just to be clear, it is quite plausible that some regions will experience dire situations approaching the worst case modeling. What is implausible is that this will be the general case nationally. All the experts agree that we are not going to remotely approach the 1 million-plus deaths that these early models predicted. Based on everything I'm reading I think we have a reasonable shot at keeping total US deaths at fewer than 100,000, though much depends of course on voluntary compliance.

The widely publicized COVID-19 Act Now model initially predicted 500,000 UK deaths; the model's author is now saying it will be closer to 20,000. We have Pollyannas in this country who induce complacency and non-compliance by understating the risks of this virus. We also have alarmists who induce panic and despair by exaggerating the risks. Truthfulness is key.


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> Mike, I truly hope you are correct in the belief that the worst case scenarios are unlikely to come to pass. But given that my state of residence has in about a week gone from a couple hundred confirmed cases to almost 7,000, which is more than most countries, and that the rate is accelerating, it is discomforting. Added to this is that NJ's health care capacity is already beginning to be taxed, despite seemingly positive actions by the state government. (Rare almost to exception!) And I hope that the actions taken by this state's government succeed in slowing the spread. But the state's orders concerning distancing, staying at home and the closure of business are often flouted and lack significant enforcement. A local TV news crew was interviewing the many residents wandering about casually without concern in a quarantine area in a NJ city. When asked why, the response was "To enjoy the nice weather." It was cold, and raining.
> 
> But whatever NJ's difficulty, NY's has already become tragic with 39,000 confirmed cases. One doctor at a hospital treating these patients was asked what it was like inside while taking a break outdoors. His response was, "It's hell. Literally hell. Patients come in, I intubate them, they die, and then the next one comes in. "


Focus on the success stories relating to our confrontation of the virus and not on the tragedy of battles lost. Therein lies our hope for the future.

We should be asking ourselves why for so long we were so focused on all the Bullsh*t, that we never even noticed this present freight train of a medical crises roaring down the tracks in our direction and hence, we were tragically unprepared and are and will continue to pay dearly for that unpreparedness.

It is far too late to lament past oversight(s) and is a total waste of all of our time for our politicians to shade their versions of events to cover their respective asses, for the benefit of historical reflection.

As seems to be the case in most such instances, the bulk of the effort to overcome these present day challenges will fall on the shoulders of "everyman/everywoman/ Each of us must take those ever so reasonable series of actions that are necessary to adequately socially distance and self-isolate ourselves, so as to contain and eventually defeat this virus.

We will win this war against a biological enemy. Believe in the innate heroic nature of everyman/everywoman in the choices we make and the actions we take as we march into our future(s)! We are each destined to play out our respective roles in this crisis. Take care and have a great day.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Mike Petrik said:


> We have Pollyannas in this country who induce complacency and non-compliance by understating the risks of this virus. We also have alarmists who induce panic and despair by exaggerating the risks. * Truthfulness is key.*


Aye, but truth is a pod in the wind of late and until it takes seed I'm obliged to lean toward the worst. My make up. Then reality, when it comes, comes rosy.


----------



## Mike Petrik

eagle2250 said:


> Focus on the success stories relating to our confrontation of the virus and not on the tragedy of battles lost. Therein lies our hope for the future. We should be asking ourselves why for so long we were so focused on all the Bullsh*t, that we never even noticed this present freight train of a medical crises roaring down the tracks in our direction and hence, we were tragically unprepared and are and will continue to pay dearly for that unpreparedness. It is far too late to lament past oversight(s) and is a total waste of all of our time for our politicians to shade their versions of events to cover their respective asses, for the benefit of historical reflection. As seems to be the case in most such instances, the bulk of the effort to overcome these present day challenges will fall on the shoulders of "everyman/everywoman/ Each of us must take those ever so reasonable series of actions that are necessary to adequately socially distance and self-isolate ourselves, so as to contain and eventually defeat this virus. We will win this war against a biological enemy. Believe in the innate heroic nature of everyman/everywoman in the choices we make and the actions we take as we march into our future(s)! We are each destined to play out our respective roles in this crisis. Take care and have a great day.


It is human nature to be unprepared for the unlikely. After every war a nation resolves never again to be unprepared, but alas it is always only a matter of time and fleeting memory. Pandemics are no different. And neither can be predicted in ways that would have allowed for the kind of preparation that would have been most effective. The urge to assign blame is a pathology.


----------



## Mike Petrik

In my opinion each and every one of us should faithfully observe all CDC protocols. Furthermore, while our public officials must balance economic needs with health needs, I favor leaning toward health needs first.

Now for the rebuttal:


----------



## eagle2250

Mike Petrik said:


> In my opinion each and every one of us should faithfully observe all CDC protocols. Furthermore, while our public officials must balance economic needs with health needs, I favor leaning toward health needs first.
> 
> Now for the rebuttal:


LOL. Given the remote possibility that this might get out, I am somewhat hesitant to admit that George Carlin is the role model that I wish I had had the gonads to emulate as I grew up. He indeed has a great and (I think) hilarious perspective on life and had much more common sense than so many of our politicians! :crazy:


----------



## Mike Petrik

^^
I've always been ambivalent about Carlin. He was a comic genius for sure, but IMO always seemed on the wrong side of things -- e.g., this video. Yet, no one was better at challenging the conceits and overreaches of the right side. As a Catholic I suspect he is now Purgatory's beloved class clown.


----------



## Oldsarge

Social Distancing . . .


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> Social Distancing . . .
> 
> View attachment 41861


Wow.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I’m looking forward to my church being filled on Easter Sunday to sing praises of deliverance....

But I have my house stocked with food and ammo because I know to hope for the best while preparing for the worst. 

No sin there!

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> I'm looking forward to my church being filled on Easter Sunday to sing praises of deliverance....
> 
> But I have my house stocked with food and ammo because I know to hope for the best while preparing for the worst.
> 
> No sin there!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


The Archdiocese of Atlanta just extended the suspension of Sunday masses through the first Sunday after Easter. I do not in any way quarrel with this decision, but it saddens me nonetheless.


----------



## Oldsarge

Mike Petrik said:


> The Archdiocese of Atlanta just extended the suspension of Sunday masses through the first Sunday after Easter. I do not in any way quarrel with this decision, but it saddens me nonetheless.


I have no doubt that we will be worshiping remotely for a number of months.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> I have no doubt that we will be worshiping remotely for a number of months.


When it comes to my faith I am remarkably free of doubt, but when it comes to our human condition I am horribly encumbered by doubt in all things.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> I have no doubt that we will be worshiping remotely for a number of months.


Eagle, Sarge, good news!

*Your Country Needs YOU!!








*

Our president announced today that he will be activating military reserves *and retirees* in our fight against the "invisible enemy."

So break out 'dem fatigues, and get ready to saddle up!


----------



## Oldsarge

Sorry. I'm over 60, disabled and have been retired well over five years. He can't touch me.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> Sorry. I'm over 60, disabled and have been retired well over five years. He can't touch me.


Never say never again! :happy:

No flimsy excuses!


----------



## Oldsarge

Read the law.


----------



## vonSuess

I suppose I'm a little old to be of much use, but they wouldn't have to ask twice...


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> Read the law.


Law?


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> Never say never again! :happy:
> 
> No flimsy excuses!
> 
> View attachment 41874


Egad! Uncle Sam seems to have lost his good looks? LOL. I always liked that red, white and blue outfit he wore! 



Flanderian said:


> Eagle, Sarge, good news!
> 
> *Your Country Needs YOU!!
> 
> View attachment 41873
> *
> 
> Our president announced today that he will be activating military reserves *and retirees* in our fight against the "invisible enemy."
> 
> So break out 'dem fatigues, and get ready to saddle up!


Oh-oh! I better see if I can persuade SWMBO to let those fatigues out just a bit and here's hoping they have a horse with a heavy duty suspension, for those of us who may require such. LOL.


----------



## Big T

I remain optimistic in our country's ability to reign in COVID-19. 

Why? Put aside the politics and listen to medical experts, particularly Dr(s). Fauci and Birx. Both have stuck tenuously to their training and presenting factual information. Fauci is not afraid to go counter to his boss, and Birx is fully steeped in statistcs. 

Reading between the lines of what each says, there is beginning to be some rays of hope for bringing the virus under control.

Do I 100% discount the UK study, or for that matter, any analysis of two months ago, or a month ago or even two days ago: absolutely not because as events evolve, statistical points do the same. Birx understands this, hence the reason she is beginning to show a smile.

I will follow the guidelines as well as I can, but not 100%, as I have employees dependent upon me for their livelihood now and when his virus is gone. 

I'm not overly concerned, but I have to say I have SWMBO, three daughters, two son-in-laws, four grandkids, one cat, one puggle, one house beagle (laying on the floor at my feet), to worry for me and preach social distancing, etc.


----------



## Oldsarge

Big T said:


> I remain optimistic in our country's ability to reign in COVID-19. Why? Put aside the politics and listen to medical experts, paricularly Dr(s). Fauci and Birx. Both have stuck tenuously to their training and presenting factual information. Fauci is not afraid to go counter to his boss, and Birx is fully steeped in statistcs. Reading between the lines of what each says, there is beginning to be some rays of hope for bringing the virus under control.
> 
> Do I 100% discount the UK study, or for that matter, any analysis of two months ago, or a month ago or even two days ago: absolutely not because as events evolve, statistical points do the same. Birx understands this, hence the reason she is beginning to show a smile.
> 
> I will follow the guidelines as well as I can, but not 100%, as I have employees dependent upon me for their livelihood now and when his virus is gone. I'm not overly concerned, but I have to say I have SWMBO, three daughters, two son-in-laws, four grandkids, one cat, one puggle, one house beagle (laying on the floor at my feet), to worry for me and preach social distancing, etc.


At least you aren't alone. Good on that. My poodle no doubt wonders why we don't go for long walks anymore and why it takes me so long to get up and down stairs. When CORVID-19 is finally defeated (or at least de-fanged) it's back to physical therapy and when the pain is gone we will walk. Oh, will we!


----------



## Big T

Oldsarge said:


> At least you aren't alone. Good on that. My poodle no doubt wonders why we don't go for long walks anymore and why it takes me so long to get up and down stairs. When CORVID-19 is finally defeated (or at least de-fanged) it's back to physical therapy and when the pain is gone we will walk. Oh, will we!


My beagle walk with me? The idea races through her brain, and when I do take her, after 100 feet, she's sitting, wanting to go back in! I suppose I could carry her, but she is a jumbo, stuffed sausage!

My poor beagle is old! She was a rescue, our 4th. My wife bought me a beagle as a gift in 1999, and the dog passed at age 9, from liver cancer. Since then, we have rescued beagles, and always look for the older dogs that others seem to think wise to pass by! The older dogs are, for the most part, acclimate to their new family much earlier than a young one. They are far more loving, but unfortunately, don't have as many years left for enjoying their company.


----------



## Oldsarge

Big T said:


> My beagle walk with me? The idea races through her brain, and when I do take her, after 100 feet, she's sitting, wanting to go back in! I suppose I could carry her, but she is a jumbo, stuffed sausage!
> 
> My poor beagle is old! She was a rescue, our 4th. My wife bought me a beagle as a gift in 1999, and the dog passed at age 9, from liver cancer. Since then, we have rescued beagles, and always look for the older dogs that others seem to think wise to pass by! The older dogs are, for the most part, acclimate to their new family much earlier than a young one. They are far more loving, but unfortunately, don't have as many years left for enjoying their company.


That is the tragedy of dogs. Their lives are so short . . .


----------



## Big T

Oldsarge said:


> That is the tragedy of dogs. Their lives are so short . . .


And if a dog does not like you, it's not the dog that's at fault!


----------



## drpeter

Big T said:


> My beagle walk with me? The idea races through her brain, and when I do take her, after 100 feet, she's sitting, wanting to go back in! I suppose I could carry her, but she is a jumbo, stuffed sausage!
> 
> My poor beagle is old! She was a rescue, our 4th. My wife bought me a beagle as a gift in 1999, and the dog passed at age 9, from liver cancer. Since then, we have rescued beagles, and always look for the older dogs that others seem to think wise to pass by! The older dogs are, for the most part, acclimate to their new family much earlier than a young one. They are far more loving, but unfortunately, don't have as many years left for enjoying their company.


Aww, @Big T, now you'll have to post a picture of this lovely beagle! I love dogs, and they seem to love me too. What is her name?


----------



## Big T

drpeter said:


> Aww, @Big T, now you'll have to post a picture of this lovely beagle! I love dogs, and they seem to love me too. What is her name?


Winnie!

When we adaopted her, her name was Finnie, but that didn't "fit her"! My father ran beagles in field trial competitions, and that started my love of the breed.

I'll get some pics of he old girl posted.


----------



## Oldsarge

If I owned a large enough parcel to have cottontails, I'd own at least a pair. I'd name them Holmes and Watson. I love beagles!


----------



## Howard

Mike Petrik said:


> ^^
> I've always been ambivalent about Carlin. He was a comic genius for sure, but IMO always seemed on the wrong side of things -- e.g., this video. Yet, no one was better at challenging the conceits and overreaches of the right side. As a Catholic I suspect he is now Purgatory's beloved class clown.


I wonder how would have he had reacted to the corona virus?


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> I wonder how would have he had reacted to the corona virus?


With typical Carlin irreverence!

YouTube has many videos up, with his performances and if you watch them, be careful who is in the room, as some may take his language and topics as hilarious.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Fauci is now saying the models are pointing to 100,000-200,000 deaths in the US. This would make this new virus in competition to be the #3 cause of death in the US, on par with accidental injuries.

Quite sobering.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Fauci is now saying the models are pointing to 100,000-200,000 deaths in the US. This would make this new virus in competition to be the #3 cause of death in the US, on par with accidental injuries.
> 
> Quite sobering.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Yes sobering for sure, but on the lower end of what I've been projecting (100,000 to 500,000) this past week in the face of some bloviators and media alarmists peddling a projected 1% US mortality rate implying millions of US fatalities.

Of course but for the dramatic national efforts we have been undertaking -- social distancing and isolation, business and school closings, quarantines, travel restrictions, etc., -- the worst likely would happen.

The bottom line is that these measures are working, and we should be encouraged. Dr. Fauci's range suggests a national mortality rate of less than of less than 0.1%

Sobering indeed, but no need for Walking Dead panic.


----------



## Howard

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Fauci is now saying the models are pointing to 100,000-200,000 deaths in the US. This would make this new virus in competition to be the #3 cause of death in the US, on par with accidental injuries.
> 
> Quite sobering.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Man, they're dropping like flies!


----------



## winghus

Under the pretense of fighting CV19 Hungary has just voted in a dictatorship.

@balazscseko

Hungarian Parliament passes bill that gives PM Orbán unlimited power & proclaims: - 
State of emergency w/o time limit -
Rule by decree -
Parliament suspended - 
No elections -
Spreading fake news + rumors: up to 5 yrs in prison - 
Leaving quarantine: up to 8 yrs in prison


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244612142831198209
The EU can't overlook this one surely.


----------



## Oldsarge

You think? Watch them.


----------



## eagle2250

winghus said:


> Under the pretense of fighting CV19 Hungary has just voted in a dictatorship.
> 
> @balazscseko
> 
> Hungarian Parliament passes bill that gives PM Orbán unlimited power & proclaims: -
> State of emergency w/o time limit -
> Rule by decree -
> Parliament suspended -
> No elections -
> Spreading fake news + rumors: up to 5 yrs in prison -
> Leaving quarantine: up to 8 yrs in prison
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244612142831198209
> The EU can't overlook this one surely.


Why-oh-why does that sound so eerily familiar? :icon_scratch::crazy:


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Hungary is a beautiful country. Would our government ever use a crisis for a power grab?

Inconceivable!

BTW, most of us should plan on staying home bound well beyond the end of May.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## 127.72 MHz

I am certain that you are not making any distinction whatsoever between a Democratic or Republican executive branch du jour, right?



Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Hungary is a beautiful country. Would our government ever use a crisis for a power grab?
> 
> Inconceivable!
> 
> BTW, most of us should plan on staying home bound well beyond the end of May.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


----------



## Flanderian

Through diligent research, I have learned that the defining symptom of Covid-19 is that it renders the entire American industrial system completely incapable of manufacturing and distributing toilette paper. (Forgive the lack of appropriate euphemism.)

While the innate sophomoric comical implications of this deficiency are obvious, (And one in which I have in the past indulged, and likely will again.) there is a far more serious implication to this general inability to provide this and other necessities that is going ignored.

I believe I am fairly current on the orders and recommendations intended to "flatten the curve." Chief among these is staying at home and not venturing out. And it is particularly vital for those of us who are geezers. But *all other ingenuity expended,* if we are frequently forced out to forage for routine household necessities until recently supplied in abundance, that lack is one of the single greatest contributors to having to venture out in public. And, indeed, if "social distancing" is the single best strategy to slow the spread of disease, that lack of household necessities is its single greatest failing.

I am not blind to the inherent difficulty this disease imposes on manufacture and distribution, as well as the effects of heightened demand. But my sense is that the sudden disappearance of common household necessities goes beyond that. Forty years in business long ago led me to the conclusion that the answer to virtually any question involving business is almost always the same: *money!*

While our state and federal governments undertake herculean efforts to mitigate our common disaster, unless they focus on the causes and remedies allowing the safe supply of routine household necessities, it may all be for naught.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Through diligent research, I have learned that the defining symptom of Covid-19 is that it renders the entire American industrial system completely incapable of manufacturing and distributing toilette paper. (Forgive the lack of appropriate euphemism.)
> 
> While the innate sophomoric comical implications of this deficiency are obvious, (And one in which I have in the past indulged, and likely will again.) there is a far more serious implication to this general inability to provide this and other necessities that is going ignored.
> 
> I believe I am fairly current on the orders and recommendations intended to "flatten the curve." Chief among these is staying at home and not venturing out. And it is particularly vital for those of us who are geezers. But *all other ingenuity expended,* if we are frequently forced out to forage for routine household necessities until recently supplied in abundance, that lack is one of the single greatest contributors to having to venture out in public. And, indeed, if "social distancing" is the single best strategy to slow the spread of disease, that lack of household necessities is its single greatest failing.
> 
> I am not blind to the inherent difficulty this disease imposes on manufacture and distribution, as well as the effects of heightened demand. But my sense is that the sudden disappearance of common household necessities goes beyond that. Forty years in business long ago led me to the conclusion that the answer to virtually any question involving business is almost always the same: *money!*
> 
> While our state and federal governments undertake herculean efforts to mitigate our common disaster, unless they focus on the causes and remedies allowing the safe supply of routine household necessities, it may all be for naught.


My stockist friends at Kroger and Costco tell me that it is not a supply issue at all, but entirely demand. They are getting extra large deliveries but cannot keep them on the shelves. The mainstream media apparently has people scared sh*tless.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> The mainstream media apparently has people scared sh*tless.


Well, were that literally true, it might go a long way to solving the problem! 

But as New York and New Jersey *alone* now have more active cases of infection *than all but 3 of the nations of world* (U.S. included.) I don't think we can lay that at the doorstep of the mainstream media. 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/


----------



## Oldsarge

I wonder how long the TP hoarders think they're going to be locked in their homes.


----------



## Big T

I think it would be most prudent for me to take a ride this evening to our hunting camp and chevk to make sure we haven't run out of old Sears, Cabelas or Herters catalogs, in the privy.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Well, were that literally true, it might go a long way to solving the problem!
> 
> But as New York and New Jersey *alone* now have more active cases of infection *than all but 3 of the nations of world* (U.S. included.) I don't think we can lay that at the doorstep of the mainstream media.
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/


Taking this vicious virus seriously and following all protocols faithfully is rational prudence. Rushing out to stores to hoard TP in anticipation of The Walking Dead is irrational fear.

For weeks the mainstream media have been peddling CFRs, mortality rates and infection rates indicating millions of US deaths. When this weekend Dr. Fauci et al shared a more credible projection of 100,000 to 200,000, they pounced on it as terrible news as if their previous reports never happened.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> I wonder how long the TP hoarders think they're going to be locked in their homes.


I don't know that consumers hoarding TP is the sole cause, or even necessarily the main cause.


----------



## Oldsarge

Flanderian said:


> I don't know that consumers hoarding TP is the sole cause, or even necessarily the main cause.


If it were not for consumer demand, black marketeers would have no one to pillage. Consumer panicky demand is the root cause.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> If it were not for consumer demand, black marketeers would have no one to pillage. Consumer panicky demand is the root cause.


A black market doesn't need to enter into it. "Consumer panicky demand" isn't a cause, it's an opportunity. The asked for retail price on-line for needed items has risen significantly. Yes, this is a product of unsatisfied demand. So if you're a distributor sitting on inventory, you're very likely to view it as a rapidly appreciating asset. And an asset that will only become worth even more in coming months in direct ratio to how it is withheld from the marketplace.

No black market, simply capitalism. This crisis will not end upon any designated date, instead it will run its horrible course for untold months, a tragedy for many, but an opportunity for some. If allowed.


----------



## Howard

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Hungary is a beautiful country. Would our government ever use a crisis for a power grab?
> 
> Inconceivable!
> 
> BTW, most of us should plan on staying home bound well beyond the end of May.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Does that mean New York too?


----------



## Big T

Oldsarge said:


> If it were not for consumer demand, black marketeers would have no one to pillage. Consumer panicky demand is the root cause.


Sort of amusing, several weeks ago, when the TP shortage started to show its ugly head, I asked the person that takes care of purchasing at my plant, if we had issues with buying TP. She said no, that our supplier (wholesale only industrial supply house) had plenty. Guess buying TP in large boxes that hold 288 rolls, has its benefits, however, in normal times, TP pilferage is normal.


----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> If it were not for consumer demand, black marketeers would have no one to pillage. Consumer panicky demand is the root cause.


Indeed, as it so frequently appears to be true, we first make our respective beds and then we b*tch when we have to sleep in them/live with the results!


----------



## Big T

No matter how, or for that matter, how good, we should never give up seeing the irony, humor or pathos, in our words and actions.

It's life and no matter how bad, sure beats the alternative.


----------



## Flanderian

R.I.P. Jazz Legends Bucky Pizzarelli and Ellis Marsalis. 😢

Two virtuoso's of the jazz idiom that I had the privilege to enjoy performing.

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...w-orleans-most-famous-musical-family-has-died


----------



## Oldsarge

It's going to get worse, much worse, as the virus spreads south to states where a number of governors have failed to issue 'stay home' orders and where the public health infrastructure is less and the poverty and number of uninsured is greater.


----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> It's going to get worse, much worse, as the virus spreads south to states where a number of governors have failed to issue 'stay home' orders and where the public health infrastructure is less and the poverty and number of uninsured is greater.


Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis has issued a "stay at home order"...it took him a while, but he did it. Overall, I sense he has done a better job than most at managing the challenges presented by this pandemic/crisis.


----------



## Dhaller

Georgia's "governor" (he stole the office, so I have to qualify the title with quotation marks) has helpfully RE-OPENED the beaches, as of yesterday.

I don't actually know anyone who understands that; I assume he got a call from a major benefactor who special ordered it for some purpose (maybe they have a beach house they want to visit?)

I'm sure that will be helpful.

DH


----------



## Mike Petrik

^^ One may disagree with Governor Kemp's decision without resorting to debunked conspiracy theories or fabricated allegations, but that would require a dose of sober fair-mindedness in all too short supply.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...ey_abrams_a_pass_on_victory_claim_140358.html
https://www.businessinsider.com/georgias-beaches-reopen-as-state-begins-to-shelter-in-place-2020-4


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I have been walking in the Georgia State Parks the past two weekends and I am grateful that these oasis of nature are still open to Georgia citizens.

Today, my wife and I hiked almost 11 miles in the Chattahoochie Bend State Park, located in Coweta Co. We encountered 3 other hikers on our hike, far fewer people and for a shorter period than we do when venturing out to the grocery.

Given the benefit to our mental and physical after being cooped up all week, the risk/reward calculation of taking this very small additional risk of exposure risk is worth it.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Dhaller

What I'm finding with the state parks is that if you stick to the less well-known/popular ones, it's fine.

We were originally going to camp for the week at Cloudland Canyon (daughter's spring break), because we're not "campground campers", but rather backcountry campers - what could be more socially distant? - but the park has been overrun by crowds since this started. Too much parking and too much convenience, perhaps? Anyway, we sadly cancelled that.

Sweetwater Creek is our usual "quick getaway" for hiking - we're near downtown Atlanta and it's just 25 minutes to get there - and it's okay if you go earlier. Arabia Mountain was fine, too.

I'd probably steer clear of Stone Mountain, Kennesaw Mountain, Unicoi, Vogel, places like that - just too well-known. They'll be crowded. My experience with beaches is that they promote gathering, not solitude - hence my sharp criticism that they should be open.

I will say this! One absolutely appreciates a fully-usable outdoor space (gardens, lawns, decks, etc) when outings are limited!

(This may be a good time to try that century I've been wanting to do on the Silver Comet trail, though - I'm finding bike trails to be splendid in this weather.)

DH


----------



## Flanderian

While not an outdoorsman, I read with pleasure of the opportunity members who enjoy this activity have to do so with a minimal degree of risk. But as my wife and I are both in the high risk category we no longer venture out at all given the grim statistics for our state. New Jersey has 34,124 active cases with 4,229 added in just the past day. And along with the aforementioned Bucky Pizzarelli, 846 residents have succumbed with 200 passing overnight. Our only need to leave our home is to purchase food and meds, and we do with increasing concern.

This is an *extraordinarily* contagious disease.


----------



## Dhaller

On a positive note, it looks like Italy peaked today (r0=1).

Hopefully we'll experience the same in 2-3 weeks (offhand, not sure how far behind Italy we are, timeline-wise).

DH


----------



## eagle2250

The wife and I have gotten in the routine of leaving the house at 0730 hours on many days and proceeding with a five mile walk through the neighborhood and around the golf course. Please note that neither of us claim to be golfers, but the scenery is beautiful, the sunshine and fresh air are refreshing and throughout the walk we are able to avoid coming any closer than 8 to 10 feet from others so inclined, just close enough to offer a hearty "howdy...how are ya neighbor! A cool refreshing shower upon our return home and we are ready to approach our respective schedules, detailed in our day planners, with smiles on our faces and a song in our respective hearts, albeit at times a slow, sad song. This seems our new reality? :crazy: Life is a bit strange, but still good.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Dhaller said:


> What I'm finding with the state parks is that if you stick to the less well-known/popular ones, it's fine.
> 
> We were originally going to camp for the week at Cloudland Canyon (daughter's spring break), because we're not "campground campers", but rather backcountry campers - what could be more socially distant? - but the park has been overrun by crowds since this started. Too much parking and too much convenience, perhaps? Anyway, we sadly cancelled that.
> 
> Sweetwater Creek is our usual "quick getaway" for hiking - we're near downtown Atlanta and it's just 25 minutes to get there - and it's okay if you go earlier. Arabia Mountain was fine, too.
> 
> I'd probably steer clear of Stone Mountain, Kennesaw Mountain, Unicoi, Vogel, places like that - just too well-known. They'll be crowded. My experience with beaches is that they promote gathering, not solitude - hence my sharp criticism that they should be open.
> 
> I will say this! One absolutely appreciates a fully-usable outdoor space (gardens, lawns, decks, etc) when outings are limited!
> 
> (This may be a good time to try that century I've been wanting to do on the Silver Comet trail, though - I'm finding bike trails to be splendid in this weather.)
> 
> DH


I did 7 miles on the Silver Comet near Austell on the coldest day in January. Boring, straight, like walking through a tunnel for a few hours on the back side of an industrial area. Not my cup of tea.

The key is getting 1.5 hours south of Atlanta. Everyone heads north to the mountains to hike while completely forgetting great places like FDR SP. We started our walk at 8:45am and were done by 13:30. If you can get finished by noon, you have the park to yourself.

As we are in an apartment while we get sorted with being back in the US, we have no yard. Luckily we have the 100 acres of Lullwater Park in our backyard, but it is very crowded these days 

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Big T

In our rural part of PA, this Sunday morning I took a drive, and noticed a number of businesses having fresh signs of their business reopening (Several weeks ago, PA's governor ordered the shuttering of all non-essential businesses, such as bars, restaurants and so forth). As in our county, to date we have only 4 that have tested positive, I do not view the early reopening in a positive light, as it may do nothing other than cause a more rapid spread. Did our governor act in haste? I don't know, as we have no statistics of test results from prior to his order or post order.

We will continue to shelter at home.


----------



## Oldsarge

I suppose this was a good time to have a wrenched back and not be able to get around much anyway. Besides, Oregon ≠ 'warm and sunny' at this time of year. However, I do occasionally take either a mug of coffee or a glass of red out onto my front porch and watch more mobile people walk by or out on the patio and watch the ducks fly up and down the stream. Occasionally a pair will dabble in the frog pond which delights the poodle no end. And should anyone ask, I am getting better.


----------



## ran23

My home made masks (hounds tooth and check handkerchiefs, really fog up my glasses when walking. think I will look into Japanese style masks.


----------



## iam.mike

ran23 said:


> think I will look into Japanese style masks.


If you are making them at home, @Alexander Kabbaz provided a great tutorial on how to make masks.

You can also make one in about 30 seconds:
https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/threads/a-mask-in-thirty-seconds.242711/
If you are in search of buying a non-surgical cloth mask, one that can be washed or otherwise sterilized, there are several companies selling them.


----------



## ran23

I am sadly lacking a sewing machine. with all the tailor tax I have paid the last few years, you would think I would have one by now. Even grocery shopping this morning, I had my glasses off. Judging from the home made masks I saw, lots of sewing machines around here.


----------



## Flanderian

Australian data study yields conclusion that social distancing must have 80% compliance to be effective. Compliance of 70% or less will not affect spread.

https://www.technologynetworks.com/...-in-13-weeks-with-80-social-distancing-332609


----------



## Oldsarge

I still have a couple of dust masks that I used to use in the shop. Are they sufficient for a run to the grocery store? They have two elastic bands and a bridge-of-the-nose clamp.


----------



## Big T

Oldsarge said:


> I still have a couple of dust masks that I used to use in the shop. Are they sufficient for a run to the grocery store? They have two elastic bands and a bridge-of-the-nose clamp.


As long as they are not the type that have a rubber flap valve to exhale, through, they'll be fine. Because of my asthma, I have a mask on in my wood shop, have a box of 100 disposable 3M n95 masks-wife and daughter have claimed a few.


----------



## Howard

Oldsarge said:


> It's going to get worse, much worse, as the virus spreads south to states where a number of governors have failed to issue 'stay home' orders and where the public health infrastructure is less and the poverty and number of uninsured is greater.


Before you know it, there won't be anyone on the planet.


----------



## Howard

ran23 said:


> My home made masks (hounds tooth and check handkerchiefs, really fog up my glasses when walking. think I will look into Japanese style masks.


When they cover up my nose it fogs up my sunglasses.


----------



## Dhaller

ran23 said:


> My home made masks (hounds tooth and check handkerchiefs, really fog up my glasses when walking. think I will look into Japanese style masks.


As someone who is (1) bespectacled and (2) has had many occasions to wear surgical-style masks over the years, there are a few anti-fogging tricks.

1. Leave a film of surfactant on the lenses: wash your lenses in soapy water, but instead of rinsing, shake them off. No fogging. Not my favorite trick because I like crystal-clear lenses, but it works.

2. Take a piece of tissue paper (like Kleenex) and fold it into a about a 1"x3" rectangle, and then nestle that between the mask and the bridge of your nose: it will capture much of the moisture projecting up from the mask. Maybe an 80% reduction in fog?

3. LASIK. Maybe someday!

DH


----------



## Oldsarge

Dhaller said:


> As someone who is (1) bespectacled and (2) has had many occasions to wear surgical-style masks over the years, there are a few anti-fogging tricks.
> 
> 1. Leave a film of surfactant on the lenses: wash your lenses in soapy water, but instead of rinsing, shake them off. No fogging. Not my favorite trick because I like crystal-clear lenses, but it works.
> 
> 2. Take a piece of tissue paper (like Kleenex) and fold it into a about a 1"x3" rectangle, and then nestle that between the mask and the bridge of your nose: it will capture much of the moisture projecting up from the mask. Maybe an 80% reduction in fog?
> 
> 3. LASIK. Maybe someday!
> 
> DH


Or cataract surgery. And the very latest replacement lenses correct for distance vision, near vision and astigmatism. Great stuff.


----------



## Zim

My wife's not enjoying having to be at home, especially while I still have to go out to work, but we're still healthy and doing well. I hope everyone is doing well.

We've been missing our dance outings so we moved the rugs, dressed up and had a night in with dinner and dancing (well, dinner then dressing up and dancing. Our meal choice was a potential danger to our clothes). It was nice to do something normal, even if some adjustments had to be made.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Amid all the unhappy news we are reading and hearing each day, there is some good news. Those of you who have been paying attention will recall that early COVID-19 models predicted US deaths as approximating 1 million, perhaps multiple millions depending on r0 assumptions. These estimates were based on an assumption of zero social distancing or other mitigation efforts, though the media reports consistently failed to make that clear. A little over a week ago Dr. Blix informed the public that superior models taking into account both actual numbers as well as the ongoing effects of mitigation were indicating that the US death toll could be kept between 100,000 and 200,000 if Americans faithfully executed on mitigation. This past weekend Dr. Blix cited the healthdata.org website as having the richest and most up to date predictive model. As of this morning this model is projecting 81,766 US fatalities, down from about 91,500 on Saturday.

The bottom line is that current indications are that our national mitigation efforts (as supplemented by ongoing treatment improvements) are working. So Americans, keep up and double-down on the social distancing and other mitigation efforts. They are making a huge difference.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections


----------



## Flanderian

Zim said:


> My wife's not enjoying having to be at home, especially while I still have to go out to work, but we're still healthy and doing well. I hope everyone is doing well.
> 
> We've been missing our dance outings so we moved the rugs, dressed up and had a night in with dinner and dancing (well, dinner then dressing up and dancing. Our meal choice was a potential danger to our clothes). It was nice to do something normal, even if some adjustments had to be made.


👍 👍 👍








Mike Petrik said:


> Amid all the unhappy news we are reading and hearing each day, there is some good news. Those of you who have been paying attention will recall that early COVID-19 models predicted US deaths as approximating 1 million, perhaps multiple millions depending on r0 assumptions. These estimates were based on an assumption of zero social distancing or other mitigation efforts, though the media reports consistently failed to make that clear. A little over a week ago Dr. Blix informed the public that superior models taking into account both actual numbers as well as the ongoing effects of mitigation were indicating that the US death toll could be kept between 100,000 and 200,000 if Americans faithfully executed on mitigation. This past weekend Dr. Blix cited the healthdata.org website as having the richest and most up to date predictive model. As of this morning this model is projecting 81,766 US fatalities, down from about 91,500 on Saturday.
> 
> The bottom line is that current indications are that our national mitigation efforts (as supplemented by ongoing treatment improvements) are working. So Americans, keep up and double-down on the social distancing and other mitigation efforts. They are making a huge difference.
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections


It is indeed heartening that some current credible projections are far less than some earlier, most extreme, worst case versions. But a death toll that exceeds the combined total number of U.S. combat deaths of both the Korean and Vietnam Wars is still horrendous. Considering that the current U.S. total is about 10,500 deaths, contrasted to China's, with more than twice the U.S. population, total of 3,400. (Though China's is likely deliberately understated.) And if the argument is made that such a low mortality rate is only possible under a restrictive regime, while Germany has more than 110,000 infections, the total number of deaths is less than !,700.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

M


Flanderian said:


> 👍 👍 👍
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is indeed heartening that some current credible projections are far less than some earlier, most extreme, worst case versions. But a death toll that exceeds the combined total number of U.S. combat deaths of both the Korean and Vietnam Wars is still horrendous. Considering that the current U.S. total is about 10,500 deaths, contrasted to China's, with more than twice the U.S. population, total of 3,400. (Though China's is likely deliberately understated.) And if the argument is made that such a low mortality rate is only possible under a restrictive regime, while Germany has more than 110,000 infections, the total number of deaths is less than !,700.


My concern is that our leaders will be inclined to pop the champagne cork too soon leaving us exposed to a resurgence. There has been a strong tendency to always favor the best case scenario from day one from political leadership.

The desire to restart the economy sooner rather than later will be hard to resist. I don't want to see unnecessary delay, but I certainly don't wish a return to the current situation in the near future. I fear that once people are encouraged to leave their homes, getting them back inside by any means short of declaring martial law will be almost impossible. We have only one shot at getting this cost/benefit estimate correct.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## eagle2250

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> M
> 
> My concern is that our leaders will be inclined to pop the champagne cork too soon leaving us exposed to a resurgence. There has been a strong tendency to always favor the best case scenario from day one from political leadership.
> 
> The desire to restart the economy sooner rather than later will be hard to resist. I don't want to see unnecessary delay, but I certainly don't wish a return to the current situation in the near future. I fear that once people are encouraged to leave their homes, getting them back inside by any means short of declaring martial law will be almost impossible. We have only one shot at getting this cost/benefit estimate correct.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Don't mean to quibble over a minor point of difference, but are we not presently with our Statewide stay-at-home-orders and the looming potential for a nationwide such order to be issued, just a quick Texas Two-Step away from a declaration of martial law? :icon_scratch:


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> 👍 👍 👍
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is indeed heartening that some current credible projections are far less than some earlier, most extreme, worst case versions. But a death toll that exceeds the combined total number of U.S. combat deaths of both the Korean and Vietnam Wars is still horrendous. Considering that the current U.S. total is about 10,500 deaths, contrasted to China's, with more than twice the U.S. population, total of 3,400. (Though China's is likely deliberately understated.) And if the argument is made that such a low mortality rate is only possible under a restrictive regime, while Germany has more than 110,000 infections, the total number of deaths is less than !,700.


https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
The above link's CFR graph almost certainly overstates the US CFR, which is probably at least as low as Germany's given that the latter's CFR statistically benefits from much more widespread testing. But the mortality rate comparison is indeed much more grim. The US is at an earlier stage than Germany in the pandemic, and therefore the US mortality rate will likely increase much more dramatically than Germany's. The likely key to Germany's success in this regard is that widespread testing, which Germany was able to roll out via private labs better than any other nation. Such testing has allowed its mitigation strategies to be much more efficacious than those of other nations, including the US. It also has a culture that places an unusually high value on rule compliance, which might explain why its March 22 social distancing orders were sufficiently effective to obviate the need for a national stay-at-home order.

China data are not worth discussing.

The medical and social issues related to this crisis are fascinating to me. They stand in stark contrast to the political nonsense, which is far too predictable to be interesting.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> M
> 
> My concern is that our leaders will be inclined to pop the champagne cork too soon leaving us exposed to a resurgence. There has been a strong tendency to always favor the best case scenario from day one from political leadership.
> 
> The desire to restart the economy sooner rather than later will be hard to resist. I don't want to see unnecessary delay, but I certainly don't wish a return to the current situation in the near future. I fear that once people are encouraged to leave their homes, getting them back inside by any means short of declaring martial law will be almost impossible. We have only one shot at getting this cost/benefit estimate correct.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Yes, that would be a horrible mistake. But I just don't think that is going to happen. As terrible as this economic coma is, even those most concerned about it acknowledge that having to do it all over again would be catastrophic. This is not to say that some risks cannot be taken -- there are always costs and benefits when it comes to policy matters -- but a risk of a round two similar to round one is simply not one that Trump will take.


----------



## Mr Thorvald

All of the 4 other people who live in my building, have been laid off or their businesses have been closed because of the curfew. Not good for landlady, who is probably not going to get any rent next month. Thankfully I am still going to work since I work at a healthcare company. But instead of taking the subway, now I drive into work from Queens. Let me tell you, the traffic is fantastic, I get home to outer Queens in 25 minutes! Of course I have to pay for the garage, but its a small price to pay for avoiding the infected bums and peasants in the subway. This weekend started planting my garden, put in peas and spinach. The tomatos I started indoors and are about 2 inches high now. Cucumbers should sprout soon. Better learn to grow your own food for when the government goes bankrupt from the drop off in tax revenues.


----------



## Mr Thorvald

ran23 said:


> I am sadly lacking a sewing machine. with all the tailor tax I have paid the last few years, you would think I would have one by now. Even grocery shopping this morning, I had my glasses off. Judging from the home made masks I saw, lots of sewing machines around here.


I have a neighbor who offered to lend me her sewing machine. I am pretty good at sewing, can sew a pretty straight seam, hem pants, take in pants in the back. But one job I can't do by hand is take in baggy trousers, since it requires a perfectly straight, very long seam. I have several pairs of very nice worsted and cotton trousers that are from a different decade, have pleats, but are nice trousers except for the fact that they are baggy in the legs. Can anyone tell me, if I'm pretty adept at sewing by hand, is it reasonable that I could learn to use the sewing machine quickly enough to make trousers narrower without spending so much time that I would shoot an entire weekend on each pair? I have no idea how a sewing machine even works really.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

eagle2250 said:


> Don't mean to quibble over a minor point of difference, but are we not presently with our Statewide stay-at-home-orders and the looming potential for a nationwide such order to be issued, just a quick Texas Two-Step away from a declaration of martial law? :icon_scratch:


I ran across a think tank article that said that no matter how drastic our situation with COVID 19 our government would never call the actual order "Martial Law." It went on to say that the authorities feel that the term alone would bring extremists, both right and left, out of the woodwork.

I searched for the article so I cold post a link but I'm unable to locate it. (Lot's of reading in the wee hours of the morning as I've been having trouble sleeping.)


----------



## 16412

I was reading something about the numbers. (Was going to send the article to friends, but lost it). There is a huge amount of information missing. How many people have gotten this virus? Nobody knows. Therefore, there are no numbers telling us what percentage of those who got have died. By now is it millions have gotten it and don't even know it and are now immune? Is the death rate 5%, 2%, 1%, .01% or even less than. 001%?
Something else. The Democrat party knew about this, but didn't care, because trying to remove Trump was more important. Most the media is in on it. Now that they lost it is all about the virus. I think the media and Democrats are a bunch of terrorists concerning this virus that they had no concern about before. Talk about fear that shouldn't exist!


----------



## smmrfld

WA said:


> I was reading something about the numbers. (Was going to send the article to friends, but lost it). There is a huge amount of information missing. How many people have gotten this virus? Nobody knows. Therefore, there are no numbers telling us what percentage of those who got have died. By now is it millions have gotten it and don't even know it and are now immune? Is the death rate 5%, 2%, 1%, .01% or even less than. 001%?
> Something else. The Democrat party knew about this, but didn't care, because trying to remove Trump was more important. Most the media is in on it. Now that they lost it is all about the virus. I think the media and Democrats are a bunch of terrorists concerning this virus that they had no concern about before. Talk about fear that shouldn't exist!


Your looniness has no boundaries, does it?


----------



## Peak and Pine

smmrfld said:


> Your looniness has no boundaries, does it?


Well at least he didn't do his anti-abortion thing. That often gets worked in.


----------



## Big T

Though I'm a conservative, this is no time for politics. In fact, I'm hoping, if any good comes out of this virus, it is putting an oak stake through the political divide dominating our (US) government. Selflessness also s spreading, and it would be nice to see this remain the norm.


----------



## momsdoc

WA said:


> I was reading something about the numbers. (Was going to send the article to friends, but lost it). There is a huge amount of information missing. How many people have gotten this virus? Nobody knows. Therefore, there are no numbers telling us what percentage of those who got have died. By now is it millions have gotten it and don't even know it and are now immune? Is the death rate 5%, 2%, 1%, .01% or even less than. 001%?
> Something else. The Democrat party knew about this, but didn't care, because trying to remove Trump was more important. Most the media is in on it. Now that they lost it is all about the virus. I think the media and Democrats are a bunch of terrorists concerning this virus that they had no concern about before. Talk about fear that shouldn't exist!


We have 28 ICU/CCU beds and 28 SICU/NeuroICU beds. We have added another 84 more ICU beds. All 140 are CoVID. The regular ICU/CCU/SICU patients have been moved out to regular beds. The entire ER, the second largest in the state is all Covid and at 50% above the capacity used in normal times, all Covid. Regular ER is a tent facility.

As of this weekend only 5 people have been successfully removed from a vent. The rest are dead or still languishing.

Do not downplay this vicious disease. It is like nothing seen in generations, and is coming to a town near you. 
Stay the F*CK at home


----------



## Big T

My next door neighbor is a very well thought of, retired doctor, and in the past, never been one to over react or dramatize events.

With this one, he is very, very scared. He also told me yesterday, that he does not believe we will see the curve tilt downward until mid-May.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Big T said:


> Though I'm a conservative, this is no time for politics.


Then why would you mention that you are a Conservative?

This is the Interchange, polite politics can be done here. Covid19 has three heads, medical, economic and political. Each has its place in the discussion.


----------



## Peak and Pine

momsdoc said:


> We have 28 ICU/CCU beds and 28 SICU/NeuroICU beds. We have added another 84 more ICU beds. All 140 are CoVID. The regular ICU/CCU/SICU patients have been moved out to regular beds. The entire ER, the second largest in the state is all Covid and at 50% above the capacity used in normal times, all Covid. Regular ER is a tent facility.
> 
> As of this weekend only 5 people have been successfully removed from a vent. The rest are dead or still languishing.
> 
> Do not downplay this vicious disease. It is like nothing seen in generations, and is coming to a town near you.
> Stay the F*CK at home


I don't feel comfortable pressing the Like button for this. Too bad we don't have one for Thank You.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I have friends that I consider well educated, well read people who continually downplay the seriousness of this pandemic and the impact this will have on our lives going forward. Given their intellect, their denial of the seriousness of this event points more toward some type of psychological coping mechanism than rational thought. It is disturbing. Maybe it is simply fear and the inability to grasp the magnitude of the changes we are about to encounter.

I am a trained analyst and my wife is a career public health official. We sift reports and gather info hour by hour that increases our alarm.

As Momsdoc points out, this is the real deal and we need to take it seriously. Phase one of this pandemic will not begin to substantially resolve until sometime in June with another flare up likely when kids return to school in the fall.

Young people, the flashpoint of any large society, are out of work by the millions with rent and crushing student loan debt looming with no way to pay. This is a serious risk factor for social instability that must be addressed by the government immediately.

A return of the service sector will be slow and will take years to reach pre pandemic levels. It took the airline industry an incredibly long time to return to pre 9-11 numbers. How many of us, post 9-11, made plans how to thwart a terrorist on our plane if one should present themselves? How do we make the same travel accommodation for a virus? If you sit next to an a symptomatic carrier on the plane no amount of wiping of one seat with wipes will do any good. You will be infected, end of story.

My wife and I watch the nightly POTUS press conference and are very frustrated and alarmed by the POTUS affectation of straying off message repeatedly, grinding axes, and picking petty squabbles with the idiotic press team.

Speaking of the press, the press teams constant attempts to point out every inconsistency and inaccuracy of the Presidents pronouncements during the Covid response is tedious and simply tees up the Presidents frustration, causes him to stray further off message, and does the public no service. It is a farce.

Well, off to the grocery today. If we never meet again, remember, we will always have Paris....

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Big T

Peak and Pine said:


> Then why would you mention that you are a Conservative?
> 
> This is the Interchange, polite politics can be done here. Covid19 has three heads, medical, economic and political. Each has its place in the discussion.


Why, because the person posting was a conservative and I did not want any misunderstanding that I was a liberal attacking his/her point of view. Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ A very well stated analysis Mr. Robinson. Perhaps that has something to do with your occupation?

To be sure Trump is a buffoon. Although this buffoon put a stop to a massive and chronic trade imbalance with China that at least three, and possibly four, administrations lacked the stomach for,...And, because of his personality, he will not receive any credit for it for at least twenty years.

Spot on Mr. Robinson.
"My wife and I watch the nightly POTUS press conference and are very frustrated and alarmed by the POTUS affectation of *straying off message repeatedly, grinding axes, and picking petty squabbles with the idiotic press team.
Speaking of the press, the press teams constant attempts to point out every inconsistency and inaccuracy of the Presidents pronouncements during the Covid response is tedious and simply tees up the Presidents frustration, causes him to stray further off message, and does the public no service. It is a farce*."

I would hazard a guess, that about twenty percent of the US population hate Trump so badly that if they were posed with a scenario where it could be guaranteed that he would lose the election but, in return, half of the U.S. population would have to die, they would expeditiously say; "Go for it!"

We elected the second worst candidate for President of the U.S. in my lifetime.

Moreover, in spite of my semi-obsessive habit of reading a wide range of world press daily, I have yet to see a *detailed analysis** of how the Democratic party could have virtually cleared the field for such a deeply flawed candidate to face off with Donald Trump.

*** Names, positions, and specific events from within the party apparatus that promoted the worse candidate for President in my lifetime.


----------



## Mr Thorvald

Looks like NYC deaths have crested (ops, just read that they went up on Tuesday--uh oh). I work at a Medicaid clinic in NYC, and we are still open and I'm still at work. 

But there is nothing we can do for Covid-19 people, we just call an ambulance. Once you are on a ventilator, your goose is cooked. I've heard 50% get out of it alive, but I find that optimistic. The thing I find is that this virus either gets you or doesn't. And if it gets you and you can't breathe, you die. There is not much any doctor can do for you if your lungs are full of fluid from viral pneumonia. Most of the pneumonia treatments are for bacterial pneumonia (antibiotics). Doctors tell me we aren't going to save sick people, they have too few tools to work with that work quickly enough. Advanced stage viral pneumonia is pretty much untreatable; all the ventilator does is keep you alive, it doesn't cure you, and antibiotics don't work on viral pneumonia.

I live in Queens, and from the map of cases you can see that its people with low incomes who live in apartment buildings who are getting it. I live in a neighborhood of separate houses and no one has it among my neighbors. But a friend of the family is a doctor who runs a nursing home, went to work, next day bam! he was dead. The best way to handle this is to get yourself to a place that is as spread out and as thinly populated as possible. Rich people are going to the Hamptons, this makes sense. This makes it more difficult for the virus to spread. Especially if you are over 70, its important to get away from the crowds. 

Thankfully, as soon as I saw Sanders winning primaries I shifted out of stocks and into bonds. I learned a hard lesson in 2008 when Obama got nominated and the bond market liquidity squeeze bankrupted Lehman Brothers. Stocks grab headlines, but keep your eye on bond market liquidity and repos--that is where the systemic cracks can cause serious seismic shifts.


----------



## Dhaller

WA said:


> I was reading something about the numbers. (Was going to send the article to friends, but lost it). There is a huge amount of information missing. How many people have gotten this virus? Nobody knows. Therefore, there are no numbers telling us what percentage of those who got have died. By now is it millions have gotten it and don't even know it and are now immune? Is the death rate 5%, 2%, 1%, .01% or even less than. 001%?
> Something else. The Democrat party knew about this, but didn't care, because trying to remove Trump was more important. Most the media is in on it. Now that they lost it is all about the virus. I think the media and Democrats are a bunch of terrorists concerning this virus that they had no concern about before. Talk about fear that shouldn't exist!


I have to confess that my local Democratic Party office - finding out I'm a biophysicist - invited me to a special "Mwahahah!" meeting. Frankly, I find the black robes and demonic masks too hot for April but, you know, traditions!

They said "hey, you know what we should do? encourage a pandemic that will likely interrupt the elections and preferentially kill the urban and poor so we can defeat Trump!"

I was like "ummm."

Anyway, conspiracy is hard work!

DH


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ Sad part is that your story is half believable,.....

And during your meeting, on the other side of town a group of globalist Republicans was figuring out how to make 1/10th of a cent more per million pills if they moved manufacturing to China. Turns out they could but each year it would cost the lives of 1.4 million primarily poor rural and urban Americans.

They approved it unanimously.

Meanwhile the plutocrats who have purchased our legislators through bribes masquerading as "Political Contributions" smile while the masses argue about who's right and who's left.


----------



## Mike Petrik

For the most part the quality of discourse on this thread is disappointingly banal. Lord, where are Balfour and Shaver.


----------



## iam.mike

momsdoc said:


> We have 28 ICU/CCU beds and 28 SICU/NeuroICU beds. We have added another 84 more ICU beds.


@momsdoc How is your hospital doing on PPE? Is all that being coordinated through your state, or does your hospital have a designated team that is trying to source? I'm in a few different discussions related to medical and non-medical PPE, so I'm just curious of what's happening from a hospital staff perspective.


----------



## iam.mike

Peak and Pine said:


> Too bad we don't have one for Thank You.


That would indeed be a great emoji! Maybe I can find one for us here.


----------



## Oldsarge

mikel said:


> That would indeed be a great emoji! Maybe I can find one for us here.


Something that showed palms together in the 'namaste' pose?


----------



## Big T

Mike Petrik said:


> For the most part the quality of discourse on this thread is disappointingly banal. Lord, where are Balfour and Shaver.


Maybe if the thread develops normally, it could be a barometer of sorts, indicating, by our posts, opinions if the virus is becoming more severe or waning?


----------



## challer

So why are all these planes flying if we really are serious about lockdown? Yes, they've slowed down but they are flying internally and internationally. Why allow food delivery? One sick delivery person could infect 100 ppl/day. Quarantines only work with near 100% compliance and at least in DC, we are not close.


----------



## eagle2250

challer said:


> So why are all these planes flying if we really are serious about lockdown? Yes, they've slowed down but they are flying internally and internationally. Why allow food delivery? One sick delivery person could infect 100 ppl/day. Quarantines only work with near 100% compliance and at least in DC, we are not close.


Well, the reality is if we go out and shop for our own groceries, we are going to potentially come in contact with many more potential carriers that we will with a single delivery person. That is not to say that we have our groceries delivered, but that on days we do go out we are generally one of the first few customers entering the store that day and we very carefully maintain our social distancing! We also move through the store pourposly and very quickly to reduce our exposure. As for the continuing air flights, life does go on, just at a reduced pace.


----------



## Mike Petrik

challer said:


> So why are all these planes flying if we really are serious about lockdown? Yes, they've slowed down but they are flying internally and internationally. Why allow food delivery? One sick delivery person could infect 100 ppl/day. Quarantines only work with near 100% compliance and at least in DC, we are not close.


And yet, our various mitigation strategies nonetheless seem to be working. As of this morning projected US deaths stands at 60,000. This is a reduction from the millions originally predicted, from the aspirational 100,000 to 200,000 mentioned by Dr. Blix weekend before last, and from the 90,000 projected just this weekend.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

At this point it is simply not possible to know the extent to which these encouraging reductions expose inaccurate CFR or r0 assumptions baked into the various models or whether instead the nationwide mitigation strategies are proving surprisingly efficacious. Possibly some of both. In any case, it would be reckless to assume that the mitigation strategies, however imperfectly carried out, are ineffectual, and it is imperative that Americans continue to comply.


----------



## 16412

I was reading that the heart problem cases were not exactly honest concerning this virus. And they were changing their minds about some heart problem cases because they don't make sense with the virus. This means that the death count from this virus is less than the numbers given.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

challer said:


> So why are all these planes flying if we really are serious about lockdown? Yes, they've slowed down but they are flying internally and internationally. Why allow food delivery? One sick delivery person could infect 100 ppl/day. Quarantines only work with near 100% compliance and at least in DC, we are not close.


Strong social distancing measures can curb the pandemic in 13 weeks or so - but only if 80% of the people do it, a new study claims. If 70% or less do it, the pandemic may not be curbed.

ZME Science is a source of science news and features, covering research and developments from all scientific fields. Their stated purpose is to bring the best and latest information, while keeping it as simple as possible.

Article:
https://www.zmescience.com/science/quarantine-work-coronavirus-07042020/


----------



## 127.72 MHz

WA said:


> I was reading that the heart problem cases were not exactly honest concerning this virus. And they were changing their minds about some heart problem cases because they don't make sense with the virus. This means that the death count from this virus is less than the numbers given.


Physicians should not be reluctant to prescribe azithromycin* when a valid indication is present. For most patients, the absolute risk of a serious arrhythmia is infinitesimal. (*So called "Z Pack")

Peer reviewed science from The Journal of The American Medical Association:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4203592/


----------



## smmrfld

WA said:


> I was reading that the heart problem cases were not exactly honest concerning this virus. And they were changing their minds about some heart problem cases because they don't make sense with the virus. This means that the death count from this virus is less than the numbers given.


Care to share your source?


----------



## challer

127.72 MHz said:


> Strong social distancing measures can curb the pandemic in 13 weeks or so - but only if 80% of the people do it, a new study claims. If 70% or less do it, the pandemic may not be curbed.
> 
> ZME Science is a source of science news and features, covering research and developments from all scientific fields. Their stated purpose is to bring the best and latest information, while keeping it as simple as possible.
> 
> Article:
> https://www.zmescience.com/science/quarantine-work-coronavirus-07042020/


We are not anywhere near 80%. It's a non-linear problem and just a few vectors is all it takes to make any quarantine a failure.


----------



## Dhaller

challer said:


> So why are all these planes flying if we really are serious about lockdown? Yes, they've slowed down but they are flying internally and internationally. Why allow food delivery? One sick delivery person could infect 100 ppl/day. Quarantines only work with near 100% compliance and at least in DC, we are not close.


Quarantines work with 70% compliance, and speed up lowering of r0 significantly at 80%.

Math sometimes saves us from absolutes and extremes.

DH


----------



## Dhaller

WA said:


> I was reading that the heart problem cases were not exactly honest concerning this virus. And they were changing their minds about some heart problem cases because they don't make sense with the virus. This means that the death count from this virus is less than the numbers given.


Science is constant vision and revision.

If that's stressful, there will be a book summarizing this using final data in a couple of years.

DH


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

WA said:


> I was reading that the heart problem cases were not exactly honest concerning this virus. And they were changing their minds about some heart problem cases because they don't make sense with the virus. This means that the death count from this virus is less than the numbers given.


If one has a defective ticker, not being able to breathe can send it into problem territory in a hurry. In this case, one technically dies because their heart stops, but the virus was the catalyst for a death that was probably going to be cardiac related.....eventually.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Feds classifying all COVID19 patients deaths as "Covid-19 deaths, regardless of cause.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/07/feds-classify-all-coronavirus-patient-deaths-as-covid-19-deaths/


----------



## Flanderian

challer said:


> We are not anywhere near 80%. It's a non-linear problem and just a few vectors is all it takes to make any quarantine a failure.


Your point is well made, but I think the issue may be a little more complex and less certain. The original study is predicated upon the concept of "social distancing." This term actually entails multiple complex behaviors, each of which can be accomplished in a manner more or less safe. So if a complete, perfect quarantine assures absolutely no possibility of transmission, a good, but possibly not perfect quarantine might allow, for example, for a 5% possibility of transmission. And even if assuming all 5% became infected, the total number infected would be less than it would otherwise be, and in turn, a smaller number could be infected by them.

Another issue that may be significant in the transmission of this disease is the concept of viral load. As I understand it, viral load is a measurement of viruses, or a specific virus, in a given quantity of blood. As it pertains to Covid-19, there are indications that higher viral loads result in more severe disease symptoms and greater mortality. And significantly, also that individuals who become infected from a smaller dose of viruses (I.e., reduced but not eliminated exposure.) may develop a milder case of the disease. If so, is there an amount of exposure that is likely to result in no, or an asymptomatic infection? And if so, is a good, but imperfect quarantine safer than none at all?


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> And yet, our various mitigation strategies nonetheless seem to be working. As of this morning projected US deaths stands at 60,000. This is a reduction from the millions originally predicted, from the aspirational 100,000 to 200,000 mentioned by Dr. Blix weekend before last, and from the 90,000 projected just this weekend.
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
> 
> At this point it is simply not possible to know the extent to which these encouraging reductions expose inaccurate CFR or r0 assumptions baked into the various models or whether instead the nationwide mitigation strategies are proving surprisingly efficacious. Possibly some of both. In any case, it would be reckless to assume that the mitigation strategies, however imperfectly carried out, are ineffectual, and it is imperative that Americans continue to comply.


Mike, this is really great information! Thank you for finding and posting it! 👍

But as you've correctly pointed out, all studies are potentially flawed due to unknowable unknowns and misassumptions. But let's hope this is closer to what proves true than not.

Still, this might serve to focus us on the implications of even this good news. The U.S. currently is reported to have roughly 423,000 infections with roughly 14,500 deaths, or roughly a quarter of the predicted fatalities. Using the data in the study you cite would mean that the total number who will ultimately get sick in the U.S. would be roughly 1.7 million, with 43,500 people yet to die. Far better than millions dead, but of little comfort to those next 43.500 people and their loved ones.

Other issues of concern in the category of unknowables is the future course of this disease. Will there be a second wave? Are these projections inclusive of such? Will this disease recur annually, and what will be its effect? My own surmise is that this disease will continue to accrue victims until an effective vaccine becomes available. The question is whether this will occur prior to acquired herd immunity, but I think it will.

One final concerning issue I rarely see addressed is what the potential effect of this disease will be upon the future health of survivors. I think there's a general public assumption that if you survive, you are necessarily restored to the level of health you enjoyed prior being infected. Unfortunately, this may not be true.

One anecdotal incident entails my wife's cousin, a woman in her late '60's who was accustomed to regular, vigorous exercise. Unfortunately, she became infected. But she did recover, shortly after which she imprudently elected to resume her physical activity, and then relapsed with severe chest and back pain. An X-Ray revealed she had developed infiltrates in her lungs. To what degree will they heal? I don't know that a realistic prognosis is currently possible.


----------



## Oldsarge

And now the virus is spreading into previously untouched rural areas. These have older populations, fewer resources and inferior health care. I fear the carnage will do nothing but increase and likely inflict a terribly cultural cost on top of the economic damage and emotional costs already inflicted. Yes, the death rate seems to be less than feared, far less than the 1918 influenza and even less than the Medieval Black Plague. But damage to the national fabric is yet to be seen.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

I went into work today and spoke with one of our epidemiologists. He is in his mid 60s and this has been his life's work. He forwarded this article to me.

I've included the link and pasted what I believe are the most pertinent findings.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554776/
It is not mentioned in the article but knowing how often my occupation comes in contact with patients he stressed that COVID 19 is three times more contagious than the most common flu strains.

The clinical manifestations of the disease *vary widely* by their severity:


*Mild disease: non-pneumonia and mild pneumonia; this occurred in 81% of cases.*
*Severe disease*: dyspnea, respiratory frequency ≥ 30/min, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤ 93%, PaO2/FiO2 ratio or P/F [the ratio between the blood pressure of the oxygen (partial pressure of oxygen, PaO2) and the percentage of oxygen supplied (fraction of inspired oxygen, FiO2)] < 300, and/or lung infiltrates > 50% within 24 to 48 hours; *this occurred in 14% of cases.*
*Critical disease*: respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction (MOD) or failure (MOF); this occurred in* 5% of cases*.

*Uncomplicated (mild) Illness *

These patients usually present with symptoms of an upper respiratory tract viral infection, including mild fever, cough (dry), sore throat, nasal congestion, malaise, headache, muscle pain, or malaise. Signs and symptoms of a more serious disease, such as dyspnea, are not present. Compared to previous HCoV infections, non-respiratory symptoms such as diarrhea are challenging to find.

*Moderate Pneumonia *

Respiratory symptoms such as cough and shortness of breath (or tachypnea in children) are present without signs of severe pneumonia.

*Severe Pneumonia*

Fever is associated with severe dyspnea, respiratory distress, tachypnea (> 30 breaths/min), and hypoxia (SpO2 < 90% on room air). However, the fever symptom must be interpreted carefully as even in severe forms of the disease, it can be moderate or even absent. Cyanosis can occur in children. In this definition, the diagnosis is clinical, and radiologic imaging is used for excluding complications.

*Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)*

The diagnosis requires clinical and ventilatory criteria. This syndrome is suggestive of a serious new-onset respiratory failure or for worsening of an already identified respiratory picture. Different forms of ARDS are distinguished based on the degree of hypoxia. The reference parameter is the PaO2/FiO2:


Mild ARDS: 200 mmHg < PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg. In not-ventilated patients or in those managed through non-invasive ventilation (NIV) by using positive end-expiratorypressure (PEEP) or a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ≥ 5 cmH2O.
Moderate ARDS: 100 mmHg < PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 200 mmHg.
Severe ARDS: PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 100 mmHg.


----------



## iam.mike

Just throwing this out there -- would anyone like to do a live discussion on this topic (via Zoom)?

We have a Zoom account, and can facilitate a multi-person call/video, that we could record and embed here.

Maybe give our doctors a chance to share with us their pov? Have others ask questions, or discuss other components of this pandemic?

Or, if any one or two people want to share some thoughts with the community over the phone/video, I could call them directly, record the conversation, and embed it here.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

mikel said:


> Just throwing this out there -- would anyone like to do a live discussion on this topic (via Zoom)?
> 
> We have a Zoom account, and can facilitate a multi-person call/video, that we could record and embed here.
> 
> Maybe give our doctors a chance to share with us their pov? Have others ask questions, or discuss other components of this pandemic?
> 
> Or, if any one or two people want to share some thoughts with the community over the phone/video, I could call them directly, record the conversation, and embed it here.


This would mean that I would actually need to shower and dress?

Sounds like a good opportunity for a community forum.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## 16412

Sorry guys. I read two articles of which somehow I lost. I was going to post them to friends and here. The math person explained several mathematical reasons.

The other article i read later had to do with heart problems and the flue that kills people every year. Apparently a number of people where placed in the virus list of deaths when the virus didn't kill them. 

Therefore a serious false reading about how many people the virus has killed. In my opinion, an act of terrorism.

One other factor. Deaths are pushed instead of the fact that far far more people who are known to get it survived. Many didn't even know they had gotten it until later. This is pushing fear instead of common sense. 

With that being said, shouldn't children be getting this so when they are old they will be immune to it, like any other disease? Fear does not allow minds to think straight. 

This virus is not in the category that some people want you to believe it is in. When I was a child children were kept away from the old people. The adults who went to check up on their parents took extra precautions. Life didn't shut down. 

A plague like a hundred years ago is different today because we have far more scientific knowledge and skills, ETC. 

The over reaction to this virus is beyond foolish. It is strange to see people alone in a car wearing a mask and rubber gloves. Or walking down the street by themself wearing these things. 

How can you get it if nobody is around close enough to get it? People are doing this because of fear. Which came from where? The greedy news media trying to make as much money as possible. 

Therefore, it is a form of terrorism.


----------



## smmrfld

WA said:


> Sorry guys. I read two articles of which somehow I lost. I was going to post them to friends and here. The math person explained several mathematical reasons.
> The other article i read later had to do with heart problems and the flue that kills people every year. Apparently a number of people where placed in the virus list of deaths when the virus didn't kill them. Therefore a serious false reading about how many people the virus has killed. In my opinion, an act of terrorism.
> One other factor. Deaths are pushed instead of the fact that far far more people who are known to get it survived. Many didn't even know they had gotten it until later. This is pushing fear instead of common sense. With that being said, shouldn't children be getting this so when they are old they will be immune to it, like any other disease? Fear does not allow minds to think straight. This virus is not in the category that some people want you to believe it is in. When I was a child children were kept away from the old people. The adults who went to check up on their parents took extra precautions. Life didn't shut down. A plague like a hundred years ago is different today because we have far more scientific knowledge and skills, ETC. The over reaction to this virus is beyond foolish. It is strange to see people alone in a car wearing a mask and rubber gloves. Or walking down the street by themself wearing these things. How can you get it if nobody is around close enough to get it? People are doing this because of fear. Which came from where? The greedy news media trying to make as much money as possible. Therefore, it is a form of terrorism.


Again, please cite your sources. Also, if you don't mind, please highlight your epidemiology credentials for us. Kudos...you seem to have this all figured out and offer rock-solid conclusions unavailable elsewhere. SMH.


----------



## Dhaller

WA said:


> Therefore, it is a form of terrorism.


"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means" - Inigo Montoya

DH


----------



## iam.mike

WA said:


> It is strange to see people alone in a car wearing a mask and rubber gloves. Or walking down the street by themself wearing these things.


I am not clear as to why one would ride alone in their car with a mask and gloves. I have seen this too, and find it unusual as well.

As for walking down the street by yourself, with no one in plain sight (or within 20 feet of you), I don't see the practicality of wearing a mask. Though, if you do come in close proximity to someone else, walking past them while outdoors, wearing a mask is more safe than not.

That said, I suspect the likelihood of virus transmission in a momentary passing-by-each-other scenario is low (unless that someone jumps at you, touches your face, and sneezes at you too). Impossible, no. Unlikely, more probable.

I did hear via a YT video (Louder with Crowder), that there is some unusual data being reported on the CDC website related to a drastic decline in reported Flu deaths, implying that most Flu deaths are being reported as Coronavirus related.

Video





I ran into another video, questing something similar (skip to about 4 minutes).






Separately, but related, I did hear a couple of insinuations that China bought-up and stock-piled all sorts of PPE, while at the same time covering up the severity of the virus. Figuring they could capitalize on the opportunity by being in a position to make billions selling PPE.

I don't know if that's true or not, because I haven't been interested enough to investigate further, but it is an interesting data-point.

All the above said, I still believe it's better to error on the side of caution, while also being respectful of other people's fear of this.

As such, I do purposely keep my distance from others as much as possible, and keep a mask with me when I go out, and wear it when I find myself in a situation of being in close proximity to others.


----------



## Dhaller

I will agree that the media generally does a poor job of reporting on science and technology issues (which encompasses public health) for the same reason politicians can't legislate properly on it: the pathway to those professions is the liberal arts, not the sciences.

It's the rare journalist - or politician - who understands Bayes Theorem, or gamma distributions, or canonical ensembles.

So you wind up with "blind leading the blind" phenomena, like solo drivers garbed in hazmat gear (and I have even heard of people afraid to speak on the phone, for fear of catching something via telecom signal).

It gets even worse once you depart the networks and dig down into "independent journalism", where you find the 5G conspiracies and so on (no, don't go searching for this.)

Generally speaking, the smartest thing folks can do when faced with a public health challenge they don't understand, though, IS to err on the silly side of caution: that driver isn't benefiting from his mask, but neither is it hurting him. Ditto walkers.

DH

(Edit: an interesting take on this is my dad, who has decided to wear a mask *because it makes other people more comfortable*. Pandemic etiquette? I think it's evolving thus.)


----------



## iam.mike

On the positive side of this, I have walked 68,384 steps in the last week alone. 😷


----------



## Dhaller

mikel said:


> On the positive side of this, I have walked 68,384 steps in the last week alone. 😷


In the past week I have cycled 110 miles, resumed a yoga practice I abandoned about 10 years ago, solved some ergonomics problems I was having with my home office, and have gotten at least 7 hours of sleep a night.

I feel better than ever?

DH


----------



## 127.72 MHz

smmrfld said:


> Again, please cite your sources. Also, if you don't mind, please highlight your epidemiology credentials for us. Kudos...you seem to have this all figured out and offer rock-solid conclusions unavailable elsewhere. SMH.


Citing sources is a fitting and appropriate request.

But one need not have any background in epidemiology to read a study and to apply critical though to a given assertion., especially where peer reviewed science is concerned.

In media and the online world I notice that asking an individual to cite their educational credentials is often the first question asked when someone disagrees with a opinion. It's as if they intend to discredit someone if their advanced degree is not in the subject being discussed.


----------



## iam.mike

Dhaller said:


> an interesting take on this is my dad, who has decided to wear a mask *because it makes other people more comfortable*. Pandemic etiquette? I think it's evolving thus.


So true. If I'm being completely honest with myself, I am wearing my mask for this very reason -- making others more comfortable (plus my masks are pretty cool looking).

Also, if there is even the slightest chance that someone is an asymptomatic carrier, why not take a few simple steps to minimize any risks?

All this is temporary anyway -- in the big scheme of our lives -- this will only be a blip.

A memorable blip, yes -- but only a blip.


----------



## smmrfld

127.72 MHz said:


> Citing sources is a fitting and appropriate request.
> 
> But one need not have any background in epidemiology to read a study and to apply critical though to a given assertion., especially where peer reviewed science is concerned.
> 
> In media and the online world I notice that asking an individual to cite their educational credentials is often the first question asked when someone disagrees with a opinion. It's as if they intend to discredit someone if their advanced degree is not in the subject being discussed.


Have you not bothered to read OP's prior posts??? If you have, please indicate any "critical thought" shown in them. SMH again.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

When people start to bring up “the malicious unseen hand” in world events my eyes glaze over.

My spouse works for CDC and has been there since 1988. They don’t fake data. All the career CDC folks you see on tv, I have known for 30+ years, attending most of their weddings, promotion events, etc. They are the most scrupulous group of professional people I have ever met in government. In my life time of knowing them, I have personally seen them work diligently to protect the American public since the Reagan Administration.

But of course, I am a former State Department Official, and a suspected member of the “Deep State” myself, so I might just be spinning you, so take what I say with a skeptical ear/eye.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## iam.mike

@Mr. B. Scott Robinson - Our very own 007! Nice!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

smmrfld said:


> Have you not bothered to read OP's prior posts??? If you have, please indicate any "critical thought" shown in them. SMH again.


I cannot say that I have read *every one* of WA's, posts. (Let's not be afraid to say mention who we're speaking of, after all it is really just an online handle,...) But he has been around for awhile and I have read more than a few of his post's.

And, while I believe that I understand the point you are making,* my point* is confined strictly to the parameters of what I have stated. One need not process a deep formal educational background in order to give a thoughtful, informed opinion, that is all.

Moreover, one's opinion is not discounted because one lacks a professional degree in the subject being discussed.


----------



## Oldsarge

Critical thinking is a citizen's duty. It was a skill I tried desperately to impart to the young brains entrusted to my care. Demanding a reference to an alleged fact is part of that. Attempting to restrict quoted data to those with 'credentials' is not. Therein lies distrust of a broad education and that I find intolerable.


----------



## Flanderian

WA said:


> The other article i read later had to do with heart problems and the flue that kills people every year. Apparently a number of people where placed in the virus list of deaths when the virus didn't kill them.


Covid-19 that affects the respiratory system also places immense stress upon the circulatory system. If someone has heart disease, they may have a heart attack. That's why preexisting medical conditions can predispose a Covid-19 patient to die as result of the infection. What killed them?

Similarly, as the disease advances, it doesn't just cause pneumonia, it begins to also attack other organ systems, particularly the kidneys, making it much more likely for renal patients to die. And once the infection becomes generalized, a patient will typically die of Toxic Shock, where all organs are attacked and shut down.

So whether Covid-19 causes a patient to drown in their own lung secretions, suffer a coronary, or expire of renal failure or toxic shock syndrome, the precipitating factor is still the same, Covid-19.



WA said:


> Therefore a serious false reading about how many people the virus has killed. In my opinion, an act of terrorism.
> 
> One other factor. Deaths are pushed instead of the fact that far far more people who are known to get it survived. Many didn't even know they had gotten it until later. This is pushing fear instead of common sense.


Of the over half million cases of Covid-19 in the U.S.A. currently 52,679 have resolved. Of that number 31,120 have recovered. 21,649 have died. To this point, the known *mortality rate* in the U.S.A. of Covid-19 patients has been *41%*.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/


WA said:


> This virus is not in the category that some people want you to believe it is in.


True, it is far more contagious, and far more lethal.



WA said:


> A plague like a hundred years ago is different today because we have far more scientific knowledge and skills, ETC.


There wasn't a plague pandemic a hundred years ago. There was an H1N1 flu pandemic. It killed between 17,000,000 and 50,000,000 people. At present, there is no proven treatment or vacine for Covid-19.* However, current improved medical symptomatic treatment, and an eventual vaccine may limit worldwide deaths to *only *a million or less.

**Edit:* Effective 3/28/20 the FDA has approved the emergency use of Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on an emergency basis, though clinical efficacy is as yet uncertain.



WA said:


> The over reaction to this virus is beyond foolish. It is strange to see people alone in a car wearing a mask and rubber gloves. Or walking down the street by themself wearing these things.
> 
> How can you get it if nobody is around close enough to get it? People are doing this because of fear. Which came from where? The greedy news media trying to make as much money as possible.


The Sars-CoV-2 virus (Covid-19) can remain viable and infectious on some surfaces for weeks. So whether anyone is around, is irrelevant.


----------



## smmrfld

Oldsarge said:


> Therein lies distrust of a broad education and that I find intolerable.


Haven't seen any evidence of that in his posts either, TBH.


----------



## eagle2250

mikel said:


> So true. If I'm being completely honest with myself, I am wearing my mask for this very reason -- making others more comfortable (plus my masks are pretty cool looking).
> 
> Also, if there is even the slightest chance that someone is an asymptomatic carrier, why not take a few simple steps to minimize any risks?
> 
> All this is temporary anyway -- in the big scheme of our lives -- this will only be a blip.
> 
> A memorable blip, yes -- but only a blip.


In our neck of the woods, Osceola County, Florida, they put out an order that goes into effect at 0000hours tonight. When you are out in public places, you wear a mask...if not it and you are cited, it will cost you $500 to $1000. You don't have to wear a mask in your vehicle or when you are exercising, as long as social distancing is maintained, but otherwise do it or be prepared to pay the piper! :icon_scratch: Oh well, I can live with that and even if I couldn't, I couldn't afford not to do so.


----------



## Flanderian

OK, finally some *good* news! :icon_cheers:

Hydroxycholoroquine and Chloroquine *HAVE* been approved for emergency use to treat Covid-19 by the FDA , effective March 28, 2020, under an Emergency Use Authorization.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/therapeutic-options.html
https://www.fda.gov/media/136534/download


----------



## Oldsarge

With a remarkable number of caveats! Given the number of severe side effects the two medications have shown this is reasonable. After all, we are without any other choices at present. Hopefully this will change as research advances.


----------



## iam.mike

Flanderian said:


> Hydroxycholoroquine and Chloroquine *HAS* been approved for emergency use to treat Covid-19 by the FDA


Thanks for the update! I got the sense this would happen, but glad to hear the official news. Let's see how the media spins it 😬


----------



## AJP

I think it was a week ago, I read on abc7.com that Dr. Anthony Cordillo, the CEO of Medic Urgent Care in LA, which has 3 facilities, in treating severe cases, was administering hydroxychloroquine with zinc and that all patients treated were symptom free within 8 to 12 hrs. He discovered that a pathway into the cell was made by the hydroxychloroquine for the zinc which would enter and prevent any replication of the virus in the cell.


----------



## iam.mike

@AJP - you are correct. Here is the article I believe you are referring to.
https://abc7.com/coronavirus-drug-covid-19-malaria-hydroxychloroquine/6079864/
Here is the video:


----------



## Tiger

Oldsarge said:


> Critical thinking is a citizen's duty. It was a skill I tried desperately to impart to the young brains entrusted to my care. Demanding a reference to an alleged fact is part of that. Attempting to restrict quoted data to those with 'credentials' is not. Therein lies distrust of a broad education and that I find intolerable.


Of course, in the social sciences (perhaps elsewhere), one could quote any number of sources regarding "factual information" - credentialed or not - and find an equal number of dissenters to that quote - factual or not. At some point, those who really care about a topic must apply logic and common sense to a disputed issue, in the attempt to ascertain truth that is free from some sort/level of bias.

As a United States History teacher, I live with this dilemma nearly every day!


----------



## ran23

And this is what other countries are already using.


----------



## Corcovado

WA said:


> Sorry guys. I read two articles of which somehow I lost. I was going to post them to friends and here. The math person explained several mathematical reasons.
> 
> The other article i read later had to do with heart problems and the flue that kills people every year. Apparently a number of people where placed in the virus list of deaths when the virus didn't kill them.
> 
> Therefore a serious false reading about how many people the virus has killed. In my opinion, an act of terrorism.
> 
> One other factor. Deaths are pushed instead of the fact that far far more people who are known to get it survived. Many didn't even know they had gotten it until later. This is pushing fear instead of common sense.
> 
> With that being said, shouldn't children be getting this so when they are old they will be immune to it, like any other disease? Fear does not allow minds to think straight.
> 
> This virus is not in the category that some people want you to believe it is in. When I was a child children were kept away from the old people. The adults who went to check up on their parents took extra precautions. Life didn't shut down.
> 
> A plague like a hundred years ago is different today because we have far more scientific knowledge and skills, ETC.
> 
> The over reaction to this virus is beyond foolish. It is strange to see people alone in a car wearing a mask and rubber gloves. Or walking down the street by themself wearing these things.
> 
> How can you get it if nobody is around close enough to get it? People are doing this because of fear. Which came from where? The greedy news media trying to make as much money as possible.
> 
> Therefore, it is a form of terrorism.


You make sweeping declarations based on scanty evidence and a lack of objective thinking.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Corcovado said:


> You make sweeping declarations based on scanty evidence and a lack of objective thinking.


Perhaps not as much as you might think.

First, in cases of co-morbidity the US practice is to generally assign cause of death in COVID-19 patients to the virus, whereas the practice of most other nations (e.g., Germany) is to do so only if the other affliction was not likely to eventually lead to fatality.

This is a statistically significant distinction since a disproportionate number of COVID-19 fatalities also present with one or more co-morbidities. Either approach is perfectly defensible, but it makes cross-national comparisons of CFRs difficult.

Second, there is increasing evidence that the COVID-19 infection rate is much higher than what we have been assuming. We don't know yet, but it is possible that a very substantial percentage of those infected remain asymptomatic (i.e., not simply pre-symptomatic).

There is much we will learn over the next several months. Our health and government leaders no doubt made mistakes based on incomplete information. In almost all cases these mistakes will prove to have been in good faith and well within reason given the information available.

https://reason.com/2020/04/12/offic...-of-total-infections-a-new-analysis-suggests/
If it turns out that the infection rate really is much higher than we have been assuming -- and Dr. Fauci has recently hinted at that possibility -- then it is conceivable that this virus could turn out to have an infection fatality rate much more similar to that of the flu than we have been assuming.

The virus's chief epidemiological distinction might be that it is far far more infectious than the flu than we thought -- perhaps more akin to the measles virus. This is a very important thing to know when trying to sort out what mitigation strategies work best, and it might turn out we took some dramatically wrong approaches.

But our health and political leaders have been doing their best grappling with competing considerations while flying with very incomplete information. This will not stop the pathological bloviators in the media and in the public (including on this forum) from throwing rocks at whomever they didn't like before this tragic episode began -- whether Trump, the "deep state", or what/whomever.


----------



## Corcovado

Mike Petrik said:


> Perhaps not as much as you might think.
> 
> First, in cases of co-morbidity the US practice is to generally assign cause of death in COVID-19 patients to the virus, whereas the practice of most other nations (e.g., Germany) is to do so only if the other affliction was not likely to eventually lead to fatality.
> 
> This is a statistically significant distinction since a disproportionate number of COVID-19 fatalities also present with one or more co-morbidities. Either approach is perfectly defensible, but it makes cross-national comparisons of CFRs difficult.
> 
> Second, there is increasing evidence that the COVID-19 infection rate is much higher than what we have been assuming. We don't know yet, but it is possible that a very substantial percentage of those infected remain asymptomatic (i.e., not simply pre-symptomatic). There is much we will learn over the next several months. Our health and government leaders no doubt made mistakes based on incomplete information. In almost all cases these mistakes will prove to have been in good faith and well within reason given the information available.
> 
> https://reason.com/2020/04/12/offic...-of-total-infections-a-new-analysis-suggests/
> If it turns out that the infection rate really is much higher than we have been assuming -- and Dr. Fauci has recently hinted at that possibility -- then it is conceivable that this virus could turn out to have an infection fatality rate much more similar to that of the flu than we have been assuming. The virus's chief epidemiological distinction might be that it is far far more infectious than the flu than we thought -- perhaps more akin to the measles virus. This is a very important thing to know when trying to sort out what mitigation strategies work best, and it might turn out we took some dramatically wrong approaches. But our health and political leaders have been doing their best grappling with competing considerations while flying with very incomplete information. This will not stop the pathological bloviators in the media and in the public (including on this forum) from throwing rocks at whomever they didn't like before this tragic episode began -- whether Trump or the deep state, etc.


The post I was responding to, which was written by a person other than you, concluded with "Therefore, it is a form of terrorism. " That is a really outrageous statement that is not supported by any facts, including the arguments put forth in your reply on WA's behalf.

That there is some ambiguity as to cause of death for any particular illness is normal. Pointing out that there may be some over- or under-counting is not evidence of any sort of wrongdoing on anyone's part, and certainly not "terrorism" FFS.

A notable feature of COVID-19 from my POV is the number of healthcare workers who have been killed by the virus. It ain't business as usual. Some supporting material for this claim of mine:

Coronavirus: Remembering the NHS workers who have died

The Arab doctors who died of coronavirus on Italy's front lines

Over 100 Doctors and Nurses Have Died Combating Coronavirus Across the World

Those are just some examples of stories about healthcare workers dying of COVID-19. You may use google yourself to further explore the issue if you care to.

I graduated medical school 20 years ago and at no time in my career have I ever read about large numbers of reasonably healthy young adults and middle aged adults in healthcare dying of an infection that they caught at work.

Even the H1N1 2009 influenza barely made a blip on the radar in comparison. I do not have the luxury of being so blase' about this pandemic and it is highly irresponsible for people to suggest that current levels of precautions are actually deliberately overblown, much less as a result of malice and greed.

The United States has actually been late in getting any real reaction at the administrative or society level. The death _rate _per infection may not be so high but that hardly matters when the infection rate is so high.

The death rate for American infantry units in WWII was actually pretty low, too, but you wouldn't say that soldiers fighting on the front lines had overblown fears of death or injury.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Corcovado said:


> The post I was responding to, which was written by a person other than you, concluded with "Therefore, it is a form of terrorism. " That is a really outrageous statement that is not supported by any facts, including the arguments put forth in your reply on WA's behalf. That there is some ambiguity as to cause of death for any particular illness is normal. Pointing out that there may be some over- or under-counting is not evidence of any sort of wrongdoing on anyone's part, and certainly not "terrorism" FFS.
> 
> A notable feature of COVID-19 from my POV is the number of healthcare workers who have been killed by the virus. It ain't business as usual. Some supporting material for this claim of mine:
> 
> Coronavirus: Remembering the NHS workers who have died
> 
> The Arab doctors who died of coronavirus on Italy's front lines
> 
> Over 100 Doctors and Nurses Have Died Combating Coronavirus Across the World
> 
> Those are just some examples of stories about healthcare workers dying of COVID-19. You may use google yourself to further explore the issue if you care to. I graduated medical school 20 years ago and at no time in my career have I ever read about large numbers of reasonably healthy young adults and middle aged adults in healthcare dying of an infection that they caught at work. Even the H1N1 2009 influenza barely made a blip on the radar in comparison. I do not have the luxury of being so blase' about this pandemic and it is highly irresponsible for people to suggest that current levels of precautions are actually deliberately overblown, much less as a result of malice and greed. The United States has actually been late in getting any real reaction at the administrative or society level. The death _rate _per infection may not be so high but that hardly matters when the infection rate is so high. The death rate for American infantry units in WWII was actually pretty low, too, but you wouldn't say that soldiers fighting on the front lines had overblown fears of death or injury.


I did not say everything WA stated was correct or that I agreed with it, just that one could not fairly dismiss all his assertions as merely sweeping generalizations or muddled thinking.

Aside from his noxious reference to "terrorism" -- which is exactly the kind of epithet I criticized in my comment -- his assertions, even if perhaps clumsily expressed, are not unreasonable.

What is unreasonable is his implication (not really expressed but arguably implied by the use of the term "terrorism") that our healthcare and government leaders are somehow lying about the characterizations of this previously unknown virus. All men of good faith should categorically reject any such assertion.

Yes, even if it proves to be the case that the infection mortality rate is much lower and the infection rate is much higher, this would not necessarily reduce the danger of the virus. My chief point regarding such a possibility (and "possibility" is all it is at this point) is that these different characteristics would likely have suggested different mitigation strategies, perhaps dramatically different.

My penultimate point is that if this proves to be the case the usual suspects can be counted on to rush in with unfair Monday morning quarterbacking. After all, they are already back-seat driving.


----------



## Corcovado

I see no evidnce whatsoever of any unfair "monday morning quarterbacking" or backseat driving, but as a U.S. citizen these past few years I do feel like a passenger on a bus with an incompetent, drunk, and mentally ill bus driver who also happens to be a mean-spirited asshole. I would welcome any backseat driving when the front seat is thus staffed.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Corcovado said:


> I see no evidnce whatsoever of any unfair "monday morning quarterbacking" or backseat driving, but as a U.S. citizen these past few years I do feel like a passenger on a bus with an incompetent, drunk, and mentally ill bus driver who also happens to be a mean-spirited asshole. I would welcome any backseat driving when the front seat is thus staffed.


I rest my case.


----------



## Corcovado

So your case rests on what? That constituents are angry, and anger is somehow by default wrong?


----------



## Corcovado

Speaking of passengers on a large vehicle:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/13/politics/theodore-roosevelt-sailor-coronavirus/index.html
*Sailor aboard USS Theodore Roosevelt dies of coronavirus

Washington *(CNN) A sailor who tested positive for Covid-19 on the USS Theodore Roosevelt has died of coronavirus, the US Navy said Monday.

The Navy did not disclose the name of the sailor, who was admitted to the intensive care unit of a US Navy hospital on Thursday. CNN previously reported a sailor from the USS Theodore Roosevelt who tested positive for the virus March 30 was found unresponsive and placed in the intensive care unit.

In addition, a US defense official told CNN that four sailors from the ship have been transferred to hospital.
"Over the weekend, four additional Theodore Roosevelt Sailors were admitted to the hospital for monitoring. All are in stable condition, none are in ICU or on ventilators," the official said.

Nearly 600 sailors on the Roosevelt have tested positive for Covid-19, the US Navy said in a statement, adding that 92% of the Roosevelt's crew members have been tested for the virus.

The impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the Roosevelt was at the center of a controversy that led to the resignation last week of acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly, who had dismissed the aircraft carrier's captain Brett Crozier after the leak of a memo in which he implored Navy officials to urgently evacuate the ship to protect the health of its sailors. Crozier also flagged his concerns about challenges of trying to contain the virus aboard the ship and requested that sailors be allowed to quarantine on land.

"We are not at war. Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset: our Sailors," he wrote in the memo that three US defense officials confirmed to CNN.

Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten told reporters Thursday the US military needed to plan for similar outbreaks in the future as the Defense Department works to cope with the virus' impacts.

"I think it's not a good idea to think the Teddy Roosevelt is a one-of-a-kind issue. We have too many ships at sea, we have too many deployed capabilities. There's 5,000 sailors on a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. To think it will never happen again is not a good way to plan. What we have to do is figure out how to plan in these kind of Covid environments," Hyten said.

Nearly 3,000 US service members have tested positive for coronavirus, two service members have died.
This story is breaking and will be updated.

CNN's Chandelis Duster contributed to this report.


----------



## Dhaller

Corcovado said:


> You make sweeping declarations based on scanty evidence and a lack of objective thinking.


Spoken like a man from a pre-digital age!

(I'm one too.)

DH


----------



## 127.72 MHz

This discourse is important debate.

I believe that far more people have become infected with covid19. As of now my assertion cannot be objectively disproved by anyone on this planet.
*1.) The United States missed the boat by failing to roll out mass covid19 testing.
2.) We are about to miss the second launch of the boat by failing to roll out mass Serum Antibody testing.*

From a March25, 2020 article form *The Atlantic *(rated left center by mediabiasfactcheck)
*How The Pandemic Will End- *
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/how-will-coronavirus-end/608719/"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed and distributed a faulty test in February. Independent labs created alternatives, but were mired in bureaucracy from the FDA. In a crucial month when the American caseload shot into the tens of thousands, only hundreds of people were tested. "

Being a chronic news junkie I have seen first hand how various news outlets print only what fits their narrative. As far as I can tell, the governments*** both state and federal, are identical to the news outlets. (***Plural was intended!)

*Trust* is the one foundational underpinning of any relationship.

April 11, 2019- *Pew Research study* (Rated least biased by mediabiasfactcheck )
*Public Trust in Government: 1958-2019*
Public trust in the government remains near historic lows. Only 17% of Americans today say they can trust the government in Washington to do what is right "just about always" (3%) or "most of the time" (14%).
https://www.people-press.org/2019/04/11/public-trust-in-government-1958-2019/
Our press? It's as though Americans only "Tune in" to the media outlets that reflects their political leanings.

From a Columbia Journalism Review* article; (* Rated left center by mediabiasfactcheck)
*The Fall, Rise, and Fall of Media Trust.*
"It may be time for journalists to acknowledge that they write from a set of values, not simply from a disinterested effort at truth. This will not be easy."
https://www.cjr.org/special_report/the-fall-rise-and-fall-of-media-trust.php
In a Sept. 26, 2019 *Gallup* article*; (rated least biased by mediaboasfactcheck) *Americans Trust in Mass Media Edges Down to 41% * (Frankly my level of distrust is far lower!)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/267047/americans-trust-mass-media-edges-down.aspx
*When trust is lost in government and media how does one evaluate rational fear verses bizarre delusions?*


----------



## Tiger

Corcovado said:


> I see no evidnce whatsoever of any unfair "monday morning quarterbacking" or backseat driving, but as a U.S. citizen these past few years I do feel like a passenger on a bus with an incompetent, drunk, and mentally ill bus driver who also happens to be a mean-spirited asshole. I would welcome any backseat driving when the front seat is thus staffed.


Based on this disgraceful comment, it appears that your description of the President is also autobiographical.

Note: I voted for the Constitution Party candidate in 2016, so please spare me the pejoratives.


----------



## Dhaller

127.72 MHz said:


> This discourse is important debate.
> 
> (Stuff)


I had planned to put together a Gantt chart of all the various news reports, research reports, etc. this past weekend - I have the clinical trial schedules of a bunch of Pharma projects - but it didn't happen.

That said, one picture that started becoming clear to me is that epidemiological modeling is *way behind* in its use of mathematical tools: namely, it shouldn't treat pandemics statistically, but should model them with discrete tools such as network analysis.

(Pandemics are graphs; specifically, "small world" graphs. If a street with 20 people has 15 victims in a town of 100, it's meaningless to say "15% of the town is infected": the street is a "small world" in which you have 75% infection. Those are very different models, and it takes little imagination to see how they would inspire differing policy reactions. Throwing all the jargon is, I'd call a pandemic "a small-world graph fractal kinetics problem". Maybe next time!)

DH


----------



## Corcovado

Tiger said:


> Based on this disgraceful comment, it appears that your description of the President is also autobiographical.
> 
> Note: I voted for the Constitution Party candidate in 2016, so please spare me the pejoratives.


It is a challenge to describe something disgraceful without offending delicate ears, I suppose. I do not believe that it constitutes being mean-spirited to express disgust at something that properly arouses disgust. Also, scathing criticism is not by default unfair or inaccurate criticism. If there are any particular points you wish to refute, I am ready to consider alternative views.


----------



## Tiger

Corcovado said:


> It is a challenge to describe something disgraceful without offending delicate ears, I suppose. I do not believe that it constitutes being mean-spirited to express disgust at something that properly arouses disgust. Also, scathing criticism is not by default unfair or inaccurate criticism. If there are any particular points you wish to refute, I am ready to consider alternative views.


My ears are far from "delicate." Many things in life are _actually_ challenging; to criticize a presidential administration (something I've done for decades!) without using vile terms seems easily accomplished. Sorry that you are unable to do so. "Expressing disgust" can also be accomplished without resorting to such base prose.

"Scathing criticism" can be eminently fair, of course. I have criticized the foreign and domestic policies of both major U.S. political parties for many years, and often with phraseology that exceeds whatever level "scathing" is understood to be. Somehow, though, I was able to avoid the foul language and related vile comments - so, it can readily be done, despite the "challenges" that you struggle to overcome.

As for your points, I did not see any in the message that we are discussing. If you would direct me to or list your specific criticisms of U.S. politicians at any level, I would be happy to comment on those remarks.


----------



## Corcovado

Tiger said:


> My ears are far from "delicate." Many things in life are _actually_ challenging; to criticize a presidential administration (something I've done for decades!) without using vile terms seems easily accomplished. Sorry that you are unable to do so. "Expressing disgust" can also be accomplished without resorting to such base prose.


Just to be clear: is this all about my being so monstrous as to use the term "asshole"? The term has a specific meaning and it certainly applies to a man who is almost incessantly arrogant, bullying, vain, and demeaning to his subordinates. He is precisely the sort of person that is meant by that term. It's not "obscene" to use that term; it's concise, and it's fair since it relates to choices that he has made to behave that way.



> As for your points, I did not see any in the message that we are discussing. If you would direct me to or list your specific criticisms of U.S. politicians at any level, I would be happy to comment on those remarks.


You're already commenting on my remarks. As to comments to support my remarks, I would point to POTUS' negligent treatment of the virus at the early stages of the pandemic (incompetent and analogous to a drunk driver), his grandiose proclamations of victory in February (crazy), his boasts about his ratings in the middle of a COVID-19 press briefing (also crazy), and his ludicrous comment "I've felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic," and add to that overall shifting tone of his rhetoric which paints a picture of a person who is faking his way through his responsibilities.


----------



## Tiger

Corcovado said:


> Just to be clear: is this all about my being so monstrous as to use the term "asshole"? The term has a specific meaning and it certainly applies to a man who is almost incessantly arrogant, bullying, vain, and demeaning to his subordinates. He is precisely the sort of person that is meant by that term. It's not "obscene" to use that term; it's concise, and it's fair since it relates to choices that he has made to behave that way.
> 
> You're already commenting on my remarks. As to comments to support my remarks, I would point to POTUS' negligent treatment of the virus at the early stages of the pandemic (incompetent and analogous to a drunk driver), his grandiose proclamations of victory in February (crazy), his boasts about his ratings in the middle of a COVID-19 press briefing (also crazy), and his ludicrous comment "I've felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic," and add to that overall shifting tone of his rhetoric which paints a picture of a person who is faking his way through his responsibilities.


We have very different definitions of the appropriateness of some (many?) words. I'll let others judge for themselves what they believe to be proper.

No doubt much of your criticisms are warranted, although they mostly seem to be attacks on style rather than substance. I also should add that the chief executive of the United States is not a monarch, and all of the screeching for President Trump to "do something...anything...everything!" contradicts his specified constitutional powers. You do care about that, don't you? I'm sure you've criticized many governors for their early (and current) stances, too - correct? Especially since they have far more constitutional latitude to deal with such problems.

That you're still ticked off from early presidential pronouncements, however inane, seems odd. There were plenty of things said/written by, for instance, Mayor DeBlasio of New York, the NYT, WaPo, and various Democrats during the "early stages" and later that were ludicrous - have you written about them in this thread? Aren't they deserving of your righteous venom, too? I think the federal so-called "stimulus" package is a complete waste of money that will not help the American economy, and merely add enormous debt, taxation, and inflation from which Americans will suffer. That's far worse than the "boasting" that has you so enraged, I believe.

Perhaps nothing angers me more than the hypocrites that attack one person/political party over an issue or various ones, but somehow seem to lose that fervor when the party that they sympathize with does the same things. I hope you're not one of those people!

*Note*: As a constitutional and economic traditionalist, I've had to fend off attacks from people all across the political spectrum. The attacks have been especially vicious over the past twenty years; it's the price I pay for being intellectually consistent.


----------



## EclecticSr.

Knew this would become political. So, let's all point a finger at one person. 

Should I point out every asshole that got it wrong?

Dr. Fauci, who I believe never actually had a medical practice, served a brief stint as an intern in some hosp., wrong at every turn with his expert opinions/comments during his 15 minutes of fame.....Pointing a finger. 
Gov. Cuomo, of N.Y. who decided to build a bridge costing billions so he could name it after his father. 
Declined purchasing respirators year, 2015, .......fact. .....pointing a finger. His tenth year in office, did nothing to prepare for such pandemic, when advised to do so, ....buy respirators, again pointing a finger. Now being praised while in a combat with Lord Mayor, like two children who hate each other. Hey we're in this together dontcha know. 

Lord Mayor Wilhelm Werner of N.Y. who advocated everyone go out and have a good time, nothing to worry about. Have a parade. Second term in office, did nothing to prepare......Now , Pointing a finger.

Mz. Pelosi, who believes relief money should go to the Lincoln center (worth billions) and PBR. etc. after her asshole remarks about ya'all come visit Chinatown in S.F., nothing to worry about....... Pointing a finger. 

The sainted one who declined restocking the supply of face masks. Two terms ....fact, ......pointing a finger. 

Go back and revisit Fauci's comments in Jan. Feb....... Go on a cruise, nothing to worry about, low risk. now claiming, guess who, should have acted sooner based on my/our recommendations. When was that good Dr. ? After your asshole expert statements above spoken by you, a sainted expert fawned over by the media. Also, revisit the comments and statements made by the other Monday morning quarterbacks above, all who have become medical experts overnight, along with most media talking heads.....pointing fingers.

Nice when you have the willing media behind you that dare not point out your BS while YOU POINT A FINGER. Heck doc. your on recorded video along with the others, this ain't 1918. No typos here. 

Fauci, again, one two faced long time political swamp hack, asshole buddies with one, I'm gonnagetcha one day, so called journalist. Giving each other the high sign caught on camera. Hey nothing to see here folks. 


Wanna make any more comments about who are the assholes?


While the one labeled asshole took positive action, who pointed out early on about such global pandemics while his speech was being torn by sainted asshole on live TV. he, once again being accused of being every kind of racist, xenophobe, homophobic devil etc.

Yeah, Mom said I was born in the dark, midnight. That was in 1940, I've seen the good, the bad and the mediocre and the ever encroaching insane. 

Assholes aplenty, geez, I forgot to mention Mr. Schumer, never held a real job, an ambulance chaser at best, who also forgets he's on record lo these many years reversing his tune every other administration thinking no one was watching or listening. 

Mr. Ping, never denounced by the media.
The guy running Venezuela praised by the cognizant elite Hollywood crowd. Does the name Penn ring a bell?

The head of the WHO......now, wouldn't you want him deciding your medical prognoses and cure?

The good Dr. Ralph Northem , Gov. of Va. Make the baby comfortable while we decide whether or not to kill it. 

The sainted one who will give your Mom a pill to make her comfortable, rather than waste money to prolong her time on earth..... but money for PBR, Lincoln center, the latest anti American pro terrorist group, why sure. ......... redundant here........ pointing that finger. Buy gumbo forgot about another crooked pointing finger waver who swore to the public, I never once had any ..............fill in the blank. 

Lets not forget, who honeymooned in the USSR. or was that Cuba? Wants/wanted to be your Pres.
I guess a few more million to purchase another home somewhere for him will make him go away, AGAIN. Nice gig.

Then there's that guy running who doesn't even know what office he's running for let alone what State he happens to be in at the time. ...... not even his own basement, ......pointing a finger, yeah I want that guy running things. 

And the list goes on, of course none of the above should be labeled assholes, but wait, I already did. 

Right now I'll take the guy at the helm, ......who was so kindly addressed as an asshole, than any of the above named assholes. Like I said, Iv'e seen many. 

I now have a better understanding of the adjective asshole, being enlightened by one poster who has since clarified it's dual usage. 
Doesn't know an asshole from a hole in the ground. Lecturing?

Every one has their entitled opinion, I've stated mine, right or wrong. 
Oh, and if you think any vile retort to my post will upset me, think again,


----------



## Oldsarge

This 'comic book' version by a bunch of data reporters might help clarify why the entire question of CORVID-19 is so badly in need of clarity. The problem is with the unknowable unknowns.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Sigh.

Acknowledging that Eclectic at least has the childish "well Corcovado started it" defense, his screed just further corroborates my earlier assessment that irrepressible partisans are pathological bloviators. I have my political leanings too, but we really should all try to be fairer. Yes, there have been missteps. Dr. Fauci is not infallible, and nor is either President Trump or Governor Cuomo, but there really is zero evidence that any of them is doing anything other than his absolute good faith best during a challenging time.

Under our system of government states are co-sovereigns, and it is their responsibility to be prepared for epidemics. For the most part they were not. My conservative friends point out that while so-called blue states were funding non-gender bathrooms and other "woke" nonsense they were under-funding their health systems. But those same friends fail to point out that while conservative states were similarly under-funding their health systems while enacting tax cut after tax cut. Mistakes all around, but just mistakes.

Being a retired gentleman of leisure I have the luxury of reading many thoughtful articles including primary sources. As I said earlier I think it is likely our leaders made some important mistakes regarding mitigation along the way -- interestingly the economic shut down might prove to have been unnecessary -- but it is very unlikely that any of these mistakes even flirted with the level of negligence. Even our admirable CDC -- a true crown jewel -- fumbled early testing, but as unfortunate as that misstep proved to be it does not impeach the fact that it was and remains a first rate agency composed of truly superb people.

I wish Ask Andy members were more universally fair-minded and sober in their commentary. If you believe someone is making a mistake or made a mistake make your assertion in a measured way that assumes the other side is working in good faith unless you have serious evidence to the contrary. And have some humility -- in most cases we are even more encumbered by a lack of perfect information than are the decision makers we are criticizing. Is that too much to ask? Sadly, for all too many I already know the answer.


----------



## Corcovado

*EclecticSr.* LOL. I don't think any comment could possibly upset you any further.

In response to *Tiger*...

_I'm sure you've criticized many governors for their early (and current) stances, too - correct? Especially since they have far more constitutional latitude to deal with such problems._

I have not criticized "many" governors. I consider the President to be an employee of the United States and myself to be one of the millions of his employers. Likewise, I consider the governor of my own state someone who answers to me and the other constituents of that state. Thus I have no obligation to overlook the shortcomings of the President even if some state governor, who it goes without saying is a member of the opposing party, has his or her own shortcomings. Likewise with senators and congressmen and women from other states. You may call it hypocrisy if that suits you, but that is really just a roundabout way of a _tu quoque_ logical fallacy and it's just water off a duck's back to me.

_That's far worse than the "boasting" that has you so enraged, I believe._

I'm actually _disturbed _by it, not enraged. It's not a matter of being offended by his style. It's the glimpse into his psyche, his priorities. His childish egotistical needs. He is not a man who instills confidence. If, for example, I had a son or daughter in the military, I'd be very worried if a man with a similar personality was his or her superior officer. He brings to mind the crazy general in the movie "Dr Strangelove," who was obsessed with the fluoride in the water and ended up starting WW III.

_Perhaps nothing angers me more than the hypocrites that attack one person/political party over an issue or various ones, but somehow seem to lose that fervor when the party that they sympathize with does the same things. I hope you're not one of those people!_

First of all, there are things that _should _anger you more than your perception that people are not fair or equal in their dispensation of political criticism. Politics isn't fair. But as to that, I am affected more by the actions of some than the actions of others, thus I critique the President without reference to the governor of some other state. Everybody has standing to criticize the president. They don't owe you a purity test. Surely you aren't so... _odd, _I guess is the word, to imagine that some fault of the governor from X or the senator from Y means you shouldn't have to listen to criticism of the President.

_As a constitutional and economic traditionalist, I've had to fend off attacks from people all across the political spectrum. The attacks have been especially vicious over the past twenty years; it's the price I pay for being intellectually consistent._

Are you saying you're "fending off attacks" from me? I was just criticizing the President and WA's absurd remarks. You're the one who said my remarks on the president must be "autobiographical."


----------



## iam.mike

While I am quite enjoying the (largely) civil discourse here -- I would like to respectfully ask that the commentary here be focused moreso on the Coronavirus / Covid-19 pandemic, and less so on people's political prerogative.

This has been a great discussion thus-far, and I would hate for it to go "off the rails" as we like to say.

If you'd like to discuss political opinions, feel free to start a new thread.

Many thanks.


----------



## fishertw

Oldsarge said:


> It's a coronovirus. So is the common cold. Unless you are elderly and in seriously poor health, you really have nothing to worry about. It's all a "the sky is falling, we must go and tell the king" sort of panic-without-reason. Probably hundreds of thousands of people have already caught it and gotten over it without being aware that they had (gasp!) COVID-19! Wash your hands and quit hyperventilating.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Sigh.
> 
> Acknowledging that Eclectic at least has the childish "well Corcovado started it" defense, his screed just further corroborates my prediction of relentless bloviation by pathological partisans. I have my political leanings too, but we really should all try to be fairer. Yes, there have been missteps. Dr. Fauci is not infallible, and nor is either President Trump or Governor Cuomo, but there really is zero evidence that any of them is doing anything other than his absolute good faith best during a challenging time.
> 
> Under our system of government states are co-sovereigns, and it is their responsibility to be prepared for epidemics. For the most part they were not. My conservative friends point out that while so-called blue states were funding non-gender bathrooms and other "woke" nonsense they were under-funding its health system. But those same friends fail to point out that while conservative states were enacting tax cut after tax cut they were under-funding their systems. Mistakes all around, but just mistakes.
> 
> Being a retired gentleman of leisure I have the luxury of reading many thoughtful articles including primary sources. As I said earlier I think it is likely our leaders made some important mistakes regarding mitigation along the way, but it is very unlikely that any of these mistakes even flirted with the level of negligence. Even our admirable CDC -- a true crown jewel -- fumbled early testing, but as unfortunate as that misstep proved to be it does not impeach the fact that it was and remains a first rate agency composed of truly superb people.
> 
> I wish Ask Andy members were more universally fair-minded and sober in their commentary. If you believe someone is making a mistake or made a mistake make your assertion in a measured way that assumes the other side is working in good faith unless you have serious evidence to the contrary. And have some humility -- in most cases we are even more encumbered by a lack of perfect information than are the decision makers we are criticizing. Is that too much to ask? Sadly, for all too many I already know the answer.


👍 👍 👍 👍

Blame aplenty to go around, any bombastic, barons of buffoonery notwithstanding. 

The military prepares to fight yesterday's wars, and languishes in times of peace, In a republic many causes vie for attention, and funding. Predictions of a super-bug pandemic have circulated for decades and been generally ignored. Well it's here, and the thread title of "exposes our health system's weakness" couldn't be more precisely apt. By any measure multiple institutions and individuals of our nation have dealt poorly with it.

The sad toll of 9/11 of roughly 3,000 souls pales next to a predicted loss of 60,000. When this agony finally passes, I only hope a proportionate amount of energy is devoted to preventing another. Then it will be time to assess causes, and if necessary, assign blame, but most needfully, to seek remedies.


----------



## Tiger

Corcovado said:


> *EclecticSr.* LOL. I don't think any comment could possibly upset you any further.
> 
> In response to *Tiger*...
> 
> _I'm sure you've criticized many governors for their early (and current) stances, too - correct? Especially since they have far more constitutional latitude to deal with such problems._
> 
> I have not criticized "many" governors. I consider the President to be an employee of the United States and myself to be one of the millions of his employers. Likewise, I consider the governor of my own state someone who answers to me and the other constituents of that state. Thus I have no obligation to overlook the shortcomings of the President even if some state governor, who it goes without saying is a member of the opposing party, has his or her own shortcomings. Likewise with senators and congressmen and women from other states. You may call it hypocrisy if that suits you, but that is really just a roundabout way of a _tu quoque_ logical fallacy and it's just water off a duck's back to me.
> 
> _That's far worse than the "boasting" that has you so enraged, I believe._
> 
> I'm actually _disturbed _by it, not enraged. It's not a matter of being offended by his style. It's the glimpse into his psyche, his priorities. His childish egotistical needs. He is not a man who instills confidence. If, for example, I had a son or daughter in the military, I'd be very worried if a man with a similar personality was his or her superior officer. He brings to mind the crazy general in the movie "Dr Strangelove," who was obsessed with the fluoride in the water and ended up starting WW III.
> 
> _Perhaps nothing angers me more than the hypocrites that attack one person/political party over an issue or various ones, but somehow seem to lose that fervor when the party that they sympathize with does the same things. I hope you're not one of those people!_
> 
> First of all, there are things that _should _anger you more than your perception that people are not fair or equal in their dispensation of political criticism. Politics isn't fair. But as to that, I am affected more by the actions of some than the actions of others, thus I critique the President without reference to the governor of some other state. Everybody has standing to criticize the president. They don't owe you a purity test. Surely you aren't so... _odd, _I guess is the word, to imagine that some fault of the governor from X or the senator from Y means you shouldn't have to listen to criticism of the President.
> 
> _As a constitutional and economic traditionalist, I've had to fend off attacks from people all across the political spectrum. The attacks have been especially vicious over the past twenty years; it's the price I pay for being intellectually consistent._
> 
> Are you saying you're "fending off attacks" from me? I was just criticizing the President and WA's absurd remarks. You're the one who said my remarks on the president must be "autobiographical."


As I've already written, feel free to criticize the President as you wish. However, it seems strange that you wouldn't criticize governors, since the former is constitutionally restricted in ways that the latter are not. There certainly is nothing logically fallacious on my part, but there appears to be something hypocritical on yours. I simply do not see how you can attack one and not the others. Such a mindset does not necessarily invalidate your position, but it does attenuate it, and makes it easy to ignore.

You missed my point - whether you like or hate Trump's style, psyche, or anything else, there have been far worse things that have occurred during this crisis. I listed the multi-trillion dollar federal spending package(s) as one. Whether I liked or hated Trump (or anyone else, for that matter), I wouldn't dilate on annoying personal traits while ignoring massive political/economic/foreign policy blunders.

My "anger" over political hypocrisy exists because it often destroys the ability to converse, teach or learn - and sometimes even to create/maintain friendships/family relations. Not serious enough for you? They are for me. "Purity test"? Of course not, but as I've now mentioned many times, everyone is free to criticize whomever they wish. I just think it's strange that with so many who can be criticized, you chose only one. Nothing here is mutually exclusive. When I criticize the Trump Administration for their support of that horrendous spending package, I also criticize both houses of Congress and both political parties for legislating it. To attack one and not the other would be illogical and hypocritical. Isn't that fair and honest?

Sorry for the last part - I did not mean fending off attacks from you. I meant that as someone who has maintained their positions (finally arrived at) for years, I am frequently in the position of objecting to both major political parties' foreign interventionism, enormous spending, and constitutional violations, among others. When I criticized the Clinton Administration, Democrats attacked me. When I objected to many policies of the Bush Administration, Republicans pulled out the sharp knives. When it was time to point out the errors of the Obama Administration, Democrats once again teed off on me. Now, when I criticize the Trump Administration, well, you get the picture.

I'll write it again - such blowback is the price one pays to be logically and politically consistent. You need not ascribe to my philosophy, but it does hurt your case if you are inconsistent with your criticisms, especially if based on political biases.


----------



## Oldsarge

Given how little actual threat jihadis are to the National Wellbeing (which is different from the National Ego) funding the Public Health Service and the CDC at, oh . . . 10% of the DOD would go a long way towards making this the last pandemic--at least for the next century.


----------



## Corcovado




----------



## medhat

Oldsarge said:


> Given how little actual threat jihadis are to the National Wellbeing (which is different from the National Ego) funding the Public Health Service and the CDC at, oh . . . 10% of the DOD would go a long way towards making this the last pandemic--at least for the next century.


Agreed, adequate funding for preventive public health services would seem money well spent ("an ounce of prevention, etc..."), but like any preventative or prophylactic government expenditures (except for perhaps the defense industry), elected officials are much more apt to fund the new, short-term, flashy "trinket" spending project. Saying you prevented an adverse event from happening is often tough to demonstrate tangibly.


----------



## Oldsarge

medhat said:


> Agreed, adequate funding for preventive public health services would seem money well spent ("an ounce of prevention, etc..."), but like any preventative or prophylactic government expenditures (except for perhaps the defense industry), elected officials are much more apt to fund the new, short-term, flashy "trinket" spending project. Saying you prevented an adverse event from happening is often tough to demonstrate tangibly.


Quite so. See how many people either downplay or dismiss the Y2K event. The catastrophe didn't happen so why did everyone have a cow? One of my good friends was a computer architect, one of the few people left in America who was still fluent in COBOL. He flew all over the country rebuilding software that kept banks and major industries going. Even at $175/hr., he was a cheap fix by comparison. Humans are dim.


----------



## Peak and Pine

I have thread sweat from reading today's entries. The only relief is more cowbell. Short of that, I would like to remind myself/you that _sheltering in place_ can be a mighty pleasant experience, heightened if you have a piece of gooey cake, tight pants, a good book and a wall upon which to contort your legs.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Dhaller said:


> I had planned to put together a Gantt chart of all the various news reports, research reports, etc. this past weekend - I have the clinical trial schedules of a bunch of Pharma projects - but it didn't happen.
> 
> That said, one picture that started becoming clear to me is that epidemiological modeling is *way behind* in its use of mathematical tools: namely, it shouldn't treat pandemics statistically, but should model them with discrete tools such as network analysis.
> 
> (Pandemics are graphs; specifically, "small world" graphs. If a street with 20 people has 15 victims in a town of 100, it's meaningless to say "15% of the town is infected": the street is a "small world" in which you have 75% infection. Those are very different models, and it takes little imagination to see how they would inspire differing policy reactions. Throwing all the jargon is, I'd call a pandemic "a small-world graph fractal kinetics problem". Maybe next time!)
> 
> DH


In my discussions with my wife, I can report that it is much more nuanced than just a numbers game.

But I am a liberal arts guy, not a statistician or epidemiologist, so it is all a bit mumbojumbo to my ears. 

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Everyone, and I mean everyone, is pressurized by the current situation. This circumstance is unique in our shared human experience, so I suggest focusing on being self aware and remembering that on any given day during this period most of us, even the Commander in Chief, will not reflect our best selves. Some degree of patience tempered with a heavy dose of forgiveness is working for me. Your mileage may vary.

I have spent several years of my career focused on disaster preparation and recovery efforts. One thing I have learned is that people oddly expect a government, local, state, federal, whatever, which in best of times typically performs only to the most minimum of standards, to suddenly become a well oiled machine in a crisis. The government one has before a crisis is strangely the same one that shows up during a crisis, and to expect otherwise is a Clark Kent morphing to Superman in the face of danger fantasy.

Everyone looks to pass the blame and point a finger. We elected these knuckleheads. And as Flanderian suggests, government 99% of the time only look backwards in its preparations, not forwards. Why else do we still have tanks based in Europe? Probably more for crowd control than fighting off potential invading Mongol hordes in Russian uniforms.

Go to the polls in November and express your support for how your officials handled this crisis or vote them out. It is either that or go to the barricades, and I question whether the current breed of my countrymen have that bone remaining in their bodies.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Everyone, and I mean everyone, is pressurized by the current situation. This circumstance is unique in our shared human experience, so I suggest focusing on being self aware and remembering that on any given day during this period most of us, even the Commander in Chief, will not reflect our best selves. Some degree of patience tempered with a heavy dose of forgiveness is working for me. Your mileage may vary.
> 
> I have spent several years of my career focused on disaster preparation and recovery efforts. One thing I have learned is that people oddly expect a government, local, state, federal, whatever, which in best of times typically performs only to the most minimum of standards, to suddenly become a well oiled machine in a crisis. The government one has before a crisis is strangely the same one that shows up during a crisis, and to expect otherwise is a Clark Kent morphing to Superman in the face of danger fantasy.
> 
> Everyone looks to pass the blame and point a finger. We elected these knuckleheads. And as Flanderian suggests, government 99% of the time only look backwards in its preparations, not forwards. Why else do we still have tanks based in Europe? Probably more for crowd control than fighting off potential invading Mongol hordes in Russian uniforms.
> 
> Go to the polls in November and express your support for how your officials handled this crisis or vote them out. It is either that or go to the barricades, and I question whether the current breed of my countrymen have that bone remaining in their bodies.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Agreed on all counts, and let there be no mistake -- the folks now most emphatically busy pointing fingers and launching criticisms would have done no better and were no more prescient. Some of our health and political leaders certainly are performing better than others, but these assessments are really not possible to make quite yet. There is simply too much information to process, much of it at least superficially contradictory, and too much information not yet available -- the "known unknowns" to which Oldsarge alluded. Eventually, we will be able to step back and make a more sober fair-minded analysis, except of course for those dogmatic partisans of all stripes who will remain too encumbered by their sad pathologies.


----------



## Dhaller

Well, much is revealed in a crisis, good and bad. Or even simply informative.

My great-grandmother who died during the 1918 pandemic (a fact I've long known) was named Nancy Isabelle Patton Haller (which I did not know) and died on November 13th, 1918 at the age of 35 (facts I never knew). I got this from discussions with my mother's cousin, her research motivated by "the times" (a genealogist, she found the death certificate.)

Much is lost, and much abides, as they say.

DH


----------



## Tiger

Dhaller said:


> Well, much is revealed in a crisis, good and bad. Or even simply informative.
> 
> My great-grandmother who died during the 1918 pandemic (a fact I've long known) was named Nancy Isabelle Patton Haller (which I did not know) and died on November 13th, 1918 at the age of 35 (facts I never knew). I got this from discussions with my mother's cousin, her research motivated by "the times" (a genealogist, she found the death certificate.)
> 
> Much is lost, and much abides, as they say.
> 
> DH


Thank you for sharing! Many might find this article on the 1918 pandemic (especially its context involving the U.S. military operations in the First World War) very thought-provoking:

https://www.theamericanconservative...led-1918-flu-pandemic-to-win-their-world-war/


----------



## Oldsarge

Following up to my call for a better PHS, FiveThirtyEight ran this article.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...ic-health-workers-to-safely-return-to-normal/
What I deduce from the article is that this country simply has to get off its every-Marlboro Man-for-himself delusion and admit that we are a social species and that we need to work within our society. Northern Europe has been thriving in that mode for decades. It's not Democratic Socialism, it's Social Democracy. Call it Responsible Capitalism.


----------



## Oldsarge

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...t-wuhan-lab-years-before-coronavirus-outbreak
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-to-cut-funding-for-world-health-organization


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> Following up to my call for a better PHS, FiveThirtyEight ran this article.
> 
> https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...ic-health-workers-to-safely-return-to-normal/
> What I deduce from the article is that this country simply has to get off its every-Marlboro Man-for-himself delusion and admit that we are a social species and that we need to work within our society. Northern Europe has been thriving in that mode for decades. It's not Democratic Socialism, it's Social Democracy. Call it Responsible Capitalism.


This is a very insightful post, I think, if for no other reason than its expression of a distinction between Democratic Socialism and Social Democracy, the former representing a fringe party in Western Europe and the latter being pretty much the Western European norm. It is astonishing how few people understand this very important distinction.


----------



## Oldsarge

Mike Petrik said:


> This is a very insightful post, I think, if for no other reason than its expression of a distinction between Democratic Socialism and Social Democracy, the former representing a fringe party in Western Europe and the latter being pretty much the Western European norm. It is astonishing how few people understand this very important distinction.


Including a recent presidential candidate and his followers.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> Including a recent presidential candidate and his followers.


And basically the entire media.


----------



## smmrfld

Mike Petrik said:


> And basically the entire media.


I assume you didn't appreciate being lumped in with your legal brethren regarding lawyer jokes and other disdain for the profession. What makes your statement above any less vile?


----------



## Oldsarge

You don't realize that the best lawyer jokes are told by lawyers? Feeble.


----------



## Mike Petrik

smmrfld said:


> I assume you didn't appreciate being lumped in with your legal brethren regarding lawyer jokes and other disdain for the profession. What makes your statement above any less vile?


I'm confused. I think Oldsarge's point was simply that both Bernie Sanders and his opponents have, to put it charitably, used the terms Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists interchangeably, even though they mean very different things. I simply observed that the media covering the campaign were no better.

Are you suggesting that any significant element of the media covering Sanders' campaign has recognized, let alone articulated, the importance distinction between Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists? Good luck with your Google hunting. I'm sure with 2 million hits you'll be able to turn up something.

Yes. I paint with a broad brush and stand by that.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> You don't realize that the best lawyer jokes are told by lawyers? Feeble.


Yep, I have several volumes.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

I went in to work again to day and met my favorite epidemiologist for another discussion.

He feels that the real infection rate in the USA, and the rest of the world for that matter, is much higer than officials have thus far guessed.
And, because of the U.S.A.'s "Original sin" of rolling out a faulty covid19 test in Feb, he stressed that no one can say authoritatively what our actual infection rate is.
I found this article from a media outlet called "Reason." (rated by mediabiasfactcheck as right center)
One surprising finding from the article:
*"The new estimate for the number of infections in the United States at the end of March is 2.5 million, which is much lower than the original estimate of 11.9 million, although still 15 times the number of confirmed cases at the time and four times the current tally. Based on the "expected infection fatality rate" of 0.96 percent, that implies roughly the same number of deaths that have been reported so far."*
https://reason.com/2020/04/12/offic...-of-total-infections-a-new-analysis-suggests/*Post Script: The reader comments on the article are quite animated.*


----------



## Mike Petrik

127.72 MHz said:


> Went in t work again to day and met my favorite epidemiologist for another discussion.
> 
> He feels that the real infection rate in the USA, and the rest of the world for that matter, is much higer than officials have thus far guessed.
> And, because of the U.S.A.'s "Original sin" of rolling out a faulty covid19 test in Feb, he stressed that no one can say authoritatively what our actual infection rate is.
> I found this article from a media outlet called "Reason." (rated by mediabiasfactcheck as right center)
> "The new estimate for the number of infections in the United States at the end of March is 2.5 million, which is much lower than the original estimate of 11.9 million, although still 15 times the number of confirmed cases at the time and four times the current tally. Based on the "expected infection fatality rate" of 0.96 percent, that implies roughly the same number of deaths that have been reported so far."
> https://reason.com/2020/04/12/offic...-of-total-infections-a-new-analysis-suggests/One surprising finding from the article:


Yes, this has been the speculation for quite some time. It is possible that the virus's higher projected mortality rate (than the flu) is not a function of a higher per infection fatality rate (which is what we have been assuming) but is instead a function of a much higher infection rate. This is still very much speculation at this point, but there is evidence of this.

As I've already mentioned this could mean (again we don't yet know) that the optimal approach should have been to simply quarantine vulnerable populations as we build herd immunity rather than to shut down the entire economy. But we do not know this yet, and woulda coulda shoulda is a game for children. Our public officials must make decisions based on the recommendations of medical experts, and those experts must make recommendations based on imperfect real time information.

Blame the Chinese.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

To be right honest I think a degree of woulda coulda shoulda is appropriate if it's context will result in a lesson learned.

The decisions made thus far have tanked the economy, putting 20 million + people out of work (conveniently flipping a seller’s market for labor to a buyer’s market now), devaluing our money through the addition several trillions of dollars out of thin air, and locking us all in our homes.

Benign analysis has it's place but do you have a specific opinion in terms of how leaders and the media presented this pandemic as it began to wind up?

I understand your point but please, if you would, state your opinion.

As an example what if it turns out that politicians and the media panicked and ran with obviously bad data and models?

If this issue had something to do with longitutal and transverse magnatization and the resulting relaxation curves I could speak authoritatively.


----------



## Oldsarge

It's all about the unknown unknowns. We do the best we can with what we have and 'what if' is a sucker's game. "What if" one way blames science. "What if" the other blames politics. Unknown unknowns blames neither and ends up being what we have.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ Dang Sarg, you almost sound like _Donald Rumsfeld_ !


----------



## Oldsarge

I hope my time in Military Intelligence was more objective and less politically oriented than his.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> And yet, our various mitigation strategies nonetheless seem to be working. As of this morning projected US deaths stands at 60,000. This is a reduction from the millions originally predicted, from the aspirational 100,000 to 200,000 mentioned by Dr. Blix weekend before last, and from the 90,000 projected just this weekend.
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
> 
> At this point it is simply not possible to know the extent to which these encouraging reductions expose inaccurate CFR or r0 assumptions baked into the various models or whether instead the nationwide mitigation strategies are proving surprisingly efficacious. Possibly some of both. In any case, it would be reckless to assume that the mitigation strategies, however imperfectly carried out, are ineffectual, and it is imperative that Americans continue to comply.


A point of information concerning this excellent tool originally brought to my attention in Mike's post #350. The projections provided by The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation *are apparently dynamic and change based upon changing data. *I didn't specifically record their projection for U.S. fatalities when I first visited it, but seem recall is was a bit over 60,000. Their current forecast has increased that estimate, and is currently 68,841. It would appear that over the short period I've been visiting this projection, actual data has been worse than what was originally projected.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Yes, this has been the speculation for quite some time. It is possible that the virus's higher projected mortality rate (than the flu) is not a function of a higher per infection fatality rate (which is what we have been assuming) but is instead a function of a much higher infection rate. This is still very much speculation at this point, but there is evidence of this.
> 
> As I've already mentioned this could mean (again we don't yet know) that the optimal approach should have been to simply quarantine vulnerable populations as we build herd immunity rather than to shut down the entire economy. But we do not know this yet, and woulda coulda shoulda is a game for children. Our public officials must make decisions based on the recommendations of medical experts, and those experts must make recommendations based on imperfect real time information.
> 
> Blame the Chinese.


Sorry, but I have to take issue with any plan that uses the combo of quarantine of at risk groups while building herd immunity concept as having been some sort of viable alternative path.

Quarantine of those in our population who are aged or who have pre existing conditions, also known as "vulnerable populations" would number in the tens of millions. 15% of the population is over 65, this number alone accounts for almost 60 million. Then pile on everyone under that age with diabetes, heart issues, obesity, asthma, etc and you might get to 100 million folks that would need to be quarantined, about a quarter of the country.

As for the building herd immunity in the remaining population while caging off 25% of America, I am certainly no bleeding heart, but this smacks of survival of the fittest to me. The less affluent, those with minimal health care or insurance, those without child care, would be pushed to the front lines to build our herd immunity while those like me work from home and enjoy the show. People on the front line would be exposing their loved ones at home. And how many homes don't have someone over 65 or a person without a pre existing condition? Maybe half? I don't know. Something like 20% of kids under 30 still live with their parents.

Building herd immunity in a short fix scenario means that people will die unnecessarily as hospitals become overwhelmed and doctors decide who lives and dies based on supply/ demand and "social worthiness", which is usually a combo of age plus wealth plus social merit. The winners in life win again! Folks like me can lean on our vast medical and government connections to get access to equipment to keep us alive if we do get sick. Others, well, they can be casualties of the pursuit of rapid herd immunity.

And where is the market for the service businesses with workers on the front line while an epidemic rages through the service industry? I won't be dining out for some time, probably at least till July. The public that could would essentially self isolate. And what of the health care costs and liability for the businesses who essentially forced non vulnerable workers to return to work who then become ill?

The current situation is certainly not perfect by any means but the quarantine while building herd immunity concept is a bit fantastic and totally unworkable from my POV.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian and BSR,

Yes, the healthdata.gov model is useful, but it has nonetheless proven to be almost as poor a predictor as the Imperial model:

https://www.sydney.edu.au/content/d...l_accuracy_covid19_predictions_ihme_model.pdf
Yet it was in reliance on these models that health professionals recommended putting our entire economy in a coma via stay at home orders.

As has been discussed there is increasing evidence that the virus's infection rate is much higher than we thought, and as a consequence its mortality rate for persons under 70 without a co-morbidity could be comparable to that of the flu. If so, our mitigation efforts (not necessarily quarantine as such) probably should have centered on the vulnerable population rather than the nation as a whole.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1.full.pdfhttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1.full.pdfhttps://www.statista.com/statistics/1109867/coronavirus-death-rates-by-age-new-york-city/https://www.the-hospitalist.org/hos.../comorbidities-rule-new-yorks-covid-19-deaths
There is much we don't know yet, and perhaps the most important is infection rate. Our policy experts and political leaders make recommendations and decisions based on best evidence at the time, but in this case it could turn out that that evidence led them to make some very unfortunate recommendations and decisions. I am not predicting this, however, as I have absolutely no idea.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Flanderian and BSR,
> 
> Yes, the healthdata.gov model is useful, but it has nonetheless proven to be almost as poor a predictor as the Imperial model:
> 
> https://www.sydney.edu.au/content/d...l_accuracy_covid19_predictions_ihme_model.pdf
> Yet it was these models that led health professionals to recommend putting our entire economy in a coma via stay at home orders.
> 
> As has been discussed there is increasing evidence that the virus's infection rate is much higher than we thought, and as a consequence its mortality rate for persons under 70 without a co-morbidity could be comparable to that of the flu. If so, our mitigation efforts (not necessarily quarantine as such) probably should have centered on the vulnerable population rather than the nation as a whole.
> 
> https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1.full.pdfhttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1.full.pdfhttps://www.statista.com/statistics/1109867/coronavirus-death-rates-by-age-new-york-city/https://www.the-hospitalist.org/hos.../comorbidities-rule-new-yorks-covid-19-deaths


I am still unclear as to how we could better protect the "vulnerable" population which numbers at least 100 million. Obesity and high blood pressure could easily double this number
Ultimately, the wedge issue was how many people in serious condition can our hospitals manage at one time. How many folks show up at the door is rather easy to quantify.

Not every city is NYC or NOLA, but slowing the roll of the outbreak and spreading it thinner over time has benefits that are clear but very difficult to quantify.

How many people did not get sick and end up dead in the emergency room will never be known.

And a few less front line medical people will have died, each one representing a major investment in time, education, experience, and potential future output for society.

And at least a few grandparents will be able to hold their grandchild's hand again who wouldn't otherwise.

My grandparents survived WW I, the Spanish Flu, the bowl weevil, the Great Depression and WWII by a combo of grit, guts, determination, and faith.

Granted, 9-11, dot com busts, mortgage collapses, and corona virus resulting in short term business closures, however significant seeming to us, appear to be small ball in comparison that the media hypes to end of days status to sell advertising and our politicians capitalize on to their benefit.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

BSR, you ask good questions and I don't have equally good answers. I do not know whether we could meaningfully protect the vulnerable population without shutting down the economy. If not, then I agree -- we must shut down the economy. But it must be remembered that the working and school-age population is disproportionately not vulnerable, and if we are going to require them to endure terrible hardships (including in the case of small businesses, to lose everything they had worked for) we certainly should be willing to consider other sound alternatives.

Interestingly enough, the original assumption that most of the population will soon be infected might have been even more correct than we knew, and bending the curve really was a necessary immediate strategy in order to avoid hospital overload, or perhaps not depending on the efficacy of those strategies on the pace of infection rate increase. But if as of today hospitals are better equipped and over half of the population has already been infected then those same strategies might no longer be sensible. Of course, that depends on critical "ifs" the answer to the latter of which we simply cannot know with confidence without much more testing.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

The more testing we can employ the better. But the FDA rolling out faulty testing in February will always be our original sin. All we can do is speculate after the fact given this failure.

Serum antibody testing is the only way to know with certainty who is safe to return to work. And it is just beginning it's roll out now.

Even the highest throughput Roche and Abbott antibody assay machines are unable to handle the numbers of tests needed for any meaningful efficiency given our population.

Another self fulfilling prophecy, it will work because that is all we will get,...


----------



## Mike Petrik

127.72 MHz said:


> The more testing we can employ the better. But the FDA rolling out faulty testing in February will always be our original sin. All we can do is speculate after the fact given this failure.


Yes, the CDC and FDA's initial launch in our fight against this virus was apparently not their finest hour.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/us/testing-coronavirus-pandemic.html
Yet I am emphatically unwilling to assign blame -- at least yet -- since most mistakes are just that -- mistakes -- not negligence. But eventually we will have to look hard at what went wrong (and right) so that next time -- and there will always be a next time -- we will be better prepared and will execute better.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> BSR, you ask good questions and I don't have equally good answers. I do not know whether we could meaningfully protect the vulnerable population without shutting down the economy. If not, then I agree -- we must shut down the economy. But it must be remembered that the working and school-age population is disproportionately not vulnerable, and if we are going to require them to endure terrible hardships (including in the case of small businesses, to lose everything they had worked for) we certainly should be willing to consider other sound alternatives.
> 
> Interestingly enough, the original assumption that most of the population will soon be infected might have been even more correct than we knew, and bending the curve really was a necessary immediate strategy in order to avoid hospital overload, or perhaps not depending on the efficacy of those strategies on the pace of infection rate increase. But if as of today hospitals are better equipped and over half of the population has already been infected then those same strategies might no longer be sensible. Of course, that depends on critical "ifs" the answer to the latter of which we simply cannot know with confidence without much more testing.


Sorry for picking on you my friend. But your summary is thoughtful and fair.
I thank you for your time on this!

I have had several in my learned circle, mostly entrepreneurs seeing their businesses slowly strangled, knowing my interests and "contacts", have been pinging me endlessly with the question as to why did we have to shut the economy and could we not simply allow the virus a quick burn through of our population so we can, as many of them say "get it over with".

I believe the denial (nothing to see here!) followed by the wobbles in the early stages (a beautiful plan for Easter services) by the administration fed into a feeling of general uncertainty among my friends, who as loyal patriots, were willing to carry an undue part of the National burden, as long as they believed that they were well led, given a basic plan as to what were the tactics feeding into a national strategy, that would result in the outcome we all desire.

To this day, I don't think they have been well served in any of these regards, and anybody who has led a team numbering larger than 3 knows what to expect when this is the situation. It is why the military is actually run daily by sergeants as opposed to generals.

My main push back to my friends is asking for clarification on the definition of "vulnerable". The medical definition is any person with any condition that makes them more likely to become ill. Whether someone has been unlucky in life's lottery, such as sufferers of cystic fibrosis, or made poor lifestyle choices to smoke and over eat, all fit the definition of "vulnerable".

By the time one counts up all the vulnerable people, the argument could be made that we are talking about 200million people, with any woman of potential child bearing age possibly included, as they were with the Zika outbreak.

There is no short term quarantine strategy, beyond total lock down, that could accommodate for this number. If there is, I have not heard or read of one.

The frustrating part for me is that strategies for dealing with this type of situation are on the shelf. This was not a wheel that had to be invented.

Also, there is the flat out lie being circulated that we had no idea this type of outbreak could happen. My SWMBO has spent her entire 30 year career and the past 12 years overseas, working on just this type of situation. Our highest leaders knew this was a risk, they were repeatedly made aware of it since the HIV crisis.

George W. Bush recognized the global security risks created by HIV, TB, and Malaria and instituted the single largest international public health program in history, the PEPFAR program, which spent over 80 billion improving the health of hundreds of millions around the globe. He understood that a sick population was a drag on economic growth and that poor economic growth leads to global instability. Stronger overseas economies are safer, more stable and create better markets for our goods and services.

International disease surveillance has been growing for decades, specifically tied to efforts to protect the homeland against diseases like Ebola, SARS, MERS, and avian influenza.

Just like international terrorism didn't start on 9-11, with the prior attempt to bomb the WTC in NYC and the bombing of embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the warnings while not ignored were not given priority until the sky collapsed.

A poem....

Twas a dangerous cliff, as they freely confessed,
Though to walk near its crest was so pleasant;
But over its terrible edge there had slipped
A duke and full many a peasant.
So the people said something would have to be done,
But their projects did not at all tally;
Some said, "Put a fence 'round the edge of the cliff,"
Some, "An ambulance down in the valley."

But the cry for the ambulance carried the day,
For it spread through the neighboring city;
A fence may be useful or not, it is true,
But each heart became full of pity
For those who slipped over the dangerous cliff;
And the dwellers in highway and alley
Gave pounds and gave pence, not to put up a fence,
But an ambulance down in the valley.

"For the cliff is all right, if you're careful," they said,
"And, if folks even slip and are dropping,
It isn't the slipping that hurts them so much
As the shock down below when they're stopping."
So day after day, as these mishaps occurred,
Quick forth would those rescuers sally
To pick up the victims who fell off the cliff,
With their ambulance down in the valley.

Then an old sage remarked: "It's a marvel to me
That people give far more attention
To repairing results than to stopping the cause,
When they'd much better aim at prevention.
Let us stop at its source all this mischief," cried he,
"Come, neighbors and friends, let us rally;
If the cliff we will fence, we might almost dispense
With the ambulance down in the valley."

"Oh he's a fanatic," the others rejoined,
"Dispense with the ambulance? Never!
He'd dispense with all charities, too, if he could;
No! No! We'll support them forever.
Aren't we picking up folks just as fast as they fall?
And shall this man dictate to us? Shall he?
Why should people of sense stop to put up a fence,
While the ambulance works in the valley?"

But the sensible few, who are practical too,
Will not bear with such nonsense much longer;
They believe that prevention is better than cure,
And their party will soon be the stronger.
Encourage them then, with your purse, voice, and pen,
And while other philanthropists dally,
They will scorn all pretense, and put up a stout fence
On the cliff that hangs over the valley.

Better guide well the young than reclaim them when old,
For the voice of true wisdom is calling.
"To rescue the fallen is good, but 'tis best
To prevent other people from falling."
Better close up the source of temptation and crime
Than deliver from dungeon or galley;
Better put a strong fence 'round the top of the cliff
Than an ambulance down in the valley.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Sorry for picking on you my friend. But your summary is thoughtful and fair.
> I thank you for your time on this!
> 
> I have had several in my learned circle, mostly entrepreneurs seeing their businesses slowly strangled, knowing my interests and "contacts", have been pinging me endlessly with the question as to why did we have to shut the economy and could we not simply allow the virus a quick burn through of our population so we can, as many of them say "get it over with".
> 
> I believe the denial (nothing to see here!) followed by the wobbles in the early stages (a beautiful plan for Easter services) by the administration fed into a feeling of general uncertainty among my friends, who as loyal patriots, were willing to carry an undue part of the National burden, as long as they believed that they were well led, given a basic plan as to what were the tactics feeding into a national strategy, that would result in the outcome we all desire.
> 
> To this day, I don't think they have been well served in any of these regards, and anybody who has led a team numbering larger than 3 knows what to expect when this is the situation. It is why the military is actually run daily by sergeants as opposed to generals.
> 
> My main push back to my friends is asking for clarification on the definition of "vulnerable". The medical definition is any person with any condition that makes them more likely to become ill. Whether someone has been unlucky in life's lottery, such as sufferers of cystic fibrosis, or made poor lifestyle choices to smoke and over eat, all fit the definition of "vulnerable".
> 
> By the time one counts up all the vulnerable people, the argument could be made that we are talking about 200million people, with any woman of potential child bearing age possibly included, as they were with the Zika outbreak.
> 
> There is no short term quarantine strategy, beyond total lock down, that could accommodate for this number. If there is, I have not heard or read of one.
> 
> The frustrating part for me is that strategies for dealing with this type of situation are on the shelf. This was not a wheel that had to be invented.
> 
> Also, there is the flat out lie being circulated that we had no idea this type of outbreak could happen. My SWMBO has spent her entire 30 year career and the past 12 years overseas, working on just this type of situation. Our highest leaders knew this was a risk, they were repeatedly made aware of it since the HIV crisis.
> 
> George W. Bush recognized the global security risks created by HIV, TB, and Malaria and instituted the single largest international public health program in history, the PEPFAR program, which spent over 80 billion improving the health of hundreds of millions around the globe. He understood that a sick population was a drag on economic growth and that poor economic growth leads to global instability. Stronger overseas economies are safer, more stable and create better markets for our goods and services.
> 
> International disease surveillance has been growing for decades, specifically tied to efforts to protect the homeland against diseases like Ebola, SARS, MERS, and avian influenza.
> 
> Just like international terrorism didn't start on 9-11, with the prior attempt to bomb the WTC in NYC and the bombing of embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the warnings while not ignored were not given priority until the sky collapsed.
> 
> A poem....
> 
> Twas a dangerous cliff, as they freely confessed,
> Though to walk near its crest was so pleasant;
> But over its terrible edge there had slipped
> A duke and full many a peasant.
> So the people said something would have to be done,
> But their projects did not at all tally;
> Some said, "Put a fence 'round the edge of the cliff,"
> Some, "An ambulance down in the valley."
> 
> But the cry for the ambulance carried the day,
> For it spread through the neighboring city;
> A fence may be useful or not, it is true,
> But each heart became full of pity
> For those who slipped over the dangerous cliff;
> And the dwellers in highway and alley
> Gave pounds and gave pence, not to put up a fence,
> But an ambulance down in the valley.
> 
> "For the cliff is all right, if you're careful," they said,
> "And, if folks even slip and are dropping,
> It isn't the slipping that hurts them so much
> As the shock down below when they're stopping."
> So day after day, as these mishaps occurred,
> Quick forth would those rescuers sally
> To pick up the victims who fell off the cliff,
> With their ambulance down in the valley.
> 
> Then an old sage remarked: "It's a marvel to me
> That people give far more attention
> To repairing results than to stopping the cause,
> When they'd much better aim at prevention.
> Let us stop at its source all this mischief," cried he,
> "Come, neighbors and friends, let us rally;
> If the cliff we will fence, we might almost dispense
> With the ambulance down in the valley."
> 
> "Oh he's a fanatic," the others rejoined,
> "Dispense with the ambulance? Never!
> He'd dispense with all charities, too, if he could;
> No! No! We'll support them forever.
> Aren't we picking up folks just as fast as they fall?
> And shall this man dictate to us? Shall he?
> Why should people of sense stop to put up a fence,
> While the ambulance works in the valley?"
> 
> But the sensible few, who are practical too,
> Will not bear with such nonsense much longer;
> They believe that prevention is better than cure,
> And their party will soon be the stronger.
> Encourage them then, with your purse, voice, and pen,
> And while other philanthropists dally,
> They will scorn all pretense, and put up a stout fence
> On the cliff that hangs over the valley.
> 
> Better guide well the young than reclaim them when old,
> For the voice of true wisdom is calling.
> "To rescue the fallen is good, but 'tis best
> To prevent other people from falling."
> Better close up the source of temptation and crime
> Than deliver from dungeon or galley;
> Better put a strong fence 'round the top of the cliff
> Than an ambulance down in the valley.


Now worries at all, BSR! And thanks for Malins' poem-- it demonstrates that even an annoying temperance advocate can have his virtues.

As for how to classify the vulnerable, I'll leave that to experts. But I would note that the information available suggests that old age (70 or over) is the most significant predictive factor for mortality -- more predictive than any co-morbidity, including hypertension, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cardiovascular disease. The average age of death from COVID-19 appears to be 80. Logically this should influence our mitigation strategy.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Now worries at all, BSR! And thanks for Malins' poem-- it demonstrates that even an annoying temperance advocate can have his virtues.
> 
> As for how to classify the vulnerable, I'll leave that to experts. But I would note that the information available suggests that old age (70 or over) is the most significant predictive factor for mortality -- more predictive than any co-morbidity, including hypertension, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cardiovascular disease. The average age of death from COVID-19 appears to be 80.
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/


Interesting...

My wife and I have been discussing this all am.

How does one, or a society decide, who is more vulnerable and most worthy of special protections and consideration in a crisis? I guess doctors in combat do this all the time during triage. I don't envy them or the burden they must carry.

However, given that our government picks winners and losers all the time, on various societal matters, and often entirely devoid of logic or common sense (the unborn comes to mind as the most vulnerable), I am very comfortable, that in this case, they punted lumping us all into one basket.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Interesting...
> 
> My wife and I have been discussing this all am.
> 
> How does one, or a society decide, who is more vulnerable and most worthy of special protections and consideration in a crisis? I guess doctors in combat do this all the time during triage. I don't envy them or the burden they must carry.
> 
> However, given that our government picks winners and losers all the time, on various societal matters, and often entirely devoid of logic or common sense, I am very comfortable, that in this case, they punted lumping us all into one basket.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Just to be clear, I am not at all suggesting picking winners and losers. I'm suggesting instead that new information is at least suggesting that perhaps we should have been reordering our mitigation strategies -- not our medical treatments -- to protect our most vulnerable fellow Americans while giving somewhat greater latitude to those of us whose risks were more comparable to the flu.

Time will presumably reveal the efficacy and wisdom of our decisions. As you know my thematic point -- and one I'm confident you share -- has been and remains that we should be appropriately charitable about shortcomings given the constantly changing and conflicting information, competing considerations, fog of war, unknown unknowns, etc. This is not to say that some sloth or incompetency won't be revealed -- just that we should resist the temptation to rush to judgment or stupidly make evaluations through our favorite political lens.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Just to be clear, I am not at all suggesting picking winners and losers. I'm suggesting instead that new information is at least suggesting that perhaps we should have been concentrating our mitigation strategies -- not our medical treatments -- on our most vulnerable cohorts and giving greater latitude to others.


Sensible.

My personal mental gymnastics is focused on how to circumscribe most vulnerable. Any line cuts somewhere. Age will never be the only factor. Once that gate is opened beyond age, some bureaucrat sharpens his pencil....

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Sensible.
> 
> My personal mental gymnastics is focused on how to circumscribe most vulnerable. Any line cuts somewhere. Age will never be the only factor. Once that gate is opened beyond age, some bureaucrat sharpens his pencil....
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Yes, in the real world boundaries are always imperfect and murky.


----------



## medhat

@Mr. B. Scott Robinson I do unfortunately agree (if I'm reading your posts correctly) that the theory/concept of "herd immunity" as it pertains specifically to COVID-19 does implicitly have, as part of the full actualization of that model, that there will be a portion of "vulnerable populations" that will become infected and succumb to the virus, up until the time there is an effective vaccine/treatment developed.

And pessimistically, this is likely regardless of any quarantine efforts, which have thus far proven to not be 100% reliable.

What HAS been aptly demonstrated is that, using cruise ships, the Teddy Roosevelt aircraft carrier, and the USNS Comfort as examples of segregated/quarantined environments, that even a single break in the containment wall exposes this uninfected population like a single match in a bushel of dried kindling.

My personal/professional leaning is that the most workable road going forward is a wholesale reconfiguration of social interactions and gatherings, as extreme as that may sound, until an effective vaccine/treatment is widely available.

The political fumble of testing seems of a magnitude that I'm not holding my breath that it'll be fixed in any actionable time frame prior to a vaccine so I think the "solution" will have to do without. Can/will we as a society make this wholesale change?

I think the answer is definitely "yes", and offer as an example air travel. How many of us remember the days of air travel prior to 9/11, and just how VERY different it is today, and how in 2020 we've now fully adapted to that "new normal". I think COVID-19 will spurn new accommodations in the same way 9/11 did. Protocols will be developed to lessen, but not fully eliminate, infectious exposure (e.g., mask use in public), and casual personal distancing will increase.

Despite what I read in conservative publications, I don't think we're somehow "immune" (medical pun intended) to migrate towards what are commonplace behaviors in Asia, an area that's not inexperienced to pandemic disease.


----------



## Acct2000

I'm just tired of both the left and the right politicizing this. In Michigan, our governor is auditioning for the vice-presidency and trying to impress the left. Trump seems to go out of his way to be brazen and pointless just to impress his followers.

No one listens.

Right now, in Lansing, MI, there are a bunch of people protesting what I agree is the governor's over-reach. However, the optics of watching these fools block the streets over travel to vacation homes and restrictions on what they can buy in stores while blocking traffic and probably interfering with emergency vehicles is just dumb.

Our society has a lot of problems far worse than this virus. The idea that the only thing that matters is getting your way - - whether left or right - - is creating problems like this. Even though I disagree with our governor on a lot of what she is doing (grandstanding over public safety) this protest is not the way to go. I know I'll be bummed if someone dies because a traffic jam keeps them out of the hospital.

Already, lunch deliveries for the hospital workers are being stopped.

Your point of view is important, but it is not so important that you need to endanger other people because you think you have some wisdom that needs to be forced on everyone.

This time, it's the right that's being stupid, but there are plenty of things like Antifa protests, etc. where the left is being stupid. This is getting more and more destructive. I just hope no one dies or has a medical situation made much worse by this foolishness.


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Sorry, but I have to take issue with any plan that uses the combo of quarantine of at risk groups while building herd immunity concept as having been some sort of viable alternative path.
> 
> Quarantine of those in our population who are aged or who have pre existing conditions, also known as "vulnerable populations" would number in the tens of millions. 15% of the population is over 65, this number alone accounts for almost 60 million. Then pile on everyone under that age with diabetes, heart issues, obesity, asthma, etc and you might get to 100 million folks that would need to be quarantined, about a quarter of the country.
> 
> As for the building herd immunity in the remaining population while caging off 25% of America, I am certainly no bleeding heart, but this smacks of survival of the fittest to me. The less affluent, those with minimal health care or insurance, those without child care, would be pushed to the front lines to build our herd immunity while those like me work from home and enjoy the show. People on the front line would be exposing their loved ones at home. And how many homes don't have someone over 65 or a person without a pre existing condition? Maybe half? I don't know. Something like 20% of kids under 30 still live with their parents.
> 
> Building herd immunity in a short fix scenario means that people will die unnecessarily as hospitals become overwhelmed and doctors decide who lives and dies based on supply/ demand and "social worthiness", which is usually a combo of age plus wealth plus social merit. The winners in life win again! Folks like me can lean on our vast medical and government connections to get access to equipment to keep us alive if we do get sick. Others, well, they can be casualties of the pursuit of rapid herd immunity.
> 
> And where is the market for the service businesses with workers on the front line while an epidemic rages through the service industry? I won't be dining out for some time, probably at least till July. The public that could would essentially self isolate. And what of the health care costs and liability for the businesses who essentially forced non vulnerable workers to return to work who then become ill?
> 
> The current situation is certainly not perfect by any means but the quarantine while building herd immunity concept is a bit fantastic and totally unworkable from my POV.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


+1.

Sweden is attempting that approach with more than questionable results. Sweden's mortality rate is 7.68% whereas in its adjoining neighbors of Norway and Denmark the mortality rates are 1.46% and 3.85% respectively.

https://time.com/5817412/sweden-coronavirus/
But even more seriously, since this is a new and little studied virus there is far more unknown about its behavior than is known. Assumptions are being made about it based on the typical behavior of viruses without those assumptions having been proven. And a chief assumption upon which herd immunity is based is that once contracted, a recovered host cannot be reinfected and continue the chain of transmission. While this is true of most/many viruses, there are a few viruses where infection actually makes the infected individual after having fully recovered *more* susceptible to reinfection, and with a more virulent form of the disease.


----------



## Oldsarge

Americans turned out to be remarkably good at staying home so the death toll appears to be far less than pessimistically predicted. I think it will prove that Americans are also remarkable good at trying to care for their fellows and any politician who advocates sacrificing 20% of the country for the 'good' of the other 80% is risking pitchforks and torches at midnight. At least, that is my hope.


----------



## Mike Petrik

It is absolutely true that herd immunity makes sense only if there is post-virus immunity, and while that is likely it is not yet proven.

I'm not sure I understand how Sweden's approach would affect its CFR (Case Fatality Rate), which _Time_ is reporting, unless its hospital system is being overloaded, which _Time_ is not reporting. Instead the approach should presumably increase its infection rate (percent of population that is or becomes infected during a single episode) and potentially affect its mortality rate (the percent of a population that succumbs to the infection during a single episode), but those are all very different things. In this respect _Time's_ report is either confused or confusing, at least to me.

Furthermore, reported CFRs are not especially reliable, or at least comparable. Different regions and countries have different standards for both (i) qualifying as "medically supervised" -- a precondition for being a "case" counted in the CFR denominator and (ii) determining whether a fatality in the case of a co-morbidity should be assigned to the virus -- a precondition for being counted in the CFR numerator.

I am not in any way endorsing Sweden's approach for the US. Even if it proves effective, the article correctly alludes to important demographic idiosyncracies. That is not to say that we might not ultimately conclude, with the benefit of hindsight, that some variant of Sweden's approach would have been a more optimal approach for the US. This goes to Oldsarge's unknown unknowns. Our experts must make real time recommendations based on very imperfect information, and I have zero reason to believe any of us would make different recommendations assuming identical information. It would be truly remarkable, and wonderful, if we eventually are able to look back and say that it turned out that all our experts' recommendations were perfect or even near perfect. But that would be a seriously bad bet.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> Americans turned out to be remarkably good at staying home so the death toll appears to be far less than pessimistically predicted. I think it will prove that Americans are also remarkable good at trying to care for their fellows and any politician who advocates sacrificing 20% of the country for the 'good' of the other 80% is risking pitchforks and torches at midnight. At least, that is my hope.


I think your hope is spot on right, but thankfully no one is remotely suggesting such a thing.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Undoubtedly, at very least in certain areas, they will have to begin opening up the economy soon. Leaving the economy stagnant for much longer is not a realistically viable option.

But on that same note, we are not going to be able to roll out the numbers of massive antibody testing that will safely start stratifying risk to keep the most vulnerable populations protected. Available free or extremely low cost antibody testing cannot come soon enough.

What a needle to thread,.....


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> Undoubtedly, at very least in certain areas, they will have to begin opening up the economy soon. Leaving the economy stagnant for much longer is not a realistically viable option.


I agree that changes from the current situation must and will be made, but I have serious doubts that the economy (And life!) is just going to go back to what it was, like an elastic band. Rather, I suspect the economy will be changed, as will society in general.

Peter Navarro has been tarred and feathered in much of the press, and perhaps in part justifiably so. But when he assigned difficulties in obtaining both the medical and everyday supplies necessary to deal with this crisis as being caused by American business off-shoring manufacturing he wasn't wrong. Irrespective of any aggravating actions or inaction on behalf of the current administration, business's dismantling of America's industrial might has given birth to a host of troubles, one of the most severe of which has come home to roost.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> I agree that changes from the current situation must and will be made, but I have serious doubts that the economy (And life!) is just going to go back to what it was like an elastic band. Rather, I suspect the economy will be changed, as will society in general.
> 
> Peter Navarro has been tarred and feathered in much of the press, and perhaps in part justifiably so. But when he assigned difficulties in obtaining both the medical and everyday supplies necessary to deal with this crisis as being caused by American business off-shoring manufacturing he wasn't wrong. Irrespective of any aggravating actions or inaction on behalf of the current administration, business's dismantling of America's industrial might has given birth to a host of troubles, one of the most severe of which has come home to roost.


I certainly don't expect a social elastic band, but I'm confident that things will eventually go back to what we all remember and recognize as normal. That said, there will some lasting changes, including:


A more regulated and less internationally dependent supply chain for certain medical devices and pharmaceuticals, exactly as you explain;
A permanent "lift" for the prepared food delivery industry, and probably other delivery industries as well; and
A dramatically increased comfort level among employers with employee telecommuting. It is conceivable that there could be favorable traffic consequences from this.

The last two items were already trends, but this sad 2020 episode will be found to have significantly accelerated both, I think.


----------



## Flanderian

I revisit the IHME's Covid-19 projections regularly. And as posted earlier noted yesterday that the projection is dynamic in that it incorporates actual data into the projection as it is collected. The link below is for my State of New Jersey -

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/new-jersey
The projected number of new deaths predicted for today in New Jersey was 225, the actual reported number of daily additional dead is 351, or roughly 50% more than what was projected. However, from the swings in the daily reported total, I strongly suspect inconsistencies in reporting to be a major contributor to this discrepancy. Also, the projection displays what I assume is a range in parentheses, and that range for this date is 12 - 910. (The math by which they derive this is, I'm afraid, beyond me.)

But that still currently leaves New Jersey with over 71,000 people sick with Covid-19, and 3,156 dead. However the hospital admission number has fallen, and deaths inevitably reflect however that is trending, though there is a lag. Hopefully that trend continues.


----------



## medhat

Mike Petrik said:


> I'm not sure I understand how Sweden's approach would affect its CFR (Case Fatality Rate), which _Time_ is reporting, unless its hospital system is being overloaded, which _Time_ is not reporting. Instead the approach should presumably increase its infection rate (percent of population that is or becomes infected during a single episode) and potentially affect its mortality rate (the percent of a population that succumbs to the infection during a single episode), but those are all very different things. In this respect _Time's_ report is either confused or confusing, at least to me.


It's my understanding that Sweden's "bet" is that they have hospital capacity to address any anticipated surge demand due to COVID-19, thus they can "rip the band-aid off" and bull rush to a herd immunity or vaccine status in lieu of the social distancing that other countries are attempting.

It's pragmatic, but theoretically not necessarily wrong nor immoral, as some would suggest. There's the implicit assumption with essentially all the existing models that, in the absence of an effective treatment, eventually the infection ultimately affects the same number of people.

What's different with "flattening the curve" is the length of time until that "saturation" prevalence of infection occurs that will vary with efforts to mitigate spread (social distancing and such), the significance of which we're seeing in the US, in particular in New York City, where the resources to care for the infected are significantly strained, albeit on close examination very inconsistently (hospitals in poorer neighborhoods stretched to breaking, while you really don't hear a peep from downtown hospitals like Memorial Sloan Kettering or NYU...strange).

Thus the whole "flattening the curve" theory is to simply avoid deaths, _in excess of expected_, that are due NOT to COVID-19 directly, but instead _due to insufficient resources_ (e.g., no ventilator available). If a country is able to manage treatment resources efficiently (e.g., hopefully Sweden), then the "area under the curve" of infected citizens should theoretically be the same whether a country tries mitigation strategies or not.

The pragmatic part of the Sweden experiment is that, if they're correct in that ultimately the same number of people will be infected with a similar mortality with or without mitigation, then by not "shutting down" their entire economy, they'll reach a steady state sooner, without the additional "cost" of having the wholesale societal disruptions that we have here in the States.

Think about the short and long term economic impacts of the mitigation efforts thus far, on any measure, from the stock market to unemployment. They're enormous. We'll be digging out of this hole for a long while.

This may sound like I'm endorsing of the Swedish approach, but I'm not. I think it's a bet with the chips being the lives of susceptible Swedish citizens.

There's a whole lot about the novel Coronavirus we don't know anything about, including details about transmission and specifics regarding morbidity and pathophysiology. We've seen it run rampant through nursing homes and cruise ships, so it's probably safe to say close contact = higher morbidity/?mortality.

With that in mind, it's altogether possible that distancing strategies may actually _decrease_ the overall number of people infected, which would imply that the currently increased Swedish mortality may be persistent because they didn't more forcefully employ a distancing strategy. I think that's a terrible gamble with peoples' lives. Also, and let's be real here, the situation in the US has been particularly fraught with heavy political/reelection overtones.

And not only in DC, but from Wall Street to Main Street, big corporations and small businesses alike are doing the same mental calculation. What's the risk of people dying, versus the risk of my business going under? I'm glad I'm in the position where I don't have to do that math.


----------



## Mike Petrik

medhat said:


> It's my understanding that Sweden's "bet" is that they have hospital capacity to address any anticipated surge demand due to COVID-19, thus they can "rip the band-aid off" and bull rush to a herd immunity or vaccine status in lieu of the social distancing that other countries are attempting. It's pragmatic, but theoretically not necessarily wrong nor immoral, as some would suggest. There's the implicit assumption with essentially all the existing models that, in the absence of an effective treatment, eventually the infection ultimately affects the same number of people. What's different with "flattening the curve" is the length of time until that "saturation" prevalence of infection occurs that will vary with efforts to mitigate spread (social distancing and such), the significance of which we're seeing in the US, in particular in New York City, where the resources to care for the infected are significantly strained, albeit on close examination very inconsistently (hospitals in poorer neighborhoods stretched to breaking, while you really don't hear a peep from downtown hospitals like Memorial Sloan Kettering or NYU...strange). Thus the whole "flattening the curve" theory is to simply avoid deaths, _in excess of expected_, that are due NOT to COVID-19 directly, but instead _due to insufficient resources_ (e.g., no ventilator available). If a country is able to manage treatment resources efficiently (e.g., hopefully Sweden), then the "area under the curve" of infected citizens should theoretically be the same whether a country tries mitigation strategies or not.
> 
> ...


That is an excellent post, Medhat, and I agree with all of it, even if it does not explain Time's puzzling CFR reference (not blaming you -- it probably can't be explained).

Either approach is indeed a "bet" with pros and cons, but given the "whole lot we don't know" (and the even less we knew when we had to make the bet) betting on the strategy that should present less risk in terms of fatalities was prudent. In particular, it seems reasonably clear to me that the state of our medical resources made the bend the curve strategy absolutely essential, at least initially.

The harder question is whether and when we might be in a position to pivot.

You are also right that no strategy escapes costs, even in human life. If we wanted to eliminate traffic fatalities we could just outlaw motor vehicles, but sensible people agree that would be a poor trade-off. I tend to favor a slower re-opening of the economy than apparently do the President and most Governors.

Yet, I acknowledge that my point of view might be poisoned a bit by an innocent callousness, since my family really has not been financially damaged by this shut-down. If I was in the position of my neighbor who is on the brink of losing everything he worked for for 30 years, my perspective would likely be different.

Also, I'm not so sure that these competing strategies necessarily do assume the same infection rates, at least with respect to a single outbreak or episode. When our mitigation strategy was first launched we certainly did repeatedly hear that the infection would "ultimately affect the same number of people" (40% to 80% infected no matter what, but bending the curve spreads out the need for medical resources), but then as the strategy matured there seemed to be a pivot to the idea that the strategy was successfully reducing the pace of the infection to a point where only a rather small minority of Americans would actually be infected, at least in this episode.

This seemed like a good thing until folks realized that it introduced a complicated question of how to reopen the economy without putting the remaining majority of uninfected Americans at risk of another outbreak before a vaccine is available. While we have made great gains in terms of medical resources, the calculus has gotten more complicated by the increasing evidence that we have no idea what percentage of the US population remains uninfected.

There is evidence for 97%, and there is evidence of 40%. Of course the accurate percentage is probably somewhere between these two extremes (and both these extremes might be reasonably accurate in different regions), but that is a huge spread and both mitigation and re-opening strategies are greatly hampered by this critical lack of information.

As you have pointed out earlier there is reason to doubt that we will soon have the practical ability to scale up the testing necessary to remedy this encumbrance, but we can hope.

One way or another, the economy will be re-opened before a vaccine is ready. Few people disagree with the necessity of this. And however and whenever that happens, there will inevitably be new infections, new deaths, and perhaps even some progress toward herd immunity.

It seems critical to me that until a vaccine is available our mitigation efforts be increasingly focused on protecting our fellow Americans with the age and co-morbidity characteristics that make them most vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality.


----------



## eagle2250

Mike Petrik said:


> I certainly don't expect an social elastic band, but I'm confident that things will eventually go back to what we all remember and recognize as normal. That said, there will some lasting changes, including:
> 
> 
> A more regulated and less internationally dependent supply chain for certain medical devices and pharmaceuticals, exactly as you explain;
> A permanent "lift" for the prepared food delivery industry, and probably other delivery industries as well; and
> A dramatically increased comfort level among employers with employee telecommuting. It is conceivable that there could be favorable traffic consequences from this.
> 
> The last two items were already trends, but this sad 2020 episode will be found to have significantly accelerated both, I think.


To the three items you detailed, I would add that I wonder if the masses will quickly , if ever, re-embrace going out to eat, sitting in close proximity to others as we enjoy our meals? I suspect seating arrangements will be greatly dispersed and customer volume similarly reduced.

Who among us will soon be ready to return to a crowded movie theater to see a show or a packed stadium to enjoy a sporting event? I sesnse we will experience an extended period of doubt and be exercising an abundance of caution in our choices....and if we are not going out as frequently, just what effect will that have on our perceived sartorial needs and choices? Now it's going to get ugly, I fear!


----------



## Mike Petrik

eagle2250 said:


> To the three items you detailed, I would add that I wonder if the masses will quickly , if ever, re-embrace going out to eat, sitting in close proximity to others as we enjoy our meals? I suspect seating arrangements will be greatly dispersed and customer volume similarly reduced.
> 
> Who among us will soon be ready to return to a crowded movie theater to see a show or a packed stadium to enjoy a sporting event? I sesnse we will experience an extended period of doubt and be exercising an abundance of caution in our choices....and if we are not going out as frequently, just what effect will that have on our perceived sartorial needs and choices? Now it's going to get ugly, I fear!


No doubt predicting these things is impossible to do with certainty, but I think the phenomena you describe will be temporary. Whether temporary means a few transitional months or a few transitional years, I don't know, but eventually our sporting event and restaurant practices will return to normal. I am less optimistic about matters sartorial, but they were heading downhill anyway. But trends change and even reverse eventually.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> I certainly don't expect an social elastic band, but I'm confident that things will eventually go back to what we all remember and recognize as normal. That said, there will some lasting changes, including:
> 
> 
> A more regulated and less internationally dependent supply chain for certain medical devices and pharmaceuticals, exactly as you explain;
> A permanent "lift" for the prepared food delivery industry, and probably other delivery industries as well; and
> A dramatically increased comfort level among employers with employee telecommuting. It is conceivable that there could be favorable traffic consequences from this.
> 
> The last two items were already trends, but this sad 2020 episode will be found to have significantly accelerated both, I think.


Sadly, I agree with eagles assessment. (Made a bit of a dogs breakfast with my post.
Some is below in mikes portion...)

I expect that a large number of consumers, particularly older people who hold a disproportionate part of our nations wealth, might be slow to come out of their caves when this is "over", whenever that is and whatever that means.

My wife and I will certainly take some months to return to our 3 times a week dining out routine. Mostly, I suspect, it will take some repeated FOMO on group gatherings before we screw up the courage to return to the fray unfettered by fear of exposure.

I wonder how the "hand sanitizer moms" , who were already uber paranoid before this outbreak, will react to the new norm as well.

Online shopping, already eating the lunch of brick and mortar stores will probably drive a steak through the heart of many legacy retailers like Macy's and JC Penney.



Mike Petrik said:


> No doubt predicting these things is impossible to do with certainty, but I think the phenomena you describe will be temporary. Whether temporary means a few transitional months or a few transitional years, I don't know, but eventually our sporting event and restaurant practices will return to normal. I am less optimistic about matters sartorial, but they were heading downhill anyway. But trends change and
> 
> My primary concern at this point is another significant shock to the economy during the recovery period. There is no resiliency in the system at the moment. Given the current situation, suffering another near catastrophe might send us into an economic death spiral.
> 
> People's lingering fear to re engage leaves us vulnerable. The faster we bounce back from this, the better.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Eagle and BSR --

Just to be clear, I absolutely agree that some folks will be slow to return to prior restaurant and sporting event practices. My point is that the fear component of this phenomenon will absolutely not last forever. If you think it will then we will just have to let time reveal who's right.

And also for clarity, I do think that it is possible that restaurants might see foot traffic more or less permanently decrease, but if so this will not be because of some type of permanent social fear of infection, but simply because this current experience has either re-introduced them to the joys of cooking or introduced them to prepared food delivery options.

And yes, some brick and mortar retailers will not recover, particularly those that were already struggling from the Internet onslaught.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Eagle and BSR --
> 
> Just to be clear, I absolutely agree that some folks will be slow to return to prior restaurant and sporting event practices. My point is that the fear component of this phenomenon will absolutely not last forever. If you think it will then we will just have to let time reveal who's right.
> 
> And also for clarity, I do think that it is possible that restaurants might see foot traffic more or less permanently decrease, but if so this will not be because of some type of permanent social fear of infection, but simply because this current experience has either re-introduced them to the joys of cooking or introduced them to prepared food delivery options.
> 
> And yes, some brick and mortar retailers will not recover, particularly those that were already struggling from the Internet onslaught.


A return to normal is what we all desire. I personally wish for a return to 09-10-2001.

I travel a lot. A whole lot.

9-11 left an indelible impact mark on air travel as well as other modes of transport including the cruise industry. The burden, I call it a friction point, caused by the federalizing of airport security, impacts every traveler in some way. Entire industries sprung up to alleviate some of this headache, Clear, being the most obvious.

Most thoughtful travelers understand that TSA is 99% theater that does very, very little to stop terrorism. I have a clear plan in mind in case some jihadi decides to try to take over my plane. This inclination to cause permanent injury to another human is imbedded in my travel awareness, for better or worse. This awareness did not exist prior to September 2001.

Looking to the future, it is clear that Covid will have a similar lingering impact on the travel industry. Adding a new layer of public health screening on top of TSA will add insult to injury for the frequent flier. Already, Delta is advertising themselves as the "cleanest" airline, so the marketplace is already reacting to the new norm.

Adding a new level of friction to travel, while the public slowly overcomes their fear of flying....yet again, will be a serious drag on economic recovery.

A serious bummer.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> A return to normal is what we all desire. I personally wish for a return to 09-10-2001.
> 
> I travel a lot. A whole lot.
> 
> 9-11 left an indelible impact mark on air travel as well as other modes of transport including the cruise industry. The burden, I call it a friction point, caused by the federalizing of airport security, impacts every traveler in some way. Entire industries sprung up to alleviate some of this headache, Clear, being the most obvious.
> 
> Most thoughtful travelers understand that TSA is 99% theater that does very, very little to stop terrorism. I have a clear plan in mind in case some jihadi decides to try to take over my plane. This inclination to cause permanent injury to another human is imbedded in my travel awareness, for better or worse. This awareness did not exist prior to September 2001.
> 
> Looking to the future, it is clear that Covid will have a similar lingering impact on the travel industry. Adding a new layer of public health screening on top of TSA will add insult to injury for the frequent flier. Already, Delta is advertising themselves as the "cleanest" airline, so the marketplace is already reacting to the new norm.
> 
> Adding a new level of friction to travel, while the public slowly overcomes their fear of flying....yet again, will be a serious drag on economic recovery.
> 
> A serious bummer.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Yes, 9-11 permanently affected air travel: we all now must endure annoying TSA protocols. Yet, notwithstanding these protocols air travel eventually far surpassed pre-9-11 levels. As the fear of infection subsides -- and it will -- air travel will again return to more normal levels, though yes there might be new and improved hygiene protocols, likely with a practical efficacy rivaling that to which you (correctly) ascribe to the TSA's.

I suppose it is possible that some airlines will introduce protocols that involve adding "insult to injury" for passengers, but I tend to doubt it. I certainly hope not. There is no scientific basis for afflicting customers with such processes, and while fear is not always rational, our fear of infection will subside over time, including its irrational components.

Our nation is going through a tough patch. Fear and anxiety is to be expected. But I do not think that our citizens -- or humans generally -- are going to sustain that fear and anxiety forever. There will be some changes for sure, but things will get back to a normal that we all recognize - probably sooner than many of us think -- and one that involves a normal level of fear and anxiety.


----------



## Oldsarge

My own view is that this will change the world forever but in ways we cannot yet predict. Being in the 'at risk' demographic, I fear it may be 12-18 months before I can return to my enjoyment of restaurants and tourist hunting/fishing. I heartily hope not but am not sanguine about the prospects.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mike Petrik said:


> Now worries at all, BSR! And thanks for Malins' poem-- it demonstrates that even an annoying temperance advocate can have his virtues.
> 
> As for how to classify the vulnerable, I'll leave that to experts. But I would note that the information available suggests that old age (70 or over) is the most significant predictive factor for mortality -- more predictive than any co-morbidity, including hypertension, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cardiovascular disease. The average age of death from COVID-19 appears to be 80. Logically this should influence our mitigation strategy.
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/


I need to correct my post above. The fetching Mrs. P has brought to my attention that there is a double counting problem embedded in the linked COVID-19 mortality demographic information.

Many people have more than one co-morbidity and certainly the listed co-morbidities exist disproportionately among the elderly. So without disentangling the variables, we cannot know from this list how to compare risk profiles, especially as between the elderly and people with various co-morbidities, and especially among the elderly with a co-morbidity.

We do know that the reported average age of death from COVID-19 is about 80, but we don't know (at least from the data in this link) the comparative roles that age plays versus a co-morbidity, especially among the aged.


----------



## Oldsarge

Exactly. I did some looking into 'risk factors'. One of them is 'diabetes' but diabetes is not a binomial, it's analog. My A1c runs c. 6.5 or lower and the risk for CORVID is 9 or 10. Do you know what yours is, gentlemen? Likewise hypertension. 

What's everyone's blood pressure? Mine is perfectly controlled, how about yours? So, yes, I'm old and that's a risk factor and yes, I have other conditions but the real question is 'to what degree?' 

My larder is low. I'm putting on my mask and going to the grocery store.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Agreed, Oldsarge.

It would also be instructive to know what percentage of COVID-19 deaths have involved a person 70 or over who also had a pre-infection co-morbidity that was fairly serious. I bet that information is out there, but I cannot find it.


----------



## Flanderian

Flanderian said:


> I revisit the IHME's Covid-19 projections regularly. And as posted earlier noted yesterday that the projection is dynamic in that it incorporates actual data into the projection as it is collected. The link below is for my State of New Jersey -
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/new-jersey
> The projected number of new deaths predicted for today in New Jersey was 225, the actual reported number of daily additional dead is 351, or roughly 50% more than what was projected. However, from the swings in the daily reported total, I strongly suspect inconsistencies in reporting to be a major contributor to this discrepancy. Also, the projection displays what I assume is a range in parentheses, and that range for this date is 12 - 910. (The math by which they derive this is, I'm afraid, beyond me.)
> 
> But that still currently leaves New Jersey with over 71,000 people sick with Covid-19, and 3,156 dead. However the hospital admission number has fallen, and deaths inevitably reflect however that is trending, though there is a lag. Hopefully that trend continues.


Update: The projected number of additional deaths for today in New Jersey was 209, but today 362 more people have died, 11 more than the previous day, and 73% more than was projected by the IHME projection. To date, 3,518 New Jerseyans have died, more than have been reported to have died in all of China with roughly twice the population of the U.S.A.


----------



## medhat

I've enjoyed this discussion, especially once it veered away from political diatribes. 

Regarding co-morbidities, I think the specific details will have to wait until the "post game" of this current round of pandemic, as data is being irregularly collected and at risk of being a faulty data set for accurate analysis. 

That said, I think in broad swaths generalizations can be made. "Advanced" age? Bad. Diabetes and kidney disease? Bad. Asthma? Surprisingly, there have been scattered reports from a number of countries that this isn't the risk factor many had assumed, with observed rates with COVID-19 hospitalized patients being anecdotally less than expected.

I have to (virtually) attend for work, but some of the group may find of interest the weekly CDC/COCA webinars, which are broadcast weekly (this week there are two, today and tomorrow). Cover a variety of relevant topics and from mostly reputable sources. You can even watch on Facebook live.

Last, for what it's worth, as of a few weeks ago the most common analogy to the clinical presentation of COVID-19 in severely ill patients was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). More recently some clinicians experienced in managing these patients have said it's overall perhaps a little more closely aligned to high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE). If true, this may have implications towards better therapies and treatments.


----------



## Mike Petrik

medhat said:


> I've enjoyed this discussion, especially once it veered away from political diatribes. Regarding co-morbidities, I think the specific details will have to wait until the "post game" of this current round of pandemic, as data is being irregularly collected and at risk of being a faulty data set for accurate analysis. That said, I think in broad swaths generalizations can be made. "Advanced" age? Bad. Diabetes and kidney disease? Bad. Asthma? Surprisingly, there have been scattered reports from a number of countries that this isn't the risk factor many had assumed, with observed rates with COVID-19 hospitalized patients being anecdotally less than expected.
> 
> I have to (virtually) attend for work, but some of the group may find of interest the weekly CDC/COCA webinars, which are broadcast weekly (this week there are two, today and tomorrow). Cover a variety of relevant topics and from mostly reputable sources. You can even watch on Facebook live.
> 
> Last, for what it's worth, as of a few weeks ago the most common analogy to the clinical presentation of COVID-19 in severely ill patients was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). More recently some clinicians experienced in managing these patients have said it's overall perhaps a little more closely aligned to high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE). If true, this may have implications towards better therapies and treatments.


Agreed on all counts. I have a suspicion -- but it is only a suspicion -- that COVID-19 fatalities will prove to be very disproportionately concentrated in the cohort of infected persons having two "bads" (well, three counting the virus itself): advanced age plus one other. But I could be wrong. The fetching Mrs. P has reminded me of that too.


----------



## Flanderian

medhat said:


> I've enjoyed this discussion, especially once it veered away from political diatribes. Regarding co-morbidities, I think the specific details will have to wait until the "post game" of this current round of pandemic, as data is being irregularly collected and at risk of being a faulty data set for accurate analysis. That said, I think in broad swaths generalizations can be made. "Advanced" age? Bad. Diabetes and kidney disease? Bad. Asthma? Surprisingly, there have been scattered reports from a number of countries that this isn't the risk factor many had assumed, with observed rates with COVID-19 hospitalized patients being anecdotally less than expected.
> 
> I have to (virtually) attend for work, but some of the group may find of interest the weekly CDC/COCA webinars, which are broadcast weekly (this week there are two, today and tomorrow). Cover a variety of relevant topics and from mostly reputable sources. You can even watch on Facebook live.
> 
> Last, for what it's worth, as of a few weeks ago the most common analogy to the clinical presentation of COVID-19 in severely ill patients was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). More recently some clinicians experienced in managing these patients have said it's overall perhaps a little more closely aligned to high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE). If true, this may have implications towards better therapies and treatments.


PBS TV, irrespective of any possible political bias, *usually* does pretty good journalism. Last night, I believe, they did a more in-depth interview with a treating physician which I recall touching upon the longer term effects of Covid-19 upon patients.

As I feared, those with worse cases of the disease are experiencing organ damage resulting from Covid-19, particularly to the lungs, heart and kidneys. So obviously, for anyone in which those organs are at all already compromised by a disease process, they stand a greater chance of dying, as well as the disease having long-term implications for their health if they do not die initially.

So I find it unconvincing to argue that it is an underlying disease process that causes death, since it is specifically Covid-19 that causes the added damage and tips the scales.

As I reported earlier, my wife's otherwise healthy and very physically active late 60's cousin suffered infiltrates of the lungs as a consequence of Covid-19 infection, even after she recovered from the disease.


----------



## Oldsarge

Hmmm, this really is a stinker of a virus. C'mon vaccine-istas!


----------



## Dhaller

Lots of posts here and a lot to digest.

I have revised my thinking about this practically daily the past week or so; a couple of reflections.

1. We have discovered some pretty glaring oversights in the structure of our economy: namely, our well-being is e


Oldsarge said:


> Hmmm, this really is a stinker of a virus. C'mon vaccine-istas!


SARS vaccines take an average of 20 months to make from the date of identification (if a vaccine can be developed.) So, August-ish 2021?
Until then, hopefully we'll find ways of mitigating the harm done.

Obviously, protocols will need to be developed to permit some modified "business as usual" until then (though not completely as usual - past few nights I've seen the best starfields ever from my back yard. *That* I'd like to keep.)

DH


----------



## Mike Petrik

Some not especially surprising but nonetheless encouraging news:

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/johnson-johnson-eyes-600-million-coronavirus-vaccines-by-early-2021/


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Some not especially surprising but nonetheless encouraging news:
> 
> https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/johnson-johnson-eyes-600-million-coronavirus-vaccines-by-early-2021/


That would be wondeful!

Thanks, Mike! 👍


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Yes, 9-11 permanently affected air travel: we all now must endure annoying TSA protocols. Yet, notwithstanding these protocols air travel eventually far surpassed pre-9-11 levels. As the fear of infection subsides -- and it will -- air travel will again return to more normal levels, though yes there might be new and improved hygiene protocols, likely with a practical efficacy rivaling that to which you (correctly) ascribe to the TSA's.
> 
> I suppose it is possible that some airlines will introduce protocols that involve adding "insult to injury" for passengers, but I tend to doubt it. I certainly hope not. There is no scientific basis for afflicting customers with such processes, and while fear is not always rational, our fear of infection will subside over time, including its irrational components.
> 
> Our nation is going through a tough patch. Fear and anxiety is to be expected. But I do not think that our citizens -- or humans generally -- are going to sustain that fear and anxiety forever. There will be some changes for sure, but things will get back to a normal that we all recognize - probably sooner than many of us think -- and one that involves a normal level of fear and anxiety.


It will recover, slowly. It took 4 years for airlines to recover capacity lost post 9-11.

Watching passengers furiously scrubbing their seats prior to my return flight from Istanbul 5 weeks ago leads me to think that behavior, on the part of the traveling public and the airlines, will be permanently changed.

Maybe future airline seats will be made of comfy anti viral copper? Given how accommodating the current flying public is to the torture of current seat configuration, an all metal seat seems possible. 

Cheers,


----------



## iam.mike

Just got this forwarded to me by some of my pals (see attached PDF).

RE: Guidelines about how to Re-Open America


----------



## Peak and Pine

^

What's with _Opening Up America *Again*_?
When was it last closed?
Hmmmm.
Oh, I get it. Echos _MAGA_. Clever, in a Repupublican sorta way.


----------



## iam.mike

I'll have to admit, I'm skeptical.

In reading Phase 1 > Employers & Specific Types of Employers - I can't visualize how businesses adopt these guidelines in a meaningful way.

How do movie theaters and restaurants operate? One quarter capacity? Or some fractional capacity where they can bring in some customers?

Gyms -- Do they block off every other treadmill and elliptical? Do they adopt some of the social distancing marks like supermarkets have implemented?

This will be very interesting to watch unfold.


----------



## Oldsarge

In the meantime . . .


----------



## Mike Petrik

Peak and Pine said:


> ^
> 
> What's with _Opening Up America *Again*_?
> When was it last closed?
> Hmmmm.
> Oh, I get it. Echos _MAGA_. Clever, in a Repupublican sorta way.


Well, if you think America has been open you certainly are not a small businessman or typical employee working for a weekly paycheck. Perhaps a comfortable retiree like me?

Actually, the slogan is not so much Republican (or Democrat) as Trump. He is the master marketer of course. Yet, I find it curious that he didn't go with the far superior echo "Opening America Up Again." I have some theories but they are too speculative to bother mentioning.


----------



## Mike Petrik

mikel said:


> I'll have to admit, I'm skeptical.
> 
> In reading Phase 1 > Employers & Specific Types of Employers - I can't visualize how businesses adopt these guidelines in a meaningful way.
> 
> How do movie theaters and restaurants operate? One quarter capacity? Or some fractional capacity where they can bring in some customers?
> 
> Gyms -- Do they block off every other treadmill and elliptical? Do they adopt some of the social distancing marks like supermarkets have implemented?
> 
> This will be very interesting to watch unfold.


There is a reason guidelines are called guidelines. But it is inevitable that general principles invite particular questions, hard calls, and murky boundaries -- so state and local governments will just have to work with businesses to clumsily muddle through them. The only alternatives would be to either (i) produce a temporary 5000+ page Internal Opening Up America Code supported by 50,000+ pages of regulations and rulings or (ii) just turn on the switch at some inevitably somewhat arbitrary point. I think they selected the best approach.

But you are right. It will be interesting, confounding, and often ridiculously amusing. But thankfully temporary.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Mike Petrik said:


> Well, if you think America has been open you certainly are not a small businessman or typical employee working for a weekly paycheck. * Perhaps a comfortable retiree like me? *


.
Mike, don't get so comfy that you're not paying attention. The word _Again_ is bolded in the quoted post. For it's misuse. When you tack it on to the phrase _Let's Open America_, the adverb _Again _connotes that it was at some undefined point closed before. If it was, I must have napped thru it. In the 70s maybe? I slept through '72. And '76.

And I have a question about coughing into your sleeve. Does it have to be _your _sleeve, or can it be someone else's?


----------



## Mike Petrik

Peak and Pine said:


> .
> Mike, don't get so comfy that you're not paying attention. The word _Again_ is bolded in the quoted post. For it's misuse. When you tack it on to the phrase _Let's Open America_, the adverb _Again _connotes that it was at some undefined point closed before. If it was, I must have napped thru it. In the 70s maybe? I slept through '72. And '76.
> 
> And I have a question about coughing into your sleeve. Does it have to be _your _sleeve, or can it be someone else's?


Peak,

In most states one may cough into the sleeve of another person only with advance consent. On college campuses such consent must be in writing and on a form created by the appropriate university administrative office.

As for your other point, frankly I'm just not smart enough to know how to respond.

Cheers,

Mike


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Peak and Pine said:


> .
> Mike, don't get so comfy that you're not paying attention. The word _Again_ is bolded in the quoted post. For it's misuse. When you tack it on to the phrase _Let's Open America_, the adverb _*Again* _connotes that it was at some undefined point closed before. If it was, I must have napped thru it. In the 70s maybe? I slept through '72. And '76.


How veiled and,.....clever?
Perhaps printing some tee shirts or dare I say hats is in order.


----------



## medhat

The thus-far insurmountable hurdle I see with the new "reopening" recommendations is regarding testing. I can't envision any way adequate testing happens, now or, pessimistically speaking, ever, so long as the feds refuse to claim responsibility. 

As a result the only consistent measure of measurable disease prevalence is hospital admission and, unfortunately, mortality rates. Epidemiologists can work backwards from those numbers to guesstimate the prevalence of disease in the population, the fudge factor being the incidence of "asymptomatic positives", which has a material impact on disease spread. 

Being further pessimistic, I think the current end result we'll see, in light of inadequate testing, is the spread of disease in a very natural progression. The only difference being that the big initial peak was blunted by the more or less spontaneous national response. 

From here on out, pending a significant policy change and the ultimate development of an effective treatment/vaccine, one could probably draw a straight (figuratively, it's actually logarithmic) line to see how disease progression grows.


----------



## iam.mike

127.72 MHz said:


> Perhaps printing some tee shirts or dare I say hats is in order.


Damn, now that's a brilliant idea! Let's do it


----------



## Mike Petrik

Some more encouraging news:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/16...uggests-patients-are-responding-to-treatment/


----------



## 127.72 MHz

medhat said:


> The thus-far insurmountable hurdle I see with the new "reopening" recommendations is regarding testing. *I can't envision any way adequate testing happens, now or, pessimistically speaking, ever, so long as the feds refuse to claim responsibility.*
> 
> Being further pessimistic, I think the current end result we'll see, in light of inadequate testing, is the *spread of disease in a very natural progression.* The only difference being that the big initial peak was blunted by the more or less spontaneous national response.


Agreed. But even if the federal government took complete responsibility for antibody testing we lack the scale required to conduct the massive numbers of tests to *safely *return people to work. At least in certain areas we will return people to work with inherent risk.
In my state of Oregon we have managed to test *0.831857143%* of the population.
As of Thursday, April 16. A total of 34,938 people have been tested, (not antibody test) according to the state's health department. This out of a total population of 4.2 million,......
https://www.livescience.com/oregon-coronavirus-updates.html
As far as *antibody testing *in my state of Oregon, there may have been a few tests here and there but no significant numbers have been conducted on the public. After all, the FDA only approved antibody testing April 2, 2020.
https://www.livescience.com/first-coronavirus-antibody-test-approved-us.html


----------



## Oldsarge

One the other hand, consider the opinions of work-from-home . . .


----------



## Oldsarge

Back at the first of the year, one of my favorite webcomics was eerily prescient . . .


----------



## 127.72 MHz

*COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California* April 17.2020 (Awaiting publication)
Peer reviewed science, especially the life sciences, is so refreshing to read after mass media indoctrination!
A quote from the paper:
"These prevalence estimates represent a range between *48,000 and 81,000 people infected in Santa Clara County by early April, 50-85-fold more than the number of confirmed cases. Conclusions The population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases*. Population prevalence estimates can now be used to calibrate epidemic and mortality projections."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10....0pOXqb3nOUoVRFDs5ZdBzO9w_yicdwyhIdvht3lBZyMgA


----------



## Mike Petrik

127.72 MHz said:


> *COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California* April 17.2020 (Awaiting publication)
> Peer reviewed science, especially the life sciences, is so refreshing to read after mass media indoctrination!
> A quote from the paper:
> "These prevalence estimates represent a range between *48,000 and 81,000 people infected in Santa Clara County by early April, 50-85-fold more than the number of confirmed cases. Conclusions The population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases*. Population prevalence estimates can now be used to calibrate epidemic and mortality projections."
> https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10....0pOXqb3nOUoVRFDs5ZdBzO9w_yicdwyhIdvht3lBZyMgA


Thanks for posting this. I'm no expert but this strikes me as oddly good news to the extent the paper suggests that the true infection fatality rate might actually be far lower than reported case fatality rates. I say "suggests" because experts will not only have to carefully analyze the accuracy of the study (not clear to me that its participants were appropriately randomized) but will also have to sort out the extent to which the Santa Clara County data are typical. Yet, the study does seem to at least lend some support to widely-reported (even if chiefly limited to more conservative media outlets) suspicions that the virus is both significantly more infectious and significantly less lethal than most models and experts have been assuming.

If the conclusions prove to be true, they should certainly influence both mitigation and "re-opening" strategies, but I'm honestly not sure exactly how. Even assuming the accuracy of the much higher Santa Clara County infection rate, that rate would not seem to remotely approach the rate necessary for herd immunity. Unless I'm missing something.


----------



## Oldsarge

And it appears that the virus isn't impressed by a Presidential seal of approval.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hydrox...ly-data-suggest-11587222001?mod=hp_lead_pos11


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ In terms of reaching a herd immunity we're in agreement.
For our "Re-opening," massive antibody testing is the only *safe* way we will be able to begin resuscitation of our economy.
For the foreseeable future we will not be able to deploy the massive numbers of antibody tests needed for meaningful mitigation.

We will lack the capacity for the tests themselves as well as the equipment needed. (Regardless of Point of care tests or higher volume laboratory testing.)

We will have to begin our reopening with best guess risk assessment.

I went into work briefly this AM and happened to speak with my epidemiologist pal. He related the buzz phrase dejour in his world is "Rolling shutdowns."

We are likely to have "Rolling shutdowns" over the next 18 months given the likely infection flair ups that will result in a working population that lacks antibodies for covid 19.

At least we're gaining a clearer vision for what our near term future looks like.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oldsarge said:


> And it appears that the virus isn't impressed by a Presidential seal of approval.
> 
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/hydrox...ly-data-suggest-11587222001?mod=hp_lead_pos11


Yes indeed. But let's all hope that our President does not voice optimism for Remdesivir for fear that that potential treatment becomes a political football!
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/new...prevents-disease-progression-monkeys-covid-19


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Thanks for posting this. I'm no expert but this strikes me as oddly good news to the extent the paper suggests that the true infection fatality rate might actually be far lower than reported case fatality rates. I say "suggests" because experts will not only have to carefully analyze the accuracy of the study (not clear to me that its participants were appropriately randomized) but will also have to sort out the extent to which the Santa Clara County data are typical. Yet, the study does seem to at least lend some support to widely-reported (even if chiefly limited to more conservative media outlets) suspicions that the virus is both significantly more infectious and significantly less lethal than most models and experts have been assuming.
> 
> If the conclusions prove to be true, they should certainly influence both mitigation and "re-opening" strategies, but I'm honestly not sure exactly how. Even assuming the accuracy of the much higher Santa Clara County infection rate, that rate would not seem to remotely approach the rate necessary for herd immunity. Unless I'm missing something.


Mike, I've found it useful to track daily the projections for New Jersey from the IHME site you originally brought to my attention. Yesterday they changed the format somewhat. They included the actual data of the last several days that had differed substantially from their original projections, and adjusted the projections. But perhaps most significantly, they added an estimate of when the state could begin "opening up." I assume this is also based on their statistical modeling. And they define what conditions must be in place to allow this.

And they provide the same estimate for other states I've looked at as well. The date they project for New Jersey is June 1st. For your home state of Georgia, they estimate this process can responsibly begin on June 15th.

Edit: Deleted as inaccurate - "And they eliminated the gross estimated number of fatalities by state."


----------



## Flanderian

While it may not prove true if and when it's subjected to detailed statistical analysis, or clinical testing, (If it's possible.) casual observations reported in the press, and I believe also mentioned by NY Gov. Cuomo today, is that there appears to be a correlation between the severity of the disease contracted and the amount of exposure the infected person experiences in contracting the disease. (I.e., viral load hypothesis.)

The link mentioned is the seeming increased number of severe cases of the disease among health care workers who often are younger and do not necessarily have other factors that should result in a more severe disease process. Casually, the most significant difference is the amount of exposure to the virus they receive through greater contact with the virus present in healthcare facilities.

I.e., if not for this effect, more frequent exposure would logically result in a greater percentage of infection, but not in a greater severity among those infected.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Mike, I've found it useful to track daily the projections for New Jersey from the IHME site you originally brought to my attention. Yesterday they changed the format somewhat. They included the actual data of the last several days that had differed substantially from their original projections, and adjusted the projections. And they eliminated the gross estimated number of fatalities by state. But perhaps most significantly, they added an estimate of when the state could begin "opening up." I assume this is also based on their statistical modeling. And they define what conditions must be in place to allow this.
> 
> And they provide the same estimate for other states I've looked at as well. The date they project for New Jersey is June 1st. For your home state of Georgia, they estimate this process can responsibly begin on June 15th.


Thanks, Flanderian. Yes, I visit that site pretty much every day, and noticed the same changes. This model is interesting and useful (at least to me), but has not been especially good at doing what models are supposed to do -- predict.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/17...-methods-shouldnt-guide-policies-critics-say/
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not criticizing at all, just pointing out that relying on the models might be the best we've got, but the "best" in this case might be a bit weak. The good news is that this model -- and most models -- have fairly consistently overshot fatality estimates over time.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> While it may not prove true if and when it's subjected to detailed statistical analysis, or clinical testing, (If it's possible.) casual observations reported in the press, and I believe also mentioned by NY Gov. Cuomo today, is that there appears to be a correlation between the severity of the disease contracted and the amount of exposure the infected person experiences in contracting the disease. (I.e., viral load hypothesis.)
> 
> The link mentioned is the seeming increased number of severe cases of the disease among health care workers who often are younger and do not necessarily have other factors that should result in a more severe disease process. Casually, the most significant difference is the amount of exposure to the virus they receive through greater contact with the virus present in healthcare facilities.
> 
> I.e., if not for this effect, more frequent exposure would logically result in a greater percentage of infection, but not in a greater severity among those infected.


Very good points. 
If this hypothesis proves to be correct, then plainly an individual's strategy should be to contract the minimum viral load necessary to acquire immunity. ;-)


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Thanks, Flanderian. Yes, I visit that site pretty much every day, and noticed the same changes. This model is interesting and useful (at least to me), but has not been especially good at doing what models are supposed to do -- predict.
> 
> https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/17...-methods-shouldnt-guide-policies-critics-say/
> Don't get me wrong -- I'm not criticizing at all, just pointing out that relying on the models might be the best we've got, but the "best" in this case might be a bit weak. The good news is that this model -- and most models -- have fairly consistently overshot fatality estimates over time.


Of course, this is just one model, and I don't have enough information, or the skills, to assess its potential validity. But I'm unfamiliar with any other conveniently available models, and this is the first I've seen offering "opening up" date projections, and think its notable as to how much later they are than are often being discussed and proposed. To the extent it may hold some validity, it's perhaps instructional.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Very good points.
> If this hypothesis proves to be correct, then plainly an individual's strategy should be to contract the minimum viral load necessary to acquire immunity. ;-)


Sorry, but if they're looking for volunteers to test the efficacy of this principle, I'm not their guy!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Of course, this is just one model, and I don't have enough information, or the skills, to assess its potential validity. But I'm unfamiliar with any other conveniently available models, and this is the first I've seen offering "opening up" date projections, and think its notable as to how much later they are than are often being discussed and proposed. To the extent it may hold some validity, it's perhaps instructional.


Best I can tell each state's projected opening up date occurs weeks after the projected number of daily deaths stabilizes at zero. This suggests an almost pedantic definition of "safe" -- one we apply to no other infectious disease. But perhaps I'm misunderstanding something.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> The opening up dates all occur weeks after the number of daily deaths stabilizes at zero. This suggests an almost pedantic definition of "safe" -- one we apply to no other infectious disease. But no doubt I'm misunderstanding something.


Yes, I think there's a lot more to it than reflected here. But again, not understanding entirely how these projections are arrived at, I attempt to take it as information. I.e., needs to be further evaluated.

But two aspects of this disease that might urge more caution is that so little is known of it, but of what is, it's potentially significantly more lethal than most. For example, it was mentioned in the press that in NYC the fatality rate there in a given period exceeded what it was for the H1N1 1918 flu pandemic.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Sorry, but if they're looking for volunteers to test the efficacy of this principle, I'm not their guy!
> 
> View attachment 42715


Ah, but if the strategy really is to bend the curve -- i.e., we are pretty much all going to get infected, we just need to do it over time to avoid hospital overload -- you will eventually be volunteered in the military sense anyway.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Yes, I think there's a lot more to it than reflected here. But again, not understanding entirely how these projections are arrived at, I attempt to take it as information. I.e., needs to be further evaluated.
> 
> But two aspects of this disease that might urge more caution is that so little is known of it, but of what is, it's potentially significantly more lethal than most. For example, it was mentioned in the press that in NYC, the fatality rate there in a given period exceeded what it was for the H1N1 1918 pandemic.


We really have no idea how lethal this virus is, precisely because we have no idea how many people have contracted it.

There is increasing evidence -- some posted on this very thread -- that the number of unreported infections might be many multiples of the number of reported infections, and that indeed a large percentage of those infected might remain entirely or almost entirely asymptomatic (not just pre-symptomatic).

It is perfectly possible that the infection fatality rate of this virus could actually resemble that of the flu.

I'm emphatically not saying that is the case, just that it might be -- we don't know yet. There is certainly increasing evidence that the virus is both far more infectious and far less lethal than we have been assuming.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> And it appears that the virus isn't impressed by a Presidential seal of approval.
> 
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/hydrox...ly-data-suggest-11587222001?mod=hp_lead_pos11


This study to the extent I can understand it (I won't pay for the WSJ) does not seem to say anything particularly interesting, at least to me.

A number of studies had already concluded that HCQ does not seem to affect the virus as such (i.e., is not a "cure") but some of those same studies concluded that it did ameliorate symptoms -- and if true that would be important since it is the symptoms -- e.g., inflammation -- that actually kills people.

Like any right thinking person I hope that this drug is beneficial, and hope others will be true game-changers.

The research on HCQ to this point has been sufficiently mixed to dampen the hope that it will be a true game-changer, but all good people still hope it will prove beneficial.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> Ah, but if the strategy really is to bend the curve -- i.e., we are pretty much all going to get infected, we just need to do it over time to avoid hospital overload -- you will eventually be volunteered in the military sense anyway.





Mike Petrik said:


> We really have no idea how lethal this virus is, precisely because we have no idea how many people have contracted it. There is increasing evidence -- some posted on this very thread -- that the number of unreported infections might be many multiples of the number of reported infections, and that indeed a large percentage of those infected might remain entirely or almost entirely asymptomatic (not just pre-symptomatic). It is perfectly possible that the infection fatality rate of this virus could actually resemble that of the flu. I'm emphatically not saying that is the case, just that it might be -- we don't know yet. There is certainly increasing evidence that the virus is both far more infectious and far less lethal than we have been assuming.


As a 70+ year old, I have absolutely no intention of contracting this disease, if it's in any way possible to avoid it.

Some estimates of the mortality rate among my population are 50%. And evidence to date concerning those in my age group, and anyone more severely affected, is that if it doesn't prove fatal, it is likely to leave survivors permanently more debilitated.

And as I believe you accurately point out, at this juncture, no one knows for certain what the particulars are.

If an effective vaccine can be developed absent such potential effects, I will be far more sanguine about resuming normal activity.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> As a 70+ year old, I have absolutely no intention of contracting this disease, if it's in anyway possible to avoid it. Some estimates of the mortality rate among my population are 50%. And evidence to date concerning those in my age group, and anyone more severely affected, is that if it doesn't prove fatal, it is likely to leave survivors permanently more debilitated. And as I believe you accurately point out, at this juncture, no one knows for certain what the particulars are.
> 
> If an effective vaccine can be developed absent such potential effects, I will be far more sanguine about resuming normal activity.


That is perfectly sensible. Anyone residing in one of the "vulnerable" cohorts should take special mitigation precautions necessary until a vaccine is available.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Testing of everyone is an interesting discussion and one that my wife and I have been kicking around.

The operational logistics of testing an entire population in the midst of a pandemic are virtually impossible to resolve. Are there enough tests, where would people go to be tested, would testers go door to door, how to keep the disease from being spread during the testing process, and the big nut to crack, does having had the virus and recovered mean than one is even immune from future infections?

Reports out of China suggest that the virus is changing so rapidly that people, as is with the flu, can be reinfected with a new strain. If true, this renders testing and the pursuit of a silver bullet vaccine extremely problematic.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Testing of everyone is an interesting discussion and one that my wife and I have been kicking around.
> 
> The operational logistics of testing an entire population in the midst of a pandemic are virtually impossible to resolve. Are there enough tests, where would people go to be tested, would testers go door to door, how to keep the disease from being spread during the testing process, and the big nut to crack, does having had the virus and recovered mean than one is even immune from future infections?
> 
> Reports out of China suggest that the virus is changing so rapidly that people, as is with the flu, can be reinfected with a new strain. If true, this renders testing and the pursuit of a silver bullet vaccine extremely problematic.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


It does, indeed. And if vaccines don't work we're left with evolution, our own. Darwin would not be amused.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Reports out of China suggest that the virus is changing so rapidly that people, as is with the flu, can be reinfected with a new strain. If true, this renders testing and the pursuit of a silver bullet vaccine extremely problematic.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Yes, folks are indeed watching mutations carefully, but fortunately experts are not unduly alarmed:

https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202004/18/WS5e9a91d5a3105d50a3d1726d.htmlhttps://www.healthline.com/health-n...d-covid-19#Mutations-arent-making-it-deadlierhttps://www.usatoday.com/story/news...rack-coronavirus-strains-mutation/5080571002/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/18/health/coronavirus-america-future.html


----------



## iam.mike

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> The operational logistics of testing an entire population in the midst of a pandemic are virtually impossible to resolve.


Wife and I re-watched Contagion (2011 Film) last night. Some of the events portrayed in the movie are eerily similar to what's happening now.

Maybe we'll all get wristbands, like in the movie (read:humor).

Until last night, I thought "Social Distancing" was a relatively new term, as I don't recall hearing it before this outbreak.

Did a little advanced Googling, and found some early mentions of it on the internet around 2006, like in this article and this one too. Also found it mentioned here, referring back to studies done in the 1920s, though the term was used in a different context.

One thing I can say, is that I am 100% thankful to all the Ask Andy members (all of you), who take time to come here and share their thoughts, wisdom, & critical-thinking about this pandemic.


----------



## Howard

I can finally say when this pandemic is over I can get a haircut and resume my dentists.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Our wise Governor has volunteered me, @Mike Petrik and @Dhaller to serve as your guinea pigs for the national reopening "strategy".

My wife and I will continue to shelter in place and social distance till the reported new infection rate records 14 straight days of decline.

The current count...zero days.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

As far as I can discern there are only two basic strategies for "re-opening" our economy:

1. We continue with current lockdown protocols until we have a vaccine fully available. Our economic coma therefore lasts till sometime next year. To me the cost of this is unthinkable.

2. States calibrate re-openings and mitigation practices in ways that protect vulnerable populations and ensure that hospitals will not be overwhelmed. I assume that the Administration's 14 day downward trajectory guideline is directed to the latter purpose.

The phrase "downward trajectory of documented cases within a 14 day period" introduces at least two ambiguities, at least to me. First, does "trajectory" literally mean trajectory, or does it instead mean 14 straight days of reduced numbers? I have researched a bit and have not been able to figure it out, at least yet. Second, do "documented cases" refer to all current cases (i.e., total accumulated cases less recoveries) or instead the number of new cases reported each day. I think it means the latter, but I'm honestly not sure -- and there is potentially a very important difference between these two interpretations.

If one assumes that "documented cases" refers to new cases and trajectory means each day must decline, then Georgia apparently is on Day 5, not 14 (or zero), declining from 661 to 23. If instead one simply looks to 14 days ago then the number has declined from 739. Alternatively, if "documented cases" refers to all current cases, then GA may indeed be at Day Zero, but I don't know since I can't find data for that (note: reported total cases is generally a cumulative number that includes all cases since inception without reduction for recoveries -- and that number can of course only increase).

https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report
Personally, I think Governor Kemp should have waited longer, but I'm unwilling to be too critical simply because the competing considerations are so difficult, and certainly too knotty for me to reach any conclusion I could defend with confidence. I can only hope that his decision proves to be prudent, though I have little doubt that some people actually hope otherwise. Regrettably, politics can be even more pathological than this virus.

Finally, I am disappointed that the Governor has not permitting more local autonomy. As a conservative Republican he should impulsively favor this, though perhaps there are legal or other reasons that I do not understand.


----------



## Dhaller

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Our wise Governor has volunteered me, @Mike Petrik and @Dhaller to serve as your guinea pigs for the national reopening "strategy".
> 
> My wife and I will continue to shelter in place and social distance till the reported new infection rate records 14 straight days of decline.
> 
> The current count...zero days.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Hah! In fairness, I have been in much more dangerous situations than a pandemic (like a containment failure in a nuclear hot cell) and lived to tell the tale! That said - and it's easy for *me* to say, because I don't need to go out into the world to make a living or get provisions - I will continue sheltering in place for a while.

My gym has elected not to reopen, but many members (myself included) have elected to continue paying dues, which makes that possible. I am continuing to pay for other services which are suspended (my daughter's ballet school, things like that.)

Obviously, a national lockdown simply isn't possible until there's a vaccine (vaccines aren't even a *sure thing*, much less accommodating to human schedules); neither is simply kicking the door in and allowing for a Darwinian "herd immunity" process (herd immunity requires 70% infection in a population, which kicks up back up into the "millions will die" model we've managed to avoid.)

As I see it, we have one short-term problem and one long term project:

1. We need to get out of the binary thinking-box that out politics has shoved us into and remember that there are solutions beyond "lock down" and "ride the herd immunity train". We need less in the way of comprehensive testing (we only need a Bayesian sample), but we DO need comprehensive contact tracing: that would allow up to treat the pandemic as what it is, an *infection network*, and to apply graph models so that we could do a *targeted* lockdown of "threads" of infection. Identify communities and people and families which need to be locked down, and provide THEM with financial and medical relief (much cheaper than supporting *everyone*, and something we *could* do for a few years). That's the short term problem to solve: trace & lock.

2. Long term, we need to "harden" our economy against economic catastrophe. Ours is WAY too delicate. You can be CERTAIN that enemy actors have noticed how quickly we fold like a wet sack as soon as the economy pauses: we're less a balloon than a smoke cloud. We need to think in terms of "strategic economic reserves" - beyond simply debt instruments - so that at least the middle 80% of the population is essentially secure. Obviously, this is a major revision of the economy, and even economic theory, hence "long term project".

DH


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Dhaller said:


> 2. Long term, we need to "harden" our economy against economic catastrophe. Ours is WAY too delicate. You can be CERTAIN that enemy actors have noticed how quickly we fold like a wet sack as soon as the economy pauses: we're less a balloon than a smoke cloud. We need to think in terms of "strategic economic reserves" - beyond simply debt instruments - so that at least the middle 80% of the population is essentially secure. Obviously, this is a major revision of the economy, and even economic theory, hence "long term project".
> DH


But this crisis has demonstrated the inefficiency of our governmental bureaucracy.

Being that economics is the study of the production, distribution, and consumption of commodities just how does one "Harden" a production and distribution network that is stretched all over the world?

How likely is it that the legislative arm of our federal government can agree that we need to force corporations who wish to operate from the relative sanctuary of our shores to show a degree of loyalty towards the U.S. best interest's by repatriating a portion of their business to the U.S.? (The only way we can control the production and distribution aspects of our economy.)

This is indeed a long term project.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> As far as I can discern there are only two basic strategies for "re-opening" our economy:
> 
> 1. We continue with current lockdown protocols until we have a vaccine fully available. Our economic coma therefore lasts till sometime next year. To me the cost of this is unthinkable.
> 
> 2. States calibrate re-openings and mitigation practices in ways that protect vulnerable populations and ensure that hospitals will not be overwhelmed. I assume that the Administration's 14 day downward trajectory guideline is directed to the latter purpose.
> 
> The phrase "downward trajectory of documented cases within a 14 day period" introduces at least two ambiguities, at least to me. First, does "trajectory" literally mean trajectory, or does it instead mean 14 straight days of reduced numbers? I have researched a bit and have not been able to figure it out, at least yet. Second, do "documented cases" refer to all current cases (i.e., total accumulated cases less recoveries) or instead the number of new cases reported each day. I think it means the latter, but I'm honestly not sure -- and there is potentially a very important difference between these two interpretations.
> 
> If one assumes that "documented cases" refers to new cases and trajectory means each day must decline, then Georgia apparently is on Day 8, not 14 (or zero), declining from 830 to 23. If instead one simply looks to 14 days ago then the number has declined from 739. Alternatively, if "documented cases" refers to all current cases, then GA may indeed be at Day Zero, but I don't know since I can't find data for that (note: reported total cases is generally a cumulative number that includes all cases since inception without reduction for recoveries -- and that number can of course only increase).
> 
> https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report
> Personally, I think Governor Kemp should have waited longer, but I'm unwilling to be too critical simply because the competing considerations are so difficult, and certainly too knotty for me to reach any conclusion I could defend with confidence. I can only hope that his decision proves to be prudent, though I have little doubt that some people actually hope otherwise. Regrettably, politics can be even more pathological than this virus.
> 
> Finally, I am disappointed that the Governor has not permitting more local autonomy. As a conservative Republican he should impulsively favor this, though perhaps there are legal or other reasons that I do not understand.


The Robinson's family interpretation is a 14 day reduction in the number of new reported cases. Currently, the count is zero days.

I am busy at the moment contemplating the cost/benefit whether I should schedule a hair cut, manicure, massage, teeth cleaning, and pectoral implant surgery for next Monday.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> The Robinson's family interpretation is a 14 day reduction in the number of new reported cases. Currently, the count is zero days.
> 
> I am busy at the moment contemplating the cost/benefit whether I should schedule a hair cut, manicure, massage, teeth cleaning, and pectoral implant surgery for next Monday.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


BSR,

Do you mean a reduction over 14 days (which plainly has happened -- 658 to 23) or 14 consecutive days of reductions (which has not)?

If the latter, then a single day of zero new cases would mean that the Guideline would never be satisfied (unless that zero occurs on the 14th day in a series of 14 reductions, since the number of new cases cannot decline from zero).

Similarly, occasional days in the single (or perhaps even double) digits could easily continually extend the 14 day requirement for months simply via random distribution.

Think about it. Such an interpretation would mean that going from 1000 to 900 over 14 days can satisfy the Guideline as long as each day records a decline, but gradually declining from 1000 to 30 would not if on Day 12 the number of new cases happened to be 20.

In any case yesterday 23 new GA cases were reported (20100, less 20077), and the day before that it was 96 (20077 less 19981), then 157, 256, 537, 661, respectively. Accordingly, I don't understand why we are at Day Zero, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding something. Perhaps you are looking at GA deaths, which of course is a lagging indicator that is not related to this Guideline?

Finally, I do think that I misread my earlier calculations, and by my count GA is now on Day 5, not 8 (and certainly not 14) I've edited my earlier post accordingly.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> BSR,
> 
> Do you mean a reduction over 14 days (which plainly has happened -- 658 to 23) or 14 consecutive days of reductions? If the latter, then one day of zero new cases would mean that we will never achieve the Guideline (unless that happens to be the 14th day in a series of 14 reductions, since the number of new cases cannot decline from zero). And one day in the single (or perhaps even double digits) would likely require months simply via random distribution. Think about it. What you are saying is that going from 1000 to 900 over 14 days can satisfy the Guideline if each day showed a decline, but gradually declining from 1000 to 25 would not if on Day 12 the number of new cases happened to be 20.
> 
> In any case yesterday 23 new GA cases were reported (20100, less 20077), and the day before that it was 96 (20077 less 19981), then 157, 256, 537, 661, respectively. Accordingly, I don't understand why we are at Day Zero, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding something. In any case, I do think that I misread my earlier calculations, and by my count GA is now on Day 5, not 8. I've edited my earlier post accordingly.
> 
> Are you perhaps looking at GA deaths, which of course is a lagging indicator that is not related to this Guideline?


Based on how the public health model is being reported to me (I am a messenger boy)....It is 14 consecutive days of decline. Technically, one day of uptick starts the clock over at zero.

Reasonable scientists can look at the numbers and know that statistically the difference between, say 11 one day and 12 the next, or 980 followed by 982, would not need qualify as a two week reset if there were a obvious significant downward trend prior. 980 followed by 1025 might be considered differently by the wizards of Clifton Road.

In reality, the number of reported Covid cases will ebb and flow for some time. Hitting zero any time soon is optimal, but highly unlikely. We should not expect to see zero for a while.

Of course, a close reading of Hoyles rules suggests that if we hit zero, the optimal number, during the 14 day count, the counting process is declared over and a winner is selected by mutual consensus of players.

As for the 1000 to 900 proposition over 14 days, that would be an anomaly that would point to other fundamental issues surrounding the pathology of the pandemic and would, according to Hoyle, necessitate a the calling of a "miss deal".

The 14 day downward trend is excellent for a regional or national model. For a single state, it has its limitations and requires some flexibility on the part of the designated score keeper.

Back to the bridge table for me! 

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Tiger

Dhaller said:


> 2. Long term, we need to "harden" our economy against economic catastrophe. Ours is WAY too delicate. You can be CERTAIN that enemy actors have noticed how quickly we fold like a wet sack as soon as the economy pauses: we're less a balloon than a smoke cloud. We need to think in terms of "strategic economic reserves" - beyond simply debt instruments - so that at least the middle 80% of the population is essentially secure. Obviously, this is a major revision of the economy, and even economic theory, hence "long term project".
> 
> DH


What do you have in mind?


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Our wise Governor has volunteered me, @Mike Petrik and @Dhaller to serve as your guinea pigs for the national reopening "strategy".
> 
> My wife and I will continue to shelter in place and social distance till the reported new infection rate records 14 straight days of decline.
> 
> The current count...zero days.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


What, you're not going to rush out to the gym, get a haircut and then hit the beach beach before retiring to the tattoo parlor!?


----------



## Flanderian

Any insight into what's going on with the IHME projection page?

I've been regularly tracking the projects via the IHME website that Mike so helpfully provided -

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
If you clicked on the link, it offers the projections for the entire USA. But in the center top is a button labeled _*United State of America*_. Clicking this button used to provide a drop down menu of each individual state, as well as other countries around the world. But as of yesterday. clicking it does nothing.

I've tried going to the page in which I'm interested, New Jersey, through the main site, and that doesn't work. And I've tried via the two browsers, Google Chrome, and Microsoft Edge. Nothing works. Anyone know what happened, and how we can look at individual state data?


----------



## iam.mike

@Flanderian - the page works for me.

Can you access it directly using this link:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/new-jersey
LMK


----------



## Flanderian

mikel said:


> @Flanderian - the page works for me.
> 
> Can you access it directly using this link:
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/new-jersey
> LMK


Thanks Mikel!

Yes I can, and now I've bookmarked it.

Also sent an e-mail to IHME technical after I made my initial post here on this in case my experience isn't unique, and it's an issue they wish to address .


----------



## iam.mike

Texas is starting Retail-to-Go tomorrow (4/24/20), allowing many physical retail stores to re-open.

Customers will be able to go to stores to pick up things they're buying - but they can't go inside.

The Texas Department of Health and Human Services laid out rules to make sure it's done safely, including:

Payments should be made over the phone to avoid contact
Items should be delivered to the customers' backseat or trunk
Workers must wash and sanitize their hands after each interaction with a customer and disinfect items that any customers touch
Workers will need to wear masks, stay 6 feet apart from co-workers, and also be subject to a temperature check before their shift starts
More info:
https://www.kvue.com/article/money/...ined/269-206babda-123d-43f7-9e52-0e45031d5f57


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> Thanks Mikel!
> 
> Yes I can, and now I've bookmarked it.
> 
> Also sent an e-mail to IHME technical after I made my initial post here on this in case my experience isn't unique, and it's an issue they wish to address .


I know it is weird but try clicking on "United States of America" rather than the search icon. That seems to do the trick for me. FWIW last week the search icon did indeed act like a drop down arrow. I can't even say for sure it wasn't a drop down arrow.


----------



## Oldsarge

Governor Brown has declared that at least dentists and physical therapists can reopen effective May 1st. One can only hope that restaurants will soon follow!


----------



## eagle2250

I find myself re-reading Tom Browkaw's "The Greatest Generation." The temper of the human metal, the personal character and the moral fiber of those magnificent bastards is what we need to pull us out of this day's crisis! I sense that we Boomers, members of the Gen X'ers and the Millenials are going to need all the help we can get from those who proceeded us to hold it together and/or pull things back together.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

eagle2250 said:


> I find myself re-reading Tom Browkaw's "The Greatest Generation." The temper of the human metal, the personal character and the moral fiber of those magnificent bastards is what we need to pull us out of this day's crisis! I sense that we Boomers, members of the Gen X'ers and the Millenials are going to need all the help we can get from those who proceeded us to hold it together and/or pull things back together.


I feel that what we lack is a healthy perspective.

During the lives of my great grandparents- grandparents, they had to cope with the end of the Civil War, Reconstruction, economic collapses of the late 19th century, WWI, The Spanish Flu, the Great Depression, WWII, Korea, and Viet Nam.

I can understand why they had a laser like focus on hard work, honesty, community, family, patriotism, and a deep respect for the fabric of society, as prioritizing these communal attitudes made surviving much more likely.

A "go it alone" attitude was mostly unsustainable.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Howard

I'm still waiting for my barbershop to open after this pandemic is over.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

eagle2250 said:


> I find myself re-reading Tom Browkaw's "The Greatest Generation." The temper of the human metal, the personal character and the moral fiber of those magnificent bastards is what we need to pull us out of this day's crisis! I sense that we Boomers, members of the Gen X'ers and the Millenials are going to need all the help we can get from those who proceeded us to hold it together and/or pull things back together.


As your XO presenting a decision briefing to you I would have to conclude that the odds for mission success are low.

Mitigation efforts would stress the importance of NCO's exposure to those old enough to be their grandparents.


----------



## Flanderian

Mike Petrik said:


> I know it is weird but try clicking on "United States of America" rather than the search icon. That seems to do the trick for me. FWIW last week the search icon did indeed act like a drop down arrow. I can't even say for sure it wasn't a drop down arrow.


Thank you, Mike!

Yes, it's working again now. 👍


----------



## Flanderian

For any who like me are following the statistical information, I realized something yesterday when it was pointed out by our Governor, Phil Murphy (Who atypically for any NJ pol seems to be doing a h#ll of a job!) that new cases being reported daily actually reflect a picture from at least a week ago, as it takes at least that long for tests to come back, and the data to be included in the report. So we're not looking at was *is* happening, but rather what *did*.

Also, by viewing what is getting reported for NJ, it appears to suffer from reporting inconsistencies and delays. For example, viewing mortality data, it appears to have spikes roughly corresponding with one week intervals, suggestive to me that the collection and compiling of this data is possibly responding to cyclical staffing cycles.

But I doubt these phenomena are confined solely to NJ, as quick perusals of other states' data suggests inconsistencies there also.


----------



## Oldsarge

Flanderian said:


> For any who like me are following the statistical information, I realized something yesterday when it was pointed out by our Governor, Phil Murphy (Who atypically for any NJ pol seems to be doing a h#ll of a job!) that new cases being reported daily actually reflect a picture from at least a week ago, as it takes at least that long for tests to come back, and the data to be included in the report. So we're not looking at was *is* happening, but rather what *did*.
> 
> Also, by viewing what is getting reported for NJ, it appears to suffer from reporting inconsistencies and delays. For example, viewing mortality data, it appears to have spikes roughly corresponding with one week periods, suggestive to me that the collection and compiling of this data is possibly responding to cyclical staffing cycles.
> 
> But I doubt these phenomena are confined solely to NJ, as quick perusals of other states' data suggests inconsistencies there also.


Hardly surprising since the party in power considers national health less an investment in national well-being and more a mineable way to increase the wealth of the stockholders. If we had a functioning Public Health Service with authority to prescribe and demand reliable, uniform reporting . . .


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> Hardly surprising since the party in power considers national health less an investment in national well-being and more a mineable way to increase the wealth of the stockholders. If we had a functioning Public Health Service with authority to prescribe and demand reliable, uniform reporting . . .


The party "in power" (I assume you are naively referring to thee executive branch) in DC notwithstanding, there is nothing to prevent any state from having whatever kind of public health department and related services its own voters wish to have. Public health is primarily a state responsibility under our constitutional system.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> Hardly surprising since the party in power considers national health less an investment in national well-being and more a mineable way to increase the wealth of the stockholders. If we had a functioning Public Health Service with authority to prescribe and demand reliable, uniform reporting . . .


Irrespective of any sympathies concerning your statement, reliable, uniform reporting on this scale is a Herculean task, and given the nature of most state governments, it is likely beyond their capabilities, both for good and bad reasons.


----------



## Tiger

Flanderian said:


> Irrespective of any sympathies concerning your statement, reliable, uniform reporting on this scale is a Herculean task, and given the nature of most state governments, it is likely beyond their capabilities, both for good and bad reasons.


...and with the distribution of "stimulus" taxpayer/inflated dollars to exceedingly profitable corporations, universities with multi-billion dollar endowments, and to many people who are still working and not in any need whatsoever (and with fewer options with which to even spend that money), I'm pretty safe in assuming that the federal government is wholly incapable of just about anything, herculean or not!

By the way, Governor Murphy's dodge re: Constitutional understanding ("It's above my pay grade") was an embarrassment. My students know more about the U.S. Constitution than this guy!

Still love ya' Flanderian!


----------



## Flanderian

Tiger said:


> ...and with the distribution of "stimulus" taxpayer/inflated dollars to exceedingly profitable corporations, universities with multi-billion dollar endowments, and to many people who are still working and not in any need whatsoever (and with fewer options with which to even spend that money), I'm pretty safe in assuming that the federal government is wholly incapable of just about anything, herculean or not!
> 
> By the way, Governor Murphy's dodge re: Constitutional understanding ("It's above my pay grade") was an embarrassment. My students know more about the U.S. Constitution than this guy!
> 
> Still love ya' Flanderian!


I did not intend to paint our beloved governor as St. Philip. but rather only as a more effective manager than is typical in government for my state. And while I am hopefully under no delusions concerning his constitutional expertise, or lack thereof, I have little doubt that his professed ignorance in this instance was as much tactical as actual.


----------



## Tiger

Flanderian said:


> I did not intend to paint our beloved governor as St. Philip. but rather only as a more effective manager than is typical in government for my state. And while I am hopefully under no delusions concerning his constitutional expertise, or lack thereof, I have little doubt that his professed ignorance in this instance was as much tactical as actual.


I understand. Yet, whether he's really obtuse or strategically vapid, it's still an indictment of the man. I like my politicians to be forthcoming in their deceit and megalomania!


----------



## momsdoc

Just now lost my third patient this week. 7.in a month, that’s more than in any year.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oldsarge said:


> Hardly surprising since the party in power considers national health less an investment in national well-being and more a mineable way to increase the wealth of the stockholders. If we had a functioning Public Health Service with authority to prescribe and demand reliable, uniform reporting . . .


I see that this has been touched on by another member but it is worth reinforcing; Creating and maintaining a state public health system is the *exclusive purview of that state*. I have been involved in public health policy for awhile and there is an explanation why, given our state's and federal model, the covid19 crisis has found a notable weak spot. But it can quickly turn into a dissertation beyond the scope of this thread.
*"The Party in Power."*
Just a couple of notes about my state: (And yes, it is unavoidable that politics enter into this because it is state legislature and a state's executive branch *exclusively* who sets policy, in short, *not* the federal government.)
1.) Oregon has the lowest number of hospital beds per citizen than *any* state in the USA.
2.) In Oregon the Democratic party has a super-majority in the legislature. (meaning they own the political process in the state.)
3.) For lack of testing and out of desperation Oregon contracted with Quest Diagnostics to conduct 20K covid19 tests. Only to find out that our* state* public health system did not even have the cotton on a stick "Swabs" to collect the samples so that they could be forwarded to Quest. So as of now Quest has processed *zero* tests for Oregon.
4.) Look at the color coded map of the USA that illustrates the numbers of covid19 positive patients. You see California and Washington in bright red and Oregon in pink. This is much less about Oregon having done a good job and more about *Oregon being in the bottom three states in the USA in testing.*

Creating and maintaining a state public health system is not, politically speaking, sexy. But it is definitely a topic that is bipartisan and if Oregon's supermajority party made it a priority it could have been done,....And still could be done!


----------



## Oldsarge

And it needs to be done!


----------



## Flanderian

momsdoc said:


> Just now lost my third patient this week. 7.in a month, that's more than in any year.


I am more sorry that I can adequately express.

But your efforts will not be forgotten.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

momsdoc said:


> Just now lost my third patient this week. 7.in a month, that's more than in any year.


Just heart breaking.

Given your personal connection to each patient I cannot imagine how you cope.

My most sincere respect and admiration goes out to you.


----------



## ran23

I'm in Southern Oregon, maybe 37 cases. Today in Home Depot, maybe half the employees were in masks, and few of the customers. I had to wait in line, clean my own cart. One family of 4, girl maybe 10-12 was the only mask). It is getting pretty lax down my way.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ So sorry to hear about this. I understand that we simply cannot keep the economy shut down for much longer. 

But for what we know about how contagious covid19 is likely to be I cannot understand how there isn't a larger push to make medical grade masks more readily available. 

It feels surreal that a nation with our relative wealth cannot even come up with enough masks for our citizens to protect themselves.

Stay as safe as you are able.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ So sorry to hear about this. I understand that we simply cannot keep the economy shut down for much longer.
> 
> But for what we know about how contagious covid19 is likely to be it feels surreal that a nation with our relative wealth cannot even come up with enough masks for our citizens to protect themselves.
> 
> Stay as safe as you are able.


My wife and I ordered masks from Walmart.com. They came direct to the house no problem.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> My wife and I ordered masks from Walmart.com. They came direct to the house no problem.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Walmart serves as an E-commerce gateway for a lot of vendors now, just like Amazon. A quick search of their site showed masks for "in store pickup" only sold directly by Walmart. Did Walmart sell them to you directly, or just handle the transaction for a different seller? I've had to cancel and get a replacement credit card once already by being burned by ordering such supplies from an unknown vendor being advertised elsewhere.


----------



## iam.mike

@Flanderian - I see some 3-ply surgical face masks on walmart.com, in packs of 50 for $65-$70 available for purchase. They are from 3rd party sellers though, so you're right in-that you don't know what you're getting -- or whether or not you'll get them.

My best friend is selling these same 3-ply masks (fully tested) for around the same price. He has them available and ready for immediate shipping (from San Jose, CA).

If you need more info, please PM me.


----------



## Flanderian

mikel said:


> @Flanderian - I see some 3-ply surgical face masks on walmart.com, in packs of 50 for $65-$70 available for purchase. They are from 3rd party sellers though, so you're right in-that you don't know what you're getting -- or whether or not you'll get them.
> 
> My best friend is selling these same 3-ply masks (fully tested) for around the same price. He has them available and ready for immediate shipping (from San Jose, CA).
> 
> If you need more info, please PM me.


Thanks, Mikel!


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Flanderian said:


> Walmart serves as an E-commerce gateway for a lot of vendors now, just like Amazon. A quick search of their site showed masks for "in store pickup" only sold directly by Walmart. Did Walmart sell them to you directly, or just handle the transaction for a different seller? I've had to cancel and get a replacement credit card once already by being burned by ordering such supplies from an unknown vendor being advertised elsewhere.


No clue. They just showed at the door after SWMBO ordered them. She wasn't particular as to the point of origin. They arrived and were first quality. I can give my recommendation without equivocation.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

Going out as seldom as I do, I just ordered some washable ones from Etsy. They'll be here before I need to go shopping again. But . . . (just in case) I ordered a camouflage one to use should I manage to go on my Hawaii deer hunt!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Those of you who are willing to invest an hour to watch the following video from one of our nation's most acclaimed epidemiological scholars will receive a truly enriched understanding of what we don't know and what we are increasingly learning:





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidishttps://profiles.stanford.edu/john-ioannidis


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> No clue. They just showed at the door after SWMBO ordered them. She wasn't particular as to the point of origin. They arrived and were first quality. I can give my recommendation without equivocation.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Thanks! 👍

Good to know.


----------



## Flanderian

I have no agenda other than to improve the chances for survival from Covid-19 for myself and loved ones, and to not add to the risk of other fellow citizens. If this could be accomplished via even more drastic measures, I would wish to consider them. If what is currently believed most affectatious proves unnecessary or counter productive, I wish it changed or abandoned as soon as possible. I have no ideological ax to grind.

At present there is far less known about SARS-Cov-2 and Covid-19 than *is* known. Do recovered sufferers remain infectious? Does infection impart future immunity? If so, for how long? Will a vaccine be possible, and if so, when? What is the actual mortality rate among those infected? To whom is it most lethal? The elderly? Certainly! But it's also killing evidently healthy younger people. Is the infection rate higher than reported, thereby exaggerating the mortality percentage? Almost certainly. Is that uniformly true to the same degree everywhere and among all populations? Almost certainly not. The admittedly spotty data generated to date strongly suggests that the spread of the disease varies significantly in different locations, and among different populations. That all, or even most, of the mechanisms explaining this have not even been identified, much less quantified, is our current reality.

I do not believe, in simplistic terms, that there is one political faction indifferent to the survival and welfare of their neighbors, and another saintly, selfless and wise.

But what I do know is that as the best available current information stands, in no more than 3 months, Covid-19 has already infected more than *400,000* residents of New York and New Jersey and killed more than *28,000*. So far.

History has a way of becoming grist for scholars with some doctoral candidates earning distinction by "proving" one hypothesis while their colleagues "prove" the opposite.  So I have no reason to believe that the history of this contagion will be any different, just as now different authorities have different opinions. But employing the best available information, currently *976,000* Americans have tested positive, and among those cases that have resolved, roughly *119,000* have recovered, and roughly *55,000* have died, resulting in a raw *32%* mortality rate.

Who wants to roll the dice?


----------



## Oldsarge

So unless we gear up to test *100%* of the population, we will never know whether to be less or even more afraid. Damned if we do and more damned if we don't.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> So unless we gear up to test *100%* of the population, we will never know whether to be less or even more afraid. Damned if we do and more damned if we don't.


Whether it's 100% or some percentage a little short of that, yes. And while the nature of the spread of this particular contagion might suggest slightly different criteria for different areas, extensive testing is one *essential* criterion for safely relaxing social distancing, as indicated in the graph below for your state of residence -

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/oregon -


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^
"The testing fiasco was the original sin of America's pandemic failure, the single flaw that undermined every other countermeasure. "

An informative article from The Atlantic that connects the dots to our initial testing failure.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/how-will-coronavirus-end/608719/
Because of our population we are likely to miss the second boat on massive antibody testing. As we've discussed we cannot leave our economy shut down much longer. But running tests on even half of the U.S. population is a tall order indeed.

"Most respiratory viruses only give you a period of relative protection. I'm talking about a year or two. That's what we know about the seasonal coronaviruses," says Falsey.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...y-after-recovering-from-a-case-of-coronavirus"Some people sickened by SARS, the dangerous coronavirus that emerged in China in 2002, did develop a measurable immune response that lasted a long time."

Being on immunosuppressants I am at increased risk for having a poor outcome should I become infected with covid19. Yet not one professional I have spoken to including two rheumatologists and a immunologist can offer me anything other than what they admit is pure speculation on my increased risk.


----------



## Mike Petrik

So many folks are better at writing than reading and bloviating than learning. Sigh.


----------



## iam.mike

Flanderian said:


> resulting in a raw *32%* mortality rate


I'm a little confused about this number. Generally, I've seen mortality rate explained as the number of deaths divided by the number of confirmed cases.

Here's one article that explains it how I understand it:
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/24/844562935/why-the-true-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-is-hard-to-estimate
Assuming that is true, wouldn't the mortality rate be 5.5% (55,346 divided by 983,000)?

I don't quite follow the "raw" mortality rate number. How are you calculating raw mortality, and why differently than what is generally being reported?

Genuinely curious, just so I understand your pov.

Also, and forgive me is this is a naive question, but isn't it possible that the mortality rate drops if exponentially more people are tested, many test positive, feel fine with no signs of symptoms, but the death rates don't rise in unison?

I'm not suggesting we take this any less seriously, but honestly curious.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Mike Petrik said:


> So many folks are better at writing than reading and bloviating than learning. Sigh.


If you're not an Attorney Mike perhaps you ought to be,...


----------



## Dhaller

Mike Petrik said:


> Those of you who are willing to invest an hour to watch the following video from one of our nation's most acclaimed epidemiological scholars will receive a truly enriched understanding of what we don't know and what we are increasingly learning:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidishttps://profiles.stanford.edu/john-ioannidis


Interview with him in this weekend's WSJ as well: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-be...shareToken=stdfaf4762f29f45809cb6918d7507264f

DH


----------



## Mike Petrik

127.72 MHz said:


> If you're not an Attorney Mike perhaps you ought to be,...


Happily retired.


----------



## Flanderian

mikel said:


> I'm a little confused about this number. Generally, I've seen mortality rate explained as the number of deaths divided by the number of confirmed cases.
> 
> Here's one article that explains it how I understand it:
> https://www.npr.org/2020/04/24/844562935/why-the-true-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-is-hard-to-estimate
> Assuming that is true, wouldn't the mortality rate be 5.5% (55,346 divided by 983,000)?
> 
> I don't quite follow the "raw" mortality rate number. How are you calculating raw mortality, and why differently than what is generally being reported?
> 
> Genuinely curious, just so I understand your pov.


I extracted the figure of 32% as it pertains to the U.S. from a table with a running total of worldwide Covid-19 *reported* statistics. -

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
I've watched the data they've listed for several weeks and it has tracked closely with the data from other notable published sources.

What I wrote is, "But employing the best available information, currently *976,000* Americans have tested positive, and among those cases that have *resolved*, roughly *119,000* have recovered, and roughly *55,000* have died, resulting in a raw *32%* mortality rate."

That is, the mortality rate applies only to the number of cases that have been reported as having a *definite outcome*, I.e., that have resolved , or roughly 174,000, of whom 55,000 died, or 32%.

I further qualified that data as the best available data because it is what is currently being reported by governments, and as imperfect as it no doubt is, is as close to a known as we're going to get right now. Much of what I've seen of the rest is most often agenda driven conjecture.

As you query, of course the mortality rate will drop if the total number of cases is greater than what is currently reported without a proportionate increase in fatalities.

My *conjecture* is that the total number of infections probably *is* higher than what is reported. And also significantly, I *conjecture* that the mortality rate will reduce as a product of greater experience treating the disease.

But these opinions are only what I think may be true. I don't *know* either of those things. But I do know that roughly 55,000 American have died from this disease in only 3 months.

Currently the IHME predicts that only 67,641 fatalities or roughly another 12,500 will occur in the U.S. between now and August 4th. I wish that it was none, but I hope it is limited to that number or less. But as of this moment, I can not yet *know* this.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> I extracted the figure of 32% as it pertains to the U.S. from a table with a running total of worldwide Covid-19 *reported* statistics. -
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
> I've watched the data they've listed for several weeks and it has tracked closely with the data from other notable published sources. What I wrote is, "But employing the best available information, currently *976,000* Americans have tested positive, and among those cases that have *resolved*, roughly *119,000* have recovered, and roughly *55,000* have died, resulting in a raw *32%* mortality rate."
> 
> That is, the mortality rate applies only to the number of cases that have been reported as having a *definite outcome*, I.e., that have resolved , or roughly 174,000, of whom 55,000 died, or 32%. I further qualified that data as the best available data because it is what is currently being reported by governments, and as imperfect as it no doubt is, is as close to a known as we're going to get right now. Much of what I've seen of the rest is most often agenda driven conjecture.
> 
> As you query, of course the mortality rate will drop if the total number of cases is greater than what is currently reported without a proportionate increase in fatalities. My *conjecture* is that the total number of infections probably *is* higher than what is reported. And also significantly, I *conjecture* that the mortality rate will reduce as a product of greater experience treating the disease. But these opinions are only what I think may be true. I don't *know* either of those things. But I do know that roughly 55,000 American have died from this disease in only 3 months.
> 
> Currently the IHME predicts that only 67,641 fatalities or roughly another 12,500 will occur in the U.S. between now and August 4th. I wish that it was none, but I hope it is limited to that number or less. But as of this moment, I can not yet *know* this.
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


Yes, your CFR fraction includes real numbers, just not numbers that actually compute anything meaningful. Leaving aside reports that CFR numerators might be overstated, the vast majority of infections are not included in the denominator, with recent studies suggesting that most infections present asymptomatically (not just pre-symptomatically).

Cases are not considered "resolved" unless tested, yet most cases are not tested. Everyone says follow the science, yet not a single actual scientist is reporting the CFR the way you compute it. Not one.

Also, there is a huge difference between CFRs and IFRs, the latter actually representing true fatality risk. This is precisely because the vast majority of infections are too slight to actually mature into supervised "cases."

The best evidence is that the actual COVID-19 IFR is between 0.1% (similar to the flu) and 0.3% (thrice that of the flu). While the dramatic difference between those rates confirms how much we still have to learn (especially about unreported and asymptomatic infections) , we do at least know that the virus's IFR is dramatically lower than our initial assumptions (1.5% to 2.5%), which is why the first Imperial model proved so spectacularly incorrect.

This means that if one assumes a very high 50% infection rate, then the resulting 0.05% - 0.15% mortality rate would generate a total of between 165,000 and 495,000,000 deaths. This is disturbingly high of course, but an order of magnitude less than the 2.2 million our mitigation strategies were originally intended to slow.

Our bend the curve strategy was intended to avoid "excess" fatalities due to hospital overloading. Once hospitals are in good shape re beds and equipment the assumption was that we would start relaxing mitigation efforts in ways calibrated to avoid future overloading.

Somehow this "slow the spread to allow hospitals to work" strategy has mutated into a "stop the spread until we have a vaccine that we might never have" strategy. This new approach, adopted sub silentio, might save some additional lives (especially if casualties due to an ongoing economic lockdown are ignored), but not nearly as many as we originally feared when we designed the bend the curve/slow the spread strategy.

This is because while COVID-19 is indeed dangerous, it is not nearly as dangerous as we originally thought, especially for people under 65 without co-morbidities (like most respiratory infections).

Let there be no misunderstanding. We *know* that COVID-19 is more dangerous than the flu because (i) it is more infectious due to a lack of a vaccine and possibly easier transmissibility and (ii) its IFR might be as high as thrice that of the flu, though we aren't sure.

Yet, we also *know* it is not the plague we originally feared, and it is only logical that our strategies be adjusted so that they are in alignment with actual new scientific data, not disproven old modeling assumptions.

Caution is appropriate, especially since we are still learning about this virus. But we do know a lot more than we did six weeks ago, and what we have learned tells us that initial incorrect modeling has combined with irresponsible media hysteria to create a disordered fear, and disordered emotions can lead to tragically poor decisions.

I encourage you to watch the video I linked yesterday to get a more healthy perspective.


----------



## iam.mike

Thanks for clarifying @Flanderian


----------



## iam.mike

Mike Petrik said:


> I encourage you to watch the video I linked yesterday to get a more healthy perspective.


Watched it yesterday. Very informational. Thanks for sharing it.


----------



## drlivingston




----------



## Oldsarge

Go, UK, go!


----------



## iam.mike

Oldsarge said:


> Go, UK, go!


This may be a noob question, but if they (Jenner Institute, in Oxford) are doing a clinical trial of 1100 people now (and up to 5k soon), do they actually & directly expose those people to the virus in some controlled setting?


----------



## Oldsarge

That question is answered in the article. It's unethical to deliberately expose people to a potentially lethal virus so they inoculate random people in a setting where the virus exists and give a placebo to others. Should the vaccine prove effective, all those given the placebo are inoculated with the real thing immediately.


----------



## iam.mike

Oldsarge said:


> in a setting where the virus exists


Honest question: what kind of setting would that be for 1.1k or 5k people? A town that has some cases of the virus? If so, how do they know whether or not people will come into contact with the virus?

I've never followed or experienced something like this before, so I'm genuinely curious as to how they would do a clinical trial with so many people and ensure those people have a chance of coming in contact with the virus.


----------



## Oldsarge

mikel said:


> Honest question: what kind of setting would that be for 1.1k or 5k people? A town that has some cases of the virus? If so, how do they know whether or not people will come into contact with the virus?
> 
> I've never followed or experienced something like this before, so I'm genuinely curious as to how they would do a clinical trial with so many people and ensure those people have a chance of coming in contact with the virus.


Did you read the article? It's all explained in it.


----------



## iam.mike

Oldsarge said:


> Did you read the article? It's all explained in it.


Well, I just re-read it, and the only take away I have from it, is that they just gave 1,100 random people either a placebo or the vaccine, and send them on their merry way to do whatever they were doing before 

Then they bring those 1,100 people back (I assume) at different intervals, and test to see if they have been infected. For those infected, they see whether or not they were given the placebo or the proposed vaccine.

I guess my question is, are all those 1,100 people on lock-down, social distancing, etc? Are they asked to go out into their town without any protection trying to get exposed to as many people as possible?

Are they all in the same town? What's the rate of infection/cases in the town(s) where the test is being performed?

Whether or not you have the chance of getting infected largely depends on how much you expose yourself to society & high-risk objects that transmit the virus (and the rate of infections in the area).

Maybe there is documentation somewhere to describe how the clinical trial is being performed.

I couldn't quite visualize how they'd do a clinical trial with 1,110 people let alone 5k people, without knowing all the people's exposure probabilities.


----------



## Oldsarge

The idea is that the vaccine has to work/not work in real world situations and the real world isn't isolated or strictly controlled. That's how it's done with vaccines. You can only do strictly controlled experimentation on lab animals. Human beings live in a random environment. It's always worked before.


----------



## challer

We've never had an approved Corona Virus vaccine in this country and we've tried. And the testing issue is so complex, ask a world class biostatistician like I work with if you don't believe, we are not going to test our way out of this. In any case, go look at video of a nasal swap and surmise how many people aren't going to got through that.


----------



## Oldsarge

IMO, if the EU approves a vaccine, whether the boffins at the CDC like it or not, we _will_ approve and use it. Public demand will be so high that no elected official will dare to say no. It may turn out to be a mistake but I think it will happen.


----------



## iam.mike

Oldsarge said:


> Public demand will be so high that no elected official will dare to say no


I think you're right.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

If you line up all the countries that have done (Covid-19) testing on a per-capita basis, the USA is at the bottom of the list.

Of course this is for a +/- test. And I believe it is fair to say that we will place similarly for the antibody test that is being rolled out.

I understand that there are questions concerning whether people should be tested or not.
But to better understand covid19 scientifically I do believe that there is important data to be gained by antibody testing large groups from within a society. (To better understand the disease.)

As of March 12, 2020 The U.S. had conducted only 23 Covid-19 tests per 1 million people. That was the fewest among eight comparison nations: Japan, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Israel, Taiwan, Italy, South Korea and the Guangdong Province of China. (If the Chinese statistics are to be believed.)

Given the logistical considerations I can see why we have to open the economy and I can see why we are unable to roll out enough tests to be meaningful.

A very tough situation, especially knowing that it has turned into a political football. In my view, regardless of who is in the executive branch, the logistical issues for antibody testing combined with the urgency to open the economy, are too steep to overcome.


----------



## Flanderian

Two pieces of recent information re-Covid-19 -

New Zealand has announced they have largely eliminated community spread of Covid-19 throughout the country via early, near complete lock down and closing the borders. Unfortunately, identical methods are not necessarily viable in other countries as New Zealand's circumstances are exceptional.

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...aland-says-it-has-won-battle-against-covid-19

Gilead Pharmaceuticals has announced a successful double blind study of the antiviral medication Remdesivir to produce meaningful improvement in outcome for Covid-19 patients to the extent that the medication will now be given to the placebo group. Not a silver-bullet, but hopefully a significant building block.

https://www.gilead.com/news-and-pre...l-remdesivir-in-patients-with-severe-covid-19
Meanwhile, clinical tests continue on Fuji Film's antiviral medication Favipravir which was claimed useful by Chinese medicine in of the treatment of Covid-19 there.

https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/drug-development/Fujifilm-tests-favipiravir-COVID-19/98/i15


----------



## iam.mike

127.72 MHz said:


> If you line up all the countries that have done (Covid-19) testing on a per-capita basis, the USA is at the bottom of the list.


Maybe I'm looking at data slightly different from you.

Out of curiosity I took data from the following sources (I don't know if their data is correct):
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/full-list-total-tests-for-covid-19https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/
Lined them up, and looked at % of population tested (top 20 test counts):


EntityCodeDateTotal testsTotal Population%IndiaIND27-Apr-20​ 665,8191,380,004,385​0.05%​VietnamVNM27-Apr-20​ 213,74397,338,579​0.22%​South AfricaZAF27-Apr-20​ 178,47059,308,690​0.30%​IranIRN27-Apr-20​ 432,32983,992,949​0.51%​ChileCHL27-Apr-20​ 161,23519,116,201​0.84%​TurkeyTUR27-Apr-20​ 918,88584,339,067​1.09%​KazakhstanKAZ27-Apr-20​ 205,56018,776,707​1.09%​South KoreaKOR27-Apr-20​ 601,66051,269,185​1.17%​United StatesUSA27-Apr-20​ 5,593,495331,002,651​1.69%​CanadaCAN27-Apr-20​ 717,45137,742,154​1.90%​AustraliaAUS27-Apr-20​ 516,70525,499,884​2.03%​Italy, people tested27-Apr-20​ 1,237,31760,461,826​2.05%​RussiaRUS27-Apr-20​ 3,019,434145,934,462​2.07%​Czech RepublicCZE27-Apr-20​ 226,25510,708,981​2.11%​PortugalPRT27-Apr-20​ 232,48010,196,709​2.28%​AustriaAUT27-Apr-20​ 232,5379,006,398​2.58%​SwitzerlandCHE27-Apr-20​ 252,9008,654,622​2.92%​ItalyITA27-Apr-20​ 1,789,66260,461,826​2.96%​NorwayNOR27-Apr-20​ 164,3165,421,241​3.03%​

Norway looks like the most %, India the least. USA is in the middle.

Though, 5.6M tests is still 2.5M more tests than the next highest country (Russia).

Also, the rate of testing in the U.S. seems to be accelerating faster than any other country.










I dunno, but it seems to me like we shouldn't only look at testing based on % of population. We should take into consideration total tests, and also testing acceleration % increase.

That said, I am merely a noob, with no statistical analysis background -- so I may be looking a this data entirely wrong


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Here's the original article. Although I admit I have not fact checked it,...

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...d-us-april-rank-last-capita-covid-19-testing/And you have spurred me to fact check it. Seems to indicate that it was true when the article was written.
Explanation: His statement was based on an early-March estimate by Vox that was outdated when Scott spoke. U.S. testing had expanded 130-fold by April 2, and has doubled again in the last two weeks.

So now, perhaps we are not dead last,....
(And it's not as though I'm a statistical wizard either.)


----------



## Flanderian

IHME has adjusted upward their projection for U.S. fatalities up to August 4th. If memory serves, at the beginning of this month the total estimate was around 62,000. It is now 72,860. This increase of roughly 10,000 represents an increase of over 15%.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Mike Petrik

Yes, the model's projection is back up, after being down, and up before that, and down before that, and way up before that. I look at this model daily and find it useful. I think I might have been the person who first linked to it on AA. But it has not been especially good at doing what models are supposed to do -- predict.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/17...-methods-shouldnt-guide-policies-critics-say/
Please remember, as bad as our death toll will be it will almost certainly be (i) less than the model's original 100,000 to 220,000 projection (which assumed 50 state compliance with each and every recommended mitigation strategy, and which of course never happened) and (ii) within the same order of magnitude as what we experienced for the flu in its 2017-18 season.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/heal...luntly-about-record-80-000-flu-deaths-n914246
Of course, but for mitigation our death toll would have been much higher -- the evidence suggesting somewhere between 165,000 and 495,000 (depending on the true infection rate and IFR). That said, it never was going to be the 2 or 3 million that the early models predicted and upon which our mitigation strategies were originally predicated. No one's fault -- just what happens when you plug in an IFR that is an order of magnitude too high.

The good news is that it is increasingly clear that for the vast majority of infected people the risk of death is no greater than that for the flu, perhaps even less. The bad news is that for vulnerable population cohorts (elderly, diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity -- and especially those within more than one of those cohorts) it is much greater than the flu. Obviously our public policy mitigation strategies, as well as our own personal behavioral decisions, should take into account this information in making appropriate risk assessments.


----------



## iam.mike

127.72 MHz said:


> Seems to indicate that it was true when the article was written.


Actually, there is something very unusual about how PolitiFact structured/presented that article.

Article published: 4/15/20

Article title including "In April", would lead someone to believe the article actually relates to information up to that date. Though, they did state the quote was from 4/02/20.

They wait till the reader scrolls 2/3rds down the article to state the source of the figures were from a 3/12/20 Vox article.

Seems a bit (very) irresponsible for Bobby Scott to make a statement on 4/02, using data from 3 weeks prior that he/his staff obtained from a Vox article.

He's got to be smart enough to know that data changes every day, and it also could have been possible the information in the Vox article wasn't 100% accurate. Ignorance or Purposefully deceiving?



> If it were me, I wouldn't have made a statement quoting data from 3 weeks prior. And even if I did, I would have mentioned that the information I was sharing was likely outdated.


Giving PolitiFact the benefit of the doubt, they do show a "False" meter on the right, at the top of the article. To indicate the quote/statement is actually false.










I just don't like how they structure & word the article.

They could make it a lot easier for the reader if they just changed how the wrote and laid out the article.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

mikel said:


> Actually, there is something very unusual about how PolitiFact structured/presented that article.
> 
> Article published: 4/15/20
> 
> Article title including "In April", would lead someone to believe the article actually relates to information up to that date. Though, they did state the quote was from 4/02/20.
> 
> They wait till the reader scrolls 2/3rds down the article to state the source of the figures were from a 3/12/20 Vox article.
> 
> Seems a bit (very) irresponsible for Bobby Scott to make a statement on 4/02, using data from 3 weeks prior that he/his staff obtained from a Vox article.
> 
> He's got to be smart enough to know that data changes every day, and it also could have been possible the information in the Vox article wasn't 100% accurate. Ignorance or Purposefully deceiving?
> 
> Giving PolitiFact the benefit of the doubt, they do show a "False" meter on the right, at the top of the article. To indicate the quote/statement is actually false.
> 
> View attachment 43232
> 
> 
> I just don't like how they structure & word the article.
> 
> They could make it a lot easier for the reader if they just changed how the wrote and laid out the article.


Point well taken.

So while you are correct in that we do seem to be in the middle of the pack I'm not feeling so celebratory knowing that *we test 17,885 people per million citizens.*

I most current data I can find is dated April 29, 2020.
Linkhttps://www.statista.com/statistics/1104645/covid19-testing-rate-select-countries-worldwide/










​


----------



## Mike Petrik

The current US testing efforts are impressive, but they are way later than it should have been. Our CDC fumbled out of the gate, causing us to play a costly game of catch-up. I don't mean to throw the CDC under the bus -- they are one of national jewels and even Brady commits fumbles. But the fact that we will look better and better on that bar graph (which is an importantly good thing) will not change the fact that overall our testing performance proved very disappointing.


----------



## iam.mike

127.72 MHz said:


> that *we test 17,885 people per million citizens*


Yeah, I think your table and my data basically say the same things, though in different ways.

While I'm not going to suggest that we batted 1,000 on this one, I still feel it's somewhat comparing apples to oranges when we're looking how many tests per M of people, when you take into account gross population numbers.

Russia has a population 56% lower than us (~145m v 331m), yet they are only testing 3,800 people per M more than us -- based on the data I extracted.

I definitely understand that using these comparisons is helpful to put data in more context -- and makes it easier to understand. But, I still do feel that sheer volume of population makes it hard to compare the data in the most meaningful way.

It would also be helpful to know who's making these tests, what volume of tests are being produced, and by who. Are countries who are making these tests exporting them for use in countries that don't have equal access to tests? If so, what does that data look like?

It's clear based on the testing timeline, that we got a late start testing. Let's hope we maintain the testing trajectory -- not to be better than every other country -- but rather to do the best we can for the residents of our country.


----------



## Flanderian

Should any not have seen this yet: Los Angeles is offering free testing to all residents as often as they wish. Mayor claims they have enough testing capacity to accomplish it.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52492634


----------



## Oldsarge

An idea whose time has come.


----------



## iam.mike

Flanderian said:


> Mayor claims they have enough testing capacity to accomplish it.


Looks like they don't  Good try Garcetti.

Screencast: https://somup.com/cYfvrhidNa










People are on fire over on Twitter:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1255669977278906368


----------



## Flanderian

mikel said:


> Looks like they don't  Good try Garcetti.
> 
> Screencast: https://somup.com/cYfvrhidNa
> 
> View attachment 43284
> 
> 
> People are on fire over on Twitter:
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1255669977278906368


Sad. 

Boy, every time I have a hope that a pol isn't full of BS, reality jumps up and smacks me! 😢


----------



## eagle2250

Reading and/or watching so many news reports of projected meat shortages and associated price increases, we made an unscheduled run to the Patrick AFB Base Commissary yesterday to prepare for the predicted shortages. Beef prices were already increased by 20% to 30%, based on the cut. Pork prices were marked up perhaps 20% per pound and many cuts were unavailable and for those interested in boneless, skinless chicken parts, forget it...they are simply not available and the prices on the parts with the bones still in them and the skin still on were pretty much all jacked up a $1 or more per pound. Just a reality of our new world, I suspect. Time to stock up on a few more cases of MRE's! :crazy:


----------



## Peak and Pine

eagle2250 said:


> ...we made an unscheduled run to the Patrick AFB Base Commissary yesterday to prepare for the predicted shortages. Beef prices were already increased by 20% to 30%, based on the cut. Pork prices were marked up perhaps 20% per pound and many cuts were unavailable and for those interested in boneless, skinless chicken parts, forget it...they are simply not available and the prices on the parts with the bones still in them and the skin still on were pretty much all jacked up a $1 or more per pound. Just a reality of our new world, I suspect. Time to stock up on a few more cases of MRE's! :crazy:


^
You shouln't be eating that stuff even if we weren't in the Time of Cholera. Try bananas. In a pinch, Little Debbies.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

eagle2250 said:


> Reading and/or watching so many news reports of projected meat shortages and associated price increases, we made an unscheduled run to the Patrick AFB Base Commissary yesterday to prepare for the predicted shortages. Beef prices were already increased by 20% to 30%, based on the cut. Pork prices were marked up perhaps 20% per pound and many cuts were unavailable and for those interested in boneless, skinless chicken parts, forget it...they are simply not available and the prices on the parts with the bones still in them and the skin still on were pretty much all jacked up a $1 or more per pound. Just a reality of our new world, I suspect. Time to stock up on a few more cases of MRE's! :crazy:


A fairly good quantity of oats, barley, wheat, flour, beans and rice, dried milk, lot's of canned goods,.....And yes, a few cases of MRE's.

It's difficult to imagine how this pandemic has changed all of our lives, likely forever.


----------



## iam.mike

127.72 MHz said:


> It's difficult to image how this pandemic has changed all of our lives, likely forever.


+1 - So true.


----------



## Oldsarge

Up here in the PNW, there are ample supplies of seafood.


----------



## Flanderian

Charlie's anti-viral medication!


----------



## Oldsarge

It must have worked!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Oldsarge said:


> It must have worked!


Yes. I have been giving my body a good cleansing every night. As with all medicines. there are side effects. But falling asleep in front of the TV and waking up with a little headache are small prices to pay for staying in good health and in good spirits.


----------



## iam.mike

Mike Petrik said:


> But falling asleep in front of the TV and waking up with a little headache are small prices to pay for staying in good health and in good spirits.


Hey, stop talking about me like that


----------



## Oldsarge

My drug of choice is currently Neyers' Left Bank Red administered in 6 oz. doses, twice with dinner followed up by a decent tawny port, 3 oz after dinner--preferably with a chunk of Gorgonzola, king of cheeses.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ Hang in there Sarg!


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> Charlie's anti-viral medication!
> 
> View attachment 43397


More than an anti-viral medication, based on that picture, it may also be the "fountain of youth!" Egad, I never took Prince Charles to be a University of Michigan fan...I just can't allow SWMBO to see this one or I will never hear the end of it. LOL. :crazy:


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Conversely, I have not had any alcohol since March 4.

I found that for me, tippling during a period of prolonged stress is not beneficial given I am now only finding my feet after 10 years of being locked in during continuous low boil overseas security threat.

The health benefits that have become evident including weight loss, better sleep, higher energy, improved mental clarity, and reduced anxiety, have led me to strongly consider making the change permanent.

A Dr. friend encouraged me to consider that after age 50, one should seriously consider switching from offense to defense in relation to ones health regimes. Less waterskiing,
less black snow slopes, and more long walks and slower downhills.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

I'm inclined to agree with your friend. My attempts to become a septuagenerian athlete haven't been rewarded, really they haven't. I may decide to return to the attempt with much more caution and then I may just decide that long walks and sporting clays are plenty exciting enough.


----------



## ran23

Not that I am ready to read the entire thread, but has anyone come down with this SARS-Covid virus yet? My wife actually asked this.


----------



## eagle2250

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Conversely, I have not had any alcohol since March 4.
> 
> I found that for me, tippling during a period of prolonged stress is not beneficial given I am now only finding my feet after 10 years of being locked in during continuous low boil overseas security threat.
> 
> The health benefits that have become evident including weight loss, better sleep, higher energy, improved mental clarity, and reduced anxiety, have led me to strongly consider making the change permanent.
> 
> A Dr. friend encouraged me to consider that after age 50, one should seriously consider switching from offense to defense in relation to ones health regimes. Less waterskiing,
> less black snow slopes, and more long walks and slower downhills.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR





Oldsarge said:


> I'm inclined to agree with your friend. My attempts to become a septuagenerian athlete haven't been rewarded, really they haven't. I may decide to return to the attempt with much more caution and then I may just decide that long walks and sporting clays are plenty exciting enough.


The wife and I actually look forward to our (almost) daily five mile fitness walks. We have some of our best conversations during those walks (15 to 17 minute miles). Back when we ran we talked , but more breathlessly and with a whole lot less extensive conversations!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

ran23 said:


> Not that I am ready to read the entire thread, but has anyone come down with this SARS-Covid virus yet? My wife actually asked this.


Even though I work in a level one Trauma center, as of yet I do not know of anyone who's tested positive.

Fingers crossed!


----------



## Flanderian

*OOPS!*

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Flanderian

ran23 said:


> Not that I am ready to read the entire thread, but has anyone come down with this SARS-Covid virus yet? My wife actually asked this.





127.72 MHz said:


> Even though I work in a level one Trauma center, as of yet I do not know of anyone who's tested positive.
> 
> Fingers crossed!


And I pray that may continue. My wife's church congregation has lost two members to Covid-19.


----------



## Oldsarge

And for those who think that the US's situation is bad consider Brazil. Rio, with its favelas, will be devastated. The First World has taken an enormous hit but when it spreads to the less developed parts of the globe we will see an unstoppable apocalypse because those poor countries simply do not have the resources to fight back even in the feeble way the West has.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ I try to bear this in mind, especially when I begin to think how this has impacted *my* life.

And it will spread, it will circulate all over this planet. It's a shame to mention anyplace specifically for fear of overlooking entire nations of people who live in countries where covid19 is going to run rampant. It's just heartbreaking,...


----------



## eagle2250

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ I try to bear this in mind, especially when I begin to think how this has impacted *my* life.
> 
> And it will spread, it will circulate all over this planet. It's a shame to mention anyplace specifically for fear of overlooking entire nations of people who live in countries where covid19 is going to run rampant. It's just heartbreaking,...


A very thoughtful and heartfelt response! Thank you.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Okay, I might as well post this before the more alarmist among us do. Yes, the IHME model was updated late yesterday to take into account increasingly relaxed state mitigation efforts, and now projects almost 134,500 US deaths, quite a dramatic increase from yesterday's fewer than 75,000. Frankly, I knew this was coming because the model was always based on a critical assumption that was never realistic, specifically mitigation in each of our 50 states until two weeks of zero new cases. I was surprised this update took so long.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
My thoughts:

1. The IHME Model's Limitations. It must be remembered that this model, while popular and useful, has never been very good at making predictions. A retrospective analysis reveals that it has been wildly incorrect, even as it jumped all over the place while its mitigation assumptions remained constant. To some extent this should not be surprising since it was trying to calibrate the efficacy of several independent mitigation tactics even though we have absolutely zero data on such efficacies. All our mitigation efforts, while reasonable and IMO appropriate, have been based on experience and common sense hypotheses, not data. We still really don't know to what extent they have been effective. Moreover, the model's assumption that mitigation strategies would eventually result in zero new cases over a two week period in each state was never compatible with the WH task force belief that the virus was far too infectious for mitigation to work that completely (hence the focus on "slow the spread" rather than "stop the spread" as discussed below); accordingly waiting to achieve zero new cases (i.e., "stop the spread") was never the strategy.

2. COVID-19's Infection Fatality Rate. From the beginning we've assumed that COVID-19 was more lethal than the flu. Nonetheless its Infection Fatality Rate is the subject of considerable debate, with studies suggesting as low 0.08% (lower than the flu's 0.1%) and as high as 0.5% (5 times the flu). To some extent the disparity of these studies can be explained by the different demographics of the populations being studied. Because COVID-19's lethality is very sensitive to certain age and co-morbidity cohorts, a study's conclusion will be significantly influenced by the % of its population that resides in one or more of those cohorts. The disparity is also a function of the uncertainty of the virus's Infection Rate and perhaps unique characteristics of the two major strains.

3. SARS-CoV-2's Infection Rate. We also assumed from the beginning that SARS-CoV-2 is more infectious than the flu for three reasons. First, the evidence suggested that it is likely somewhat more transmissible than the flu; second, the efficacy of mitigation tactics would necessarily be compromised due to large the number of contagious asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infections; and third, being a new virus there was no antibody immunity via either prior infections or vaccines. Nonetheless, the precise Infection Rate (sometimes called the penetration rate) of SARS-CoV-2 has perhaps been the most contentious question discussed among experts. It almost certainly varies widely by region and presumably has been depressed to some unknown extent by mitigation. Because that rate must be known to compute the IFR denominator, its mystery is another reason IFR estimates range from under 0.1% to as high as 0.5%.

4. Slow the Spread versus Stop the Spread. Our national mitigation strategy assumed that the virus's acute infectiousness would make its spread virtually impossible to stop. The plan was to instead "slow the spread" in order to avoid excess fatalities due to healthcare system overload. Thanks to herculean efforts that plan has been largely successful, at least so far. You will recall that Drs. Birx and Fauci said that the if we successfully slow the spread (not stop it) we could keep fatalities between 100,000 and 220,000, which was far fewer than the 1,000,000+ that had been initially projected. In contrast, the IHME model was always predicated on an indefinite "stop the spread" strategy, not the temporary slow the spread strategy that the White House (and all other Western nations except Sweden) actually adopted. Again, in addition to not being a very good predictor of outcomes even when its assumptions were largely correct, IHME model was never intended to describe our actual situation which always assumed a relaxation of mitigation prior to the achievement of zero new cases.

5. Why Choose Slow the Spread. Of course, political dogmatists will spin facts to support their dogmas. They will launch virtue-signaling slogans and cheap shot criticisms because that is what they do. But the truth is that there is no option that does not involve more deaths, and trying to select a strategy based on alternative death tolls is not only simplistic, it is impossible. It must be remembered that a prolonged economic shutdown also presents costs in human life and health. It would be irresponsible to simply wait for a vaccine that might or might not arrive, and it is revealing that not a single governor proposes this. But nor can we simply pretend this is the flu, and certainly no governor has suggested such a thing. The WH task force sets guidelines, but the state governors actually make and implement decisions. All of those decisions are based on the same "slow the spread" strategy that has always been in place. Some governors proceeded more aggressively with mitigation, others more cautiously, just as some now are proceeding more aggressively with relaxation and others more cautiously. But all options carry risks that are too complicated to be evaluated with confidence. At this point it is simply not possible to know which states are making better choices, and because all environments are different (no controlled experiments possible) we may never know. It is interesting that the IHME model is projecting a higher mortality rate for Illinois, a state that is taking a cautious approach to mitigation relaxation, than Georgia, a state that is being more aggressive. Why? I have no idea, and I suspect the modelers would have a hard time explaining, though it would not surprise me at all if this seemingly paradoxical prediction turns out to be correct.

6. Mitigation Relaxation Strategy. Unless we are willing to adopt a stop the spread strategy (requiring our economic shutdown and stay at home orders to stay in place indefinitely, perhaps till we have a vaccine) we must execute a gradual relaxation of mitigation that (i) provides as much protection as possible for the vulnerable population cohorts and (ii) ensures that our healthcare system has all resources it needs and is not overwhelmed. The moment the latter might look to be at risk, a governor must be prepared to pivot quickly to slow relaxation or even reinforce mitigation.

7. IFRs and Risk. It is important to assess risk correctly, lest the alarmist media confuse you. While this virus is not the flu, it is not the plague either. It is extremely sensitive to age, especially those over 65 with a serious co-morbidity. While the great majority of infections among these vulnerable cohorts do resolve favorably, the fatality rate is still terribly high -- much much higher than the flu. On the other hand all the IFR studies agree that for those under 65 without a serious co-morbidity the fatality rate if infected is actually somewhat less than the 0.1% associated with the flu.

8. Testing and Contact Tracing. Finally, the risks associated with this inevitable mitigation relaxation can themselves be considerably mitigated to the extent we can perform widespread testing and contact tracing. Unfortunately, thus far our performance in these respects has not exactly been stellar. That said, American ingenuity and resolve might just come through yet. We'll see.

Addendum: I just listened an interview of the IHME modeler. He pointed out that the two major variables accounting for the projection increase are (i) increased mobility resulting from the various state mitigation relaxations and (ii) a change in the definition of COVID-19 fatalities. The model now includes fatalities from patients dying with COVID-19 symptoms even if untested. This definitional change (which is being made by many data accumulators) caused the increase to appear more dramatic than it otherwise would have. He also pointed out that the model does not take into account anticipated reduced R0 from warmer temperatures and assumes that our increasingly mobile population will not practice mask-wearing or other social distancing. He emphasized that the projection will likely to reduce as summer arrives, especially if a significant percentage of the population wear masks and practice social distancing.


----------



## ran23

Think I will try out the TieBar face masks, my Amazon order is back ordered.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

All accurate and valid points Mike.

True, our nation, the world, must open up and move on knowing the inherent risks involved for certain cohorts in our society. 

I'm noticing a movement of citizens expressing their rights to not wear a face mask regardless of their availability. It seems to be individuals who inherently distrust government as well as proclaimed Constitutionalists not wishing to give in to what they see as government encroachment of their civil liberties.

As most people understand wearing a mask is actually a courtesy to individuals who are in higher risk categories. The masks do less to protect you and much more to protect the venerable. 

I see no sense in trying to convince individuals that wearing a mask would be helpful to their fellow man verses giving up their personal sovereignty to a system whom they distrust. They see their demonstration of personal freedom as a far greater good than the altruism of a helping hand to their fellow man. It saddens me greatly.


----------



## Oldsarge

Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself . . .


----------



## Mike Petrik

127.72 MHz said:


> All accurate and valid points Mike.
> 
> True, our nation, the world, must open up and move on knowing the inherent risks involved for certain cohorts in our society.
> 
> I'm noticing a movement of citizens expressing their rights to not wear a face masks regardless of their availability. It seems to be individuals who inherently distrust government as well as proclaimed Constitutionalists not wishing to give in to what they see as government encroachment of their civil liberties.
> 
> As most people understand wearing a mask is actually a courtesy to individuals who are in higher risk categories. The masks do less to protect you and much more to protect the venerable.
> 
> I see no sense in trying to convince individuals that wearing a mask would be helpful to their fellow man verses giving up their personal sovereignty to a system whom they distrust. They see their demonstration of personal freedom as a far greater good than the altruism of a helping hand to their fellow man. It saddens me greatly.


Agreed. It is difficult to argue the distrust point with such citizens. Sadly, in recent years so many of our institutions have earned the distrust, and our media have been terribly dishonest mediators and enablers. But the constitutional objections are worse than silly. Only a few states require masks, and then only under certain limited conditions; and conservatives of all people should know that states have broad police powers under our constitution (unlike the federal government). Finally, even if legal infirmities existed, that would not possibly excuse the selfish refusal to voluntarily do the right thing.


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> All accurate and valid points Mike.
> 
> True, our nation, the world, must open up and move on knowing the inherent risks involved for certain cohorts in our society.
> 
> I'm noticing a movement of citizens expressing their rights to not wear a face masks regardless of their availability. It seems to be individuals who inherently distrust government as well as proclaimed Constitutionalists not wishing to give in to what they see as government encroachment of their civil liberties.
> 
> As most people understand wearing a mask is actually a courtesy to individuals who are in higher risk categories. The masks do less to protect you and much more to protect the venerable.
> 
> I see no sense in trying to convince individuals that wearing a mask would be helpful to their fellow man verses giving up their personal sovereignty to a system whom they distrust. They see their demonstration of personal freedom as a far greater good than the altruism of a helping hand to their fellow man. It saddens me greatly.


In other words, "**** you Jack, I'm alright!"


----------



## Mike Petrik

Flanderian said:


> In other words, "**** you Jack, I'm alright!"


I suspect you have no idea how appropriately placed your video is.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oldsarge said:


> Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself . . .


God bless you brother.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Flanderian said:


> In other words, "**** you Jack, I'm alright!"


But rather I feel like burying my face in my hands and crying would be more accurate,...


----------



## ran23

Tie Bar sold out of all their Men's Masks.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

People who are against wearing masks strike me as the same types who think local zoning is unconstitutional.

Living in, and enjoying the advantages of the benefits of “society”, requires some curbing of personal liberties in pursuit of the common good.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

I can't find the reference but someone once said (approximately) 'freedom is not absence of law but perfect obedience to perfect law'. Perfection being unobtainable, we still pursue it as best we can. Wear your mask and wash your hands!


----------



## Guest

.......for in all the states of created beings capable of laws, _where there is no law, there is no freedom:_ for _liberty_ is, to be free from restraint and violence from others; which cannot be, where there is no law: but freedom is not, as we are told, _a liberty for every man to do what he lists:_ (for who could be free, when every other man's humour might domineer over him?) but a _liberty_ to dispose and order as he lists, his persons, actions, possessions, and his whole property, which the allowance of those laws under which he is, and therein not to be subject to the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own. - John Locke, _Two treatises of government,_p. 234 (1689).


----------



## Big T

There is much in life we do not like, yet we do. For example, I dislike seeing my doc, yet I do so religiously. I am of the age where I will take every precaution I can, to not get sick.

Wearing a mask, is one of the simplest things we can do, to assist in mitigating COVID19. Those that deliberately ignore this very mild request, are extremely selfish individuals.


----------



## eagle2250

127.72 MHz said:


> All accurate and valid points Mike.
> 
> True, our nation, the world, must open up and move on knowing the inherent risks involved for certain cohorts in our society.
> 
> I'm noticing a movement of citizens expressing their rights to not wear a face mask regardless of their availability. It seems to be individuals who inherently distrust government as well as proclaimed Constitutionalists not wishing to give in to what they see as government encroachment of their civil liberties.
> 
> As most people understand wearing a mask is actually a courtesy to individuals who are in higher risk categories. The masks do less to protect you and much more to protect the venerable.
> 
> I see no sense in trying to convince individuals that wearing a mask would be helpful to their fellow man verses giving up their personal sovereignty to a system whom they distrust. They see their demonstration of personal freedom as a far greater good than the altruism of a helping hand to their fellow man. It saddens me greatly.


On the news they talked about three family members being arrested in a Flint, MI, for killing a security guard in a Dollar Geneeral store after he told one of them that she would have to put on a mask or leave the store. To my mind that's taking one's personal civil rights way too far...virus or no virus.


----------



## Tiger

Most of the "constitutional arguments" being used would only have validity if it were the federal government imposing rules/regulations/laws beyond the scope of its powers as defined by the U.S. Constitution.

States, when operating in their own sphere (i.e., not where there are enumerated powers delegated to the federal government), would have far more latitude, _presuming states are obeying their own constitutions_.

When we return to originalist principles and understanding, things become so much easier to understand, and far more effective to boot!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Tiger said:


> Most of the "constitutional arguments" being used would only have validity if it were the federal government imposing rules/regulations/laws beyond the scope of its powers as defined by the U.S. Constitution.
> 
> States, when operating in their own sphere (i.e., not where there are enumerated powers delegated to the federal government), would have far more latitude, _presuming states are obeying their own constitutions_.
> 
> When we return to originalist principles and understanding, things become so much easier to understand, and far more effective to boot!


Agreed.
That said, some of the executive and administrative orders are of questionable validity under state law and state constitutions. As you most certainly know, governors cannot legislate, and their orders must derive either from constitutional powers or legislative delegation.


----------



## Mike Petrik

eagle2250 said:


> On the news they talked about three family members being arrested in a Flint, MI, for killing a security guard in a Dollar Geneeral store after he told one of them that she would have to put on a mask or leave the store. To my mind that's taking one's personal civil rights way too far...virus or no virus.


That has nothing whatsoever to do with constitutional rights. The security guard is a private employee enforcing the private store's perfectly valid private rules. This apparently was just murder.


----------



## Big T

There are always some that act as elementary schoolkids, opposed to everything the teacher says.


----------



## Tiger

Mike Petrik said:


> Agreed.
> That said, some of the executive and administrative orders are of questionable validity under state law and state constitutions. As you most certainly know, governors cannot legislate, and their orders must derive either from constitutional powers or legislative delegation.


Absolutely, Mike.

Just heard that New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is prohibiting all public protests in NYC (my location). I'll have to check the New York State Constitution to see if he has any power to do so, but I doubt that he does. I do find it funny in an infuriating sort of way that some of the same people who wish to impose their political views on the states via the "incorporation doctrine" are quick to abandon that doctrine when it prevents them from exercising some sort of power.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Big T said:


> There are always some that act as elementary schoolkids, opposed to everything the teacher says.


How true. Just like dealing with adolescents; Whatever you say they will oppose.

To wit and in context to our covid19 crisis, they see themselves as intellectual patriots on a crusade,....

I truly am surprised at the numbers of people who could care less about the venerable among our population.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mike Petrik said:


> That has nothing whatsoever to do with constitutional rights. The security guard is a private employee enforcing the private store's perfectly valid private rules. This apparently was just murder.
> 
> And just to be clear, there is no evidence suggesting that this was shooting was in any way motivated by a disagreement about constitutional rights. The fairest interpretation of the news reports is that a woman felt disrespected by the security guard and complained to her husband and son who went to the store to murder the guard.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Murder for disrespect.

Makes one hopeful that dueling will make a comeback.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Big T

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Murder for disrespect.
> 
> Makes one hopeful that dueling will make a comeback.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Fine with me, provided we each our own weapons! Gotta revisit my "cowboy action shoosting"!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Murder for disrespect.
> 
> Makes one hopeful that dueling will make a comeback.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


This is sadly commonplace in many urban areas.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> This is sadly commonplace in many urban areas.


I am thinking more like the 18-19th century Burr- Hamilton type, with the full fig get up and seconds.

I can suggest a growing number of contemporary people in the spotlight I would encourage toward this "honor upholding" behavior.

But I strongly doubt they would have the nerve.

I remember when Chris Mathews pissed off Zell Miller during an interview and Zell challenged Chris to a duel. I spit out my beer in admiration for Zell at that ultimate "put up or shut up" moment! 

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Acct2000

I see more of the tired leftist - - anyone who worries about the economy and wants to get people back to work - - is evil. Sigh.

I fear the disease and exercise precautions. At this point, from how it looks, we have put way too many people out of work based on fear and hysteria. We need to find ways to get back to work.

Also, people on the left and right need to stop describing everyone who disagrees with them as being flatter and more EVIL than a Saturday Morning Cartoon villain. It's not true and it's getting really, really, really old!!!


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Acct2000 said:


> I see more of the tired leftist - - anyone who worries about the economy and wants to get people back to work - - is evil. Sigh.
> 
> I fear the disease and exercise precautions. At this point, from how it looks, we have put way too many people out of work based on fear and hysteria. We need to find ways to get back to work.
> 
> Also, people on the left and right need to stop describing everyone who disagrees with them as being flatter and more EVIL than a Saturday Morning Cartoon villain. It's not true and it's getting really, really, really old!!!


This crisis has brought me genuine despair. True, the virus has changed the way most of the world lives, possibly forever.

But my despair is witnessing the willful ignorance and the sheer numbers of median "Thinkers," and I use the term loosely, in our population.

My observations in general; There are high numbers on the left who want to use this crisis as a club to beat the current executive's administration with their aim on the upcoming election. It's the capitalists pigs who want to sacrifice worker's lives to line their pockets,...

How can at least a simple majority refuse to inform themselves and unite in recognizing the Chinese Communist Party's role in the spread of the virus?

On the right, an unfathomable distrust of the government that is the personification of paranoia. I'm talking about a level of ignorance that defies description. Anti-Vaxxer's who believe that the entire covid19 crisis is non-existent. It has been a worldwide government conspiracy orchestrated by a "New world order" group of globalists.

People who refuse to wear a mask as a example to other like minded "Patriots" against "The Man" taking their civil rights.

There are legions of ignorant extremists on both ends of the spectrum. And propaganda outlets masquerading as mainstream media that discourage critical thought. The numbers are so large that it leads me to believe civil discourse is impossible.

I am happy that my wife and I have family and experience in rural living. We intend to keep an urban home but we have also resolved to locate a rural setting where we can excommunicate ourselves to a large degree from the extreme trends that have swept over our nation.

Thank you for your indulgence in unburdening myself.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

It is clear that there is more than one virus afoot in America.

Many are searching for the “unseen hand” to explain events that go well beyond a binary good vs. evil explanation.

God, Communists, Liberals, Fascists, Millennialists, the Deep State, globalists, unrepentant sinners, Wall Street, omnivores, Chinese market vendors, the CIA, Donald Trump....from my reading, each and probably more, has a seat at the table of the grand cabal directing the world toward socio- economic Armageddon.

Oddly, as a member of the Illuminati, I have been excluded. My invite must be late arriving in the mail.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## ran23

Covid-19 or SARS Covid is other countries. Strange it has different names.


----------



## Oldsarge

As a staff NCO for the Tri-lateral Commission, I am offended at being left out.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oldsarge said:


> As a staff NCO for the Tri-lateral Commission, I am offended at being left out.


I always suspected that you might be one of them Sarg,.....You sly devil you.


----------



## Oldsarge

127.72 MHz said:


> I always suspected that you might be one of them Sarg,.....You sly devil you.


It's a job, bro.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I was informed by the Illuminati Sub Committee on Member Internet Monitoring (ISUCMIM) chairman Dr. Kissinger, that I left out some of the usual “usual suspects “ including The Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderburg, The Federal Reserve,and Bohemian Grove.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> I was informed by the Illuminati Sub Committee on Member Internet Monitoring (ISUCMIM) chairman Dr. Kissinger, that I left out some of the usual "usual suspects " including The Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderburg, The Federal Reserve,and Bohemian Grove.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


You are not really "made" until you are a Davos Man.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> You are not really "made" until you are a Davos Man.


A Georgia Boy can only dream of the snow capped peaks of Davos!

Maybe once I am finally successful in overthrowing the Venezuelan government, I might get my pledge card.

The last group of knuckle draggers I recruited made a right dogs dinner of it.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Mike Petrik

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> A Georgia Boy can only dream of the snow capped peaks of Davos!
> 
> Maybe once I am finally successful in overthrowing the Venezuelan government, I might get my pledge card.
> 
> The last group of knuckle draggers I recruited made a right dogs dinner of it.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


Good luck my friend, but don't count on it. While the Davos globalists profess to enthusiastically detest the Venezuelan Marxists, deep inside they are sort of conflicted. Your resume won't so much be enhanced by your heroic accomplishment as complicated by it.

But Pompeo and Haspel could create an appealing NGO legend and send you as a spy, in which case you should consult Matt S re proper wardrobe.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Mike Petrik said:


> Good luck my friend, but don't count on it. While the Davos globalists profess to enthusiastically detest the Venezuelan Marxists, deep inside they are sort of conflicted. Your resume won't so much be enhanced by your heroic accomplishment as complicated by it. But the Trump CIA could create an appealing NGO legend and send you as a spy!


No habla....


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> I was informed by the Illuminati Sub Committee on Member Internet Monitoring (ISUCMIM) chairman Dr. Kissinger, that I left out some of the usual "usual suspects " including The Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderburg, The Federal Reserve,and Bohemian Grove.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


And you know, they're all in on it,...


----------



## eagle2250

Last evening as I sat watching the evening news and seeing the irate Michiganders, strutting on the Capitol steps with their long guns at the ready and exercising their freedom of speech and expression against the Governors lock down order, I was struck with the realization that our expression of such freedoms so frequently reveals the 'village idiot' that resides within us! The governor is right and the morons are wrong....nuff said!


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

This situation jumped the shark so long ago that beyond tracking the daily national and state body count, I have tried to tune it out as it is all jibberish from Washington, and my Babel fish appears to be malfunctioning.

As an alternative, I have begun prepping for the armed rebellion from the tragically unemployed and ignored underclass that tracks to be on schedule for Amazon delivery in Q4 of this year.

I am going for the IRA soldier at a funeral look.










Slainte,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

eagle2250 said:


> Last evening as I sat watching the evening news and seeing the irate Michiganders, strutting on the Capitol steps with their long guns at the ready and exercising their freedom of speech and expression against the Governors lock down order, I was struck with the realization that our expression of such freedoms so frequently reveals the 'village idiot' that resides within us! The governor is right and the morons are wrong....nuff said!


I think the gov showed remarkable forbearance. If I were in that office there would be a heavy company of National Guard around the steps and up on the roof . . . just showin' presence, yanno?


----------



## 127.72 MHz

eagle2250 said:


> Last evening as I sat watching the evening news and seeing the irate Michiganders, strutting on the Capitol steps with their long guns at the ready and exercising their freedom of speech and expression against the Governors lock down order, I was struck with the realization that our expression of such freedoms so frequently reveals the 'village idiot' that resides within us! The governor is right and the morons are wrong....nuff said!


There are no rights we Americans guard more jealously than our rights to be willfully ignorant, selfish, and plainly stupid,....

Although in all seriousness I believe these kinds of actions demonstrate how little faith much of our society has in our institutions. It is impossible to track the motives of certain cohorts within our society, especially extreme elements, without having the discussion turn political.


----------



## challer

eagle2250 said:


> Last evening as I sat watching the evening news and seeing the irate Michiganders, strutting on the Capitol steps with their long guns at the ready and exercising their freedom of speech and expression against the Governors lock down order, I was struck with the realization that our expression of such freedoms so frequently reveals the 'village idiot' that resides within us! The governor is right and the morons are wrong....nuff said!


What data supports this conclusion? The epidemiologists and biostatisticians I work with, and are considered among the best in the world, do not concur that the general lock down in MI is providing any value to general public health. Lockdown was only ever designed to slow the spread such that hospitals are not overwhelmed which have achieved in all but four states. Certainly the vulnerable should be protected. Everyone will get exposed and best current thinking is C19 will be around as a seasonal flu. Everyone has the right to stay locked down as you see fit. And even if you've had it you can still spread it via contamination. Now lets address the alcohol drug and suicide deaths are up dramatically and calculated to exceed all C19 deaths over the years (most drug and suicide deaths will take a few years to present). The R value for MI has been below 1 since March, one of the best in the country.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ Yes, the lockdown was indeed designed to slow the spread of the virus. So, now that we have slowed the spread does that mean we should all ignore social distancing and possibly overwhelm our healthcare facilities? *I believe the answer is that we should still practice social distancing, do you believe that? *Moreover, I do not require empirical data to support my conclusion, only median intelligence and a small dose of common sense.

How do you propose that we protect the vulnerable ? Please comment on the wisdom of large groups of people congregating in close proximity to one another, do you believe it wise?

*Since no NIH funded empirical data exists to support eagle2250's assertion that it is dumb to ignore social distancing does that not make it so? Please comment,..*.

I work in a biomedical and diagnostic imaging laboratory. The laboratory next to us has four NIH funded epidemiologists, a couple of virologists, and several biostatisticians that I have spoken with and listened to.

So, as I understand, it is the hope that by slowing the spread of the virus we not only avoid overwhelming our healthcare system but we allow time for the development of therapeutics and possibly a vaccine. (Although one of the scientists I spoke to recently told me that in his opinion, there will not be an effective vaccine for quite some time, if ever.)

It is easy to be a naysayer, but more difficult to take a position and support it.


----------



## Flanderian

eagle2250 said:


> Last evening as I sat watching the evening news and seeing the irate Michiganders, strutting on the Capitol steps with their long guns at the ready


Just to be clear, are you objecting to their lack of proper armament?












127.72 MHz said:


> How do you propose that we protect the vulnerable ?


Why, deport them all to an Island of Lost Souls! You know, like a reverse leper colony. Quarantine those who are well, to protect them from the sick!


----------



## Peak and Pine

challer said:


> The epidemiologists and biostatisticians I work with, and are considered among the best in the world, do not concur that the general lock down in Michigan is providing *any value to general piblic health.*


Then maybe they're not really among the best in the world. Maybe they're just the best on your block. Don't be fooled by those coffee mugs their kids gave them on Father's Day that said _World's Best Epidemiologist and. Biostatitician._


----------



## Tiger

_Something to consider..._

https://fee.org/articles/why-sweden-s-covid-19-strategy-is-quietly-becoming-the-world-s-strategy/


----------



## 127.72 MHz

More food for thought,...
"But Swedish officials are hardly championing their own experiment as a template for the rest of the world. "This is a marathon, this is not over by any means," Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter, Sweden's ambassador to the Uunited States."

*"Our biggest failure has been for our elderly population," Olofsdotter acknowledged. *

The vast majority of those who have perished are over the age of 70. The country's nursing homes were particularly ravaged by the disease. Sweden's coronavirus death rate per million citizens is higher than that of the United States, and its coronavirus death toll is considerably higher than its Nordic neighbors, which all enforced measures that were stricter than what Sweden imposed.


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> More food for thought,...
> "But Swedish officials are hardly championing their own experiment as a template for the rest of the world. "This is a marathon, this is not over by any means," Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter, Sweden's ambassador to the Uunited States."
> 
> *"Our biggest failure has been for our elderly population," Olofsdotter acknowledged. *
> 
> The vast majority of those who have perished are over the age of 70. The country's nursing homes were particularly ravaged by the disease. Sweden's coronavirus death rate per million citizens is higher than that of the United States, and its coronavirus death toll is considerably higher than its Nordic neighbors, which all enforced measures that were stricter than what Sweden imposed.


Consider the source -

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Foundation_for_Economic_Education


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^ I was aware but hey, The Washington Post printed it and it's not as though the Koch's are their best friends,....


----------



## Tiger

Flanderian said:


> Consider the source -
> 
> https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Foundation_for_Economic_Education


And of course, you have examined in a similar fashion the sources of all contrary information, and their funding? The motives of politicians? The political slant of many media institutions?

Why the ad hominem attack? Agree or disagree with the information, which did not originate with the group you are attacking; they are simply reporting it. Otherwise, you should be consistent in disavowing everything you read and hear from NYT, WaPO, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, Soros-funded groups, et al., because they sure as hell have supreme political bias.


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ I was aware but hey, The Washington Post printed it and it's not as though the Koch's are their best friends,....


My objection to the article is that it is essentially a piece of agenda driven propaganda full of false equivalencies intended to leave the reader with the understanding that Sweden's initial approach of largely ignoring the transmission of the disease is somehow identical with the subsequent planned, systematic and selective relaxation of restrictions in other countries. (However poorly conceived and accomplished.) It is simplistic. And it is dangerous.

When presented with obviously flagrant propaganda, from any source, right or left, I find it helpful to investigate the motivation of that source. And in the case of FEE it is a libertarian (Some say anarcho-capitalist.) think tank (Which from either the right or left translates to propagandist.) that contrives arguments to support its world view.

The issue isn't whether national economies should reopen or remain closed, that's inane. They *must* reopen; the question is how.

I know that some enjoy argument/debate for its own sake. I find it tiresome. And others quicken to the drama of heroic laissez faire capitalism subduing evil government, or the opposite. I don't care. But I do care very much as to how public health and safety can best be protected from a disease that has already killed over 10,000 fellow state residents, and that even before the generally anticipated second wave arrives. And it makes me wonder if having more skin in the game would make idologs who consign all such concerns to left-wing conspiracies less sanguine.

There is no universally agreed upon mortality rate for Covid-19, with various individuals either trivializing its lethality or exaggerating it to support their political biases. One argument being that if it was exaggerated, it must therefore be trivial. Or that because some segments of our population are seemingly less affected, for the balance . . . . oh well!

One statistical analysis, which may or may not be indicative of the disease's IFR was performed by the publishers of Worldometer, a profit based website with no obvious political bias. Nor were its views solicited by interviewers or organizations with such. From extrapolating official NYC data, it arrived at an IFR of 1.4%, I.e., "1.4% of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 have a fatal outcome." This contrasts with an IFR for seasonal flu of less than .1%.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/
That other different estimates have, and will, be done is certain, and will be debated for years. The figure I have heard most often is around 1%.


----------



## Tiger

...and since we're all so concerned about sources, it turns out that sourcewatch.org (as referenced by Flanderian above) is a subgroup of the Center for Media and Democracy - a "progressive" organization with an obvious bias. As per Wikipedia:

The *Center for Media and Democracy* (*CMD*) is a progressive nonprofit watchdog and advocacy organization based in Madison, Wisconsin CMD publishes PR Watch, SourceWatch, and ALECexposed.org.

Seems silly to paint a free market organization (when did that become bad, gentlemen?) as biased because it receives money from the Koch Bros. (why is that a problem?) by citing information from a biased left wing group. No doubt Flanderian will provide us with the funding sources of CMD, right?

I guess political/economic bias is fine, as long as the slant tilts your way?


----------



## Tiger

Flanderian said:


> My objection to the article is that it is essentially a piece of agenda driven propaganda full of false equivalencies intended to leave the reader with the understanding that Sweden's initial approach of largely ignoring the transmission of the disease is somehow identical with the subsequent planned, systematic and selective relaxation of restrictions in other countries. (However poorly conceived and accomplished.) It is simplistic. And it is dangerous.
> 
> When presented with obviously flagrant propaganda, from any source, right or left, I find it helpful to investigate the motivation of that source. And in the case of FEE it is a libertarian (Some say anarcho-capitalist.) think tank (Which from either the right or left translates to propagandist.) that contrives arguments to support its world view.
> 
> The issue isn't whether national economies should reopen or remain closed, that's inane. They *must* reopen; the question is how.
> 
> I know that some enjoy argument/debate for its own sake. I find it tiresome. And others quicken to the drama of heroic laissez faire capitalism subduing evil government, or the opposite. I don't care. But I do care very much as to how public health and safety can best be protected from a disease that has already killed over 10,000 fellow state residents, and that even before the generally anticipated second wave arrives. And it makes me wonder if having more skin in the game would make idologs who consign all such concerns to left-wing conspiracies less sanguine.
> 
> There is no universally agreed upon mortality rate for Covid-19, with various individuals either trivializing its lethality or exaggerating it to support their political biases. One argument being that if it was exaggerated, it must therefore be trivial. Or that because some segments of our population are seemingly less affected, for the balance . . . . oh well!
> 
> One statistical analysis, which may or may not be indicative of the disease's IFR was performed by the publishers of Worldometer, a profit based website with no obvious political bias. Nor were its views solicited by interviewers or organizations with such. From extrapolating official NYC data, it arrived at an IFR of 1.4%, I.e., "1.4% of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 have a fatal outcome." This contrasts with an IFR for seasonal flu of less than .1%.
> 
> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/
> That other different estimates have, and will, be done is certain, and will be debated for years. The figure I have heard most often is around 1%.


The point of the article was to show that Sweden followed a different path than many of the states in the United States (and other nations). I thought this necessary, as so many here have been blindly supporting (some) state policies that are irrational, unscientific, politically motivated, and so authoritarian that they "squint towards monarchy," to paraphrase Patrick Henry. This is not to defend those who eschew prudence and logic by pretending as if no dangers are present.

Unfortunately, Flanderian, it was you who politicized the discussion initially and above, while portraying yourself as somehow immune to the political bias affecting others.

It should be noted that the group cited by Flanderian (Sourcewatch) in his dismissal of an article about factual Swedish policies is funded by far-left financier George Soros.


----------



## Andy

Eye Glasses fogging help with a mask. Read this and tried it and I think it works. I wear glasses and wearing a mask they fog up. The suggestion was to put a tissue or paper towel at the top of the mask, glasses over the top part (nose). And it seemed to solve the fogging issue!


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Who watches the watchmen?

Georgia Department of Public Health accused of presenting sloppy and manipulated death and spread data to purposefully mislead the public.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--reg...uses-critics-cry-foul/182PpUvUX9XEF8vO11NVGO/
Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Oldsarge

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Who watches the watchmen?
> 
> Georgia Department of Public Health accused of presenting sloppy and manipulated death and spread data to purposefully mislead the public.
> 
> https://www.ajc.com/news/state--reg...uses-critics-cry-foul/182PpUvUX9XEF8vO11NVGO/
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


_Sigh! _It's in line with so much coming out of the 'corridors of power' these days.


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Who watches the watchmen?
> 
> Georgia Department of Public Health accused of presenting sloppy and manipulated death and spread data to purposefully mislead the public.
> 
> https://www.ajc.com/news/state--reg...uses-critics-cry-foul/182PpUvUX9XEF8vO11NVGO/
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


I'm astonished, I would have had no idea!


----------



## Tiger

Just to be clear - and accurate - there have been errors of every type across the governmental board (local, state, and federal). We have had data suggesting that COVID-19 is far worse than it actually is, and far less severe than it really is. We've also seen policies that seem quite prudent and logical, and others that are the antithesis of that.

In Michigan, a salon owner has been threatened with arrest if she opens her business, even though she plans on taking every precaution possible, and will require that of patrons. Yet, under Governor Whitmer's "decree" she won't be able to do. The owner is facing bankruptcy and foreclosure on her home, as are some of her employees. Liquor stores have no such restrictions, however.

Yet, some seem perplexed that many are outraged by such capricious, pernicious and unlawful autocratic actions by Whitmer...


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

The only reason the article caught my eye was that it suggests that EVERY error pointed to a continuing downward trend.

It may be true, or who knows if the reporting is accurate?

It simply lit up my radar.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Tiger

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> The only reason the article caught my eye was that it suggests that EVERY error pointed to a continuing downward trend.
> 
> It may be true, or who knows if the reporting is accurate?
> 
> It simply lit up my radar.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


...or politically motivated; I agree!

I simply think we need to be logical, rational, prudent, and balanced. Policies based on ideological extremes will prove to be insidiously lethal. That Governor Whitmer's often illogical, unscientific, and autocratic policies that are needlessly crushing a large segment of her state's population seemed to receive so much support here was surprising...and troubling.


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> The only reason the article caught my eye was that it suggests that EVERY error pointed to a continuing downward trend.
> 
> It may be true, or who knows if the reporting is accurate?
> 
> It simply lit up my radar.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


That is suggestive, isn't it? But for a variety of reasons I doubt that any statistics are entirely correct. In most instances I would think inaccuracies are simply the product of limitations of resources and methodologies to collect and compile them. But in others, it's hard to think they haven't been fiddled, often blatantly so. If you look over the data for different countries -

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
How many believe that Russia, with the second most confirmed cases in world, over 290,000, has a case fatality rate so low compared to most other countries? Though after all, we know that the Russian government exerts no pressure on their press. right?


----------



## Flanderian

Nobel laureate economist's prescription for opening up America. Track it, trap it and kill it! Why universal testing is a great investment. And why a lack of testing isn't. 7 1/2 minute video interview -

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/w...recovery-testing-says-this-nobel-prize-winner
Extended article -

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/paul-romer-on-how-to-survive-the-chaos-of-the-coronavirus


----------



## Tiger

I would think that such crucial decisions should be made by the most informed and knowledgable medical professionals in the United States, not economists, and implemented lawfully by state governments, i.e., governors acting within the boundaries of state constitutions and laws passed by state legislatures, not executive fiat.

Economics is a social science with radically differing schools of thought. I doubt if Romer - or historically, von Mises or Keynes - would be the best choices to make such decisions. Advice, yes, decisions, no.


----------



## Oldsarge

Somehow asking an economist's recommendations about public health has to be one of the poorer journalistic decisions around. Why not ask a poet about energy policy? Makes as much sense to me.


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> Somehow asking an economist's recommendations about public health has to be one of the poorer journalistic decisions around. Why not ask a poet about energy policy? Makes as much sense to me.


I believe he *was* asked a question about the economy, and his recommendation entails a public health initiative. Whether it is feasible and desirable from a public health perspective is a separate, but valid question. Though he seems like a reasonable and intelligent man.

Obviously, Paul Solman is a skeptic too, and no doubt with good reason.


----------



## Flanderian

Beware geeks bearing rifts -

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...ts-tweeting-about-coronavirus-are-likely-bots


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> Beware geeks bearing rifts -
> 
> https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...ts-tweeting-about-coronavirus-are-likely-bots


Is the Internet truly a necessary evil, or is it just evil? :icon_scratch:


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Flanderian said:


> Beware geeks bearing rifts -
> 
> https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...ts-tweeting-about-coronavirus-are-likely-bots


From the article (Taken out of context): "Carley with Carnegie Mellon said *always go to authoritative or trusted sources *for information," Carley said. "Just be very vigilant."

I'll admit, I have never sent or received a Tweet,... But Every week I read 12 to 15 news sources regularly ranging from The CCP's Global times, The Guardian, BBC, NYTimes, NYPost, WAPost, NPR, LATimes, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, Time, English Language "LeMonde," DerSpiegle, CBC, Global News(Canada), al jazeera, The Moscow Times,...Obviously this does not cover the magazines like New Yorker, The Atlantic, or the numerous think tank articles.


​
I have been a news junkie to this degree for years.

My conclusion is that,* singularly*, I would *not trust one* of these news outlets as a "*authoritative or trusted source."*

Some are better than others in terms of presenting "just the facts" but for fear of having this go in a political direction I will refrain from rating them.

Bottom line, (in my opinion) There are no "Authoritative or trusted sources."

Every last one has an axe to grind and, again in my opinion, it is particularly noteworthy that more than a few mirror the example set by the Chinese Communist Party's Global Times,...


----------



## iam.mike

I've been traveling and have missed much of this discussion in the last two weeks (so I'll have to go back and read up).

That said, I was listening to a Podcast recently where Eric Hunley was interviewing John McAfee.

McAfee made an interesting observation -- Hospitals can get paid up to $39k if a COVID-19 pneumonia patient ends up on a ventilator.

Directly implying that Hospital administration (not specifically doctors) have an avenue (i.e. incentive) to potentially artificially increase the number of COVID-19 cases.

Here's the part of the interview where McAfee starts discussing it.






I did a quick Google search, and found that other outlets are talking about it as well.

Here's a USA Today article, where they did a fact check, and confirmed that hospitals get paid more for COVID-19 patients.

I'm not suggesting anything, but merely sharing information I have come across.

*Traveling*

Separately, for those of you who have not ventured out much, I can say unequivocally that traveling via commercial airline right now is an exceptional experience.

Very little traffic getting to/from the airport
Airports are practically empty
Getting through security is a breeze -- especially if you have CLEAR & TSA Pre
Planes are running at a 1/10th capacity, making getting on and off the plane quick and effortless
Planes are incredibly clean
Airlines are waiving change fees (which helped me incredibly)
I know all this is about to end as the country begins to open-up again, but I've been to 3-4 states in the last 2+ weeks, and my traveling experience was nothing short of pleasant and relaxing.


----------



## smmrfld

mikel said:


> I've been traveling and have missed much of this discussion in the last two weeks (so I'll have to go back and read up).
> 
> That said, I was listening to a Podcast recently where Eric Hunley was interviewing John McAfee.
> 
> McAfee made an interesting observation -- Hospitals can get paid up to $39k if a COVID-19 pneumonia patient ends up on a ventilator.
> 
> Directly implying that Hospital administration (not specifically doctors) have an avenue (i.e. incentive) to potentially artificially increase the number of COVID-19 cases.
> 
> Here's the part of the interview where McAfee starts discussing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did a quick Google search, and found that other outlets are talking about it as well.
> 
> Here's a USA Today article, where they did a fact check, and confirmed that hospitals get paid more for COVID-19 patients.
> 
> I'm not suggesting anything, but merely sharing information I have come across.
> 
> *Traveling*
> 
> Separately, for those of you who have not ventured out much, I can say unequivocally that traveling via commercial airline right now is an exceptional experience.
> 
> Very little traffic getting to/from the airport
> Airports are practically empty
> Getting through security is a breeze -- especially if you have CLEAR & TSA Pre
> Planes are running at a 1/10th capacity, making getting on and off the plane quick and effortless
> Planes are incredibly clean
> Airlines are waiving change fees (which helped me incredibly)
> I know all this is about to end as the country begins to open-up again, but I've been to 3-4 states in the last 2+ weeks, and my traveling experience was nothing short of pleasant and relaxing.


John McAfee is about as loony as they come, and anything he says should be completely disregarded IMO.


----------



## eagle2250

smmrfld said:


> John McAfee is about as loony as they come, and anything he says should be completely disregarded IMO.


He strikes me as both loony and in all probability, higher than a f___ing (using John's words, not mine) kite! LOL.


----------



## iam.mike

smmrfld said:


> John McAfee is about as loony as they come, and anything he says should be completely disregarded IMO.





eagle2250 said:


> He strikes me as both loony and in all probability, higher than a f___ing (using John's words, not mine) kite! LOL.


I do not disagree with those sentiments about McAfee's personality.

Though just because someone comes off that way, doesn't mean that 100% of what they say is _*inaccurate*_.

If we are going to use that type of measuring stick, then we would need to completely disregard a whole lot more people that have had a hand in the city, state, federal, and global management of this crisis.

While those individuals may not outwardly act as "loony" as McAfee, they certainly have taken equally as loony positions.

If a system has the ability to be abused, be rest assured there are those who will seek to take advantage of it -- one way or the other.

Hopefully now that Fauci supports cautious re-opening, we'll see the more strict cities allowing their small business owners (those that already haven't lost their businesses) to open back up.


----------



## Flanderian

smmrfld said:


> John McAfee is about as loony as they come, and anything he says should be completely disregarded IMO.





eagle2250 said:


> He strikes me as both loony and in all probability, higher than a f___ing (using John's words, not mine) kite! LOL.


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/15/john_mcafee_liable_death_neighbour_belize/


----------



## Acct2000

In Michigan, we are still locked down. This is affecting me two ways.

1) My father passed Friday and we won't be able to have a public funeral for him because way, way too many people would have wanted to pay their respects.

2) I haven't had a hair cut in over three months. (I was going to get one and my barber got sick (not covid) just before I was going to get it cut. I know it's not a big deal, but my dad always looked sharp and I would just like to look better during the funeral.)

I don't get how either of these things is helping anyone. The huge number of people who lost their jobs because of this is worse.


----------



## iam.mike

Acct2000 said:


> My father passed Friday and we won't be able to have a public funeral for him because way, way too many people would have wanted to pay their respects.


I'm so very sorry to hear about your loss. My condolences to you and your family.

The reason for my recent travel (to Michigan) was because my step father died on May 4th. We couldn't have a funeral either 

That said, once things open back up, we're planning to hold a Celebration of Life for him at one of his favorite golf courses in Michigan. He loved golf so much, so I'm looking forward to honoring him there.

*Hair Cut*

I too was getting annoyed at my mop-of-a-head-of-hair. So I grabbed my clippers and gave myself a hair cut. Not great, but not as bad as I thought either. 🤯


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Acct2000 said:


> In Michigan, we are still locked down. This is affecting me two ways.
> 
> 1) My father passed Friday and we won't be able to have a public funeral for him because way, way too many people would have wanted to pay their respects.
> 
> 2) I haven't had a hair cut in over three months. (I was going to get one and my barber got sick (not covid) just before I was going to get it cut. I know it's not a big deal, but my dad always looked sharp and I would just like to look better during the funeral.)
> 
> I don't get how either of these things is helping anyone. The huge number of people who lost their jobs because of this is worse.


In our lifetime's these are unprecedented events. My empathy to you as I am in the midst of the same process,...

A close friend in Florida lost his sister the in the middle of April and he didn't even receive a death certificate or her ashes until the middle of May.

Best regards,


----------



## eagle2250

Acct2000 said:


> In Michigan, we are still locked down. This is affecting me two ways.
> 
> 1) My father passed Friday and we won't be able to have a public funeral for him because way, way too many people would have wanted to pay their respects.
> 
> 2) I haven't had a hair cut in over three months. (I was going to get one and my barber got sick (not covid) just before I was going to get it cut. I know it's not a big deal, but my dad always looked sharp and I would just like to look better during the funeral.)
> 
> I don't get how either of these things is helping anyone. The huge number of people who lost their jobs because of this is worse.


My friend, I am so very sorry to hear of the loss of your father. He was a great man and you are one of the most devoted sons of whom I am aware. I think perhaps the fact that you were there for him in life says more about your father and yourself than does a delayed funeral service. A future celebration of life service, as suggested by Mikel sounds like a wonderful idea. You and your family will be in our prayers.


----------



## Retired EE

Our family is facing similar pain... my dad is on his death bed. He never retired and has worked without a non-working interlude for about the last 73 years-- with 22 years in the military and a Vietnam veteran. Incredibly, he was, until several weeks ago, still participating in telework while in home hospice. When word circulated that his health was rapidly deteriorating, he said he received 800 voice-mail messages. So... we're in the same situation-- that when the time comes we will not be able to hold a funeral service that would accommodate people who want to pay their respects. We will likely defer to holding a celebration-of-life service after the pandemic subsides.

Recently, he handed me an old family photo album with pictures from the late 1800's and early 1900's, including his dad's 1920 West Point yearbook. While looking thru it, there was an old newspaper clipping, between the pages, showing a photo of a large military parade in New York City celebrating US army forces after World War I. I looked-up the date of the parade and it was held September 10, 1919. I don't think I can post the photo due to copyright law, but it showed packed sidewalks with onlookers and thousands of soldiers marching down 5th avenue. Looking-up the duration of the Spanish Flu, it ran from spring 1918 to summer 1919. I thought the photo provided an interesting insight to the thinking and attitudes of folks and political leadership towards this earlier pandemic (I didn't see masks, nor was there social distancing-- just a mass of humanity involved in a celebration).


----------



## Mike Petrik

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
This recently released CDC analysis is generally consistent with what Stanford Professor John Ioannidis and other "optimistic contrarians" have been saying for two months. I encourage you to unpack and study the numbers.

This should be considered important news, but it has been entirely ignored by the MSM. Can't imagine why.


----------



## Acct2000

Retired EE said:


> Our family is facing similar pain... my dad is on his death bed. He never retired and has worked without a non-working interlude for about the last 73 years-- with 22 years in the military and a Vietnam veteran. Incredibly, he was, until several weeks ago, still participating in telework while in home hospice. When word circulated that his health was rapidly deteriorating, he said he received 800 voice-mail messages. So... we're in the same situation-- that when the time comes we will not be able to hold a funeral service that would accommodate people who want to pay their respects. We will likely defer to holding a celebration-of-life service after the pandemic subsides.
> 
> Recently, he handed me an old family photo album with pictures from the late 1800's and early 1900's, including his dad's 1920 West Point yearbook. While looking thru it, there was an old newspaper clipping, between the pages, showing a photo of a large military parade in New York City celebrating US army forces after World War I. I looked-up the date of the parade and it was held September 10, 1919. I don't think I can post the photo due to copyright law, but it showed packed sidewalks with onlookers and thousands of soldiers marching down 5th avenue. Looking-up the duration of the Spanish Flu, it ran from spring 1918 to summer 1919. I thought the photo provided an interesting insight to the thinking and attitudes of folks and political leadership towards this earlier pandemic (I didn't see masks, nor was there social distancing-- just a mass of humanity involved in a celebration).


My condolences. I hope you are able to visit him. (After March 12, I only saw my father after he went into hospice care.)


----------



## Retired EE

Acct2000 said:


> My condolences. I hope you are able to visit him. (After March 12, I only saw my father after he went into hospice care.)


Thank you. My condolences to you and your family, as well. My dad had the option of home hospice care. The hospice organization set-up a hospital bed in his bedroom and he is visited thru-out the week by a nurse and other staff. My step-mother has been shouldering the rest of the care, 24 7. We are fortunate that we can see him (yesterday, we visited him). Hard to watch someone who was once strong and robust-- used to jog with him around the parade ground as a little kid while he prepared for army ranger school, physically deteriorate to now looking like an image from Leonardo DaVinci's "Study of an Old Man". He still is mentally sharp, however.


----------



## iam.mike

@momsdoc @127.72 MHz and to anyone else who knows people in the medical field, law enforcement, or other front line workers:

We have about 400-500 non-medical fabric face masks we'd like to donate (100% free, we pay shipping) to front-line workers.

I'd prefer to send them in small or large bulk vs individual pieces.

They look like this, and are made from a fine Italian broadcloth fabric @Alexander Kabbaz kindly donated.










If interested, please contact me via PM here on the site.

Thx.


----------



## Howard

I've heard on the news that Phase 2 which should include hair salons will re-open next week.


----------



## Oldsarge

Barber shops have opened here in Oregon, for a given value of 'open'. Masks are required and reservations so that a minimal number of customers are in the shop at a time and can be kept socially distant. So you can get a hair cut but you and your beard are on your own.


----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> Barber shops have opened here in Oregon, for a given value of 'open'. Masks are required and reservations so that a minimal number of customers are in the shop at a time and can be kept socially distant. So you can get a hair cut but you and your beard are on your own.


Come to Florida and they will not only cut your hair, but they will also trim your beard and eyebrows and clip the unsightly hairs from you nose and your ears. Ya just can't have em cut much more than that! LOL.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

I abandoned the traditional mask as being too cumbersome and decided instead to go with a 100% cotton balaclava which I can pull up and down as needed. Plus it does not fog my glasses like a medical mask.

While pulled down, it closely resembles an ascot or mock turtleneck. Might there be a market here that will make the wearing of this more fashionable modified mock buffle/ascot a serious option for men looking to look good while being safe?

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## eagle2250

Since we first embarked on this social distancing adventure of ours I have had a urologist, a family Doctor and now an Ophthalmologist suggesting I participate in what they call "telemedicine appointments" to attend to my needs. With the urologists and the family physicians appointments I concluded that while it was not an optimal way to complete a doctors visit it was arguably doable, but with this most recent eye appointment I find it almost tragically laughable. How is this medical dolt going to check my eyes over the telephone? Gawd bless the medical hero's among us, but come on now...let's get serious! :angry: Are any others out there being subjected to or offered these "Telemedicine" appointments, or is this just a central Florida thing?


----------



## Peak and Pine

^

The medical dolt, as you say, is keeping you safe from the highly contagious environs of a medical office, made more so by visits from the likes of you and me, we of the age-related, prone-to-get category. Your county has had 20 deaths. Mine, none. I leave my grounds once a week, masked and loaded with disinfectant. My self isolation and twiddling thumbs is one of the reasons I've posted so much lately. This will end when covid does, a blessing-to-come for certain members here. Your eye doctor will ask you questions about your sight. Should he not like the answers he will schedule an in-person when all is safe. Should you answer that you are going blind, he will say covid be damned and get you to the ER. _Tele_ is also the prefix for telephone and you can choose to do your consult that way. I have, with both the family guy and the oncologjst (yes I have that, but have for 30 years and don't care.) In bpth cases I was not charged for the visit exclamatipn point. Here's to your continued good health and better hair cuts.


----------



## smmrfld

eagle2250 said:


> Since we first embarked on this social distancing adventure of ours I have had a urologist, a family Doctor and now an Ophthalmologist suggesting I participate in what they call "telemedicine appointments" to attend to my needs. With the urologists and the family physicians appointments I concluded that while it was not an optimal way to complete a doctors visit it was arguably doable, but with this most recent eye appointment I find it almost tragically laughable. How is this medical dolt going to check my eyes over the telephone? Gawd bless the medical hero's among us, but come on now...let's get serious! :angry: Are any others out there being subjected to or offered these "Telemedicine" appointments, or is this just a central Florida thing?


Calling someone a "dolt" because they've adapted their business to unprecedented circumstances is unfair and demeaning. Not sure if you've ever owned your own business, but many of us have had to rapidly transition to a very different model; it hasn't been easy, but some great productivity advancements have resulted. Telemedicine can be wonderful...I had a small infection in a finger nail bed recently and my primary care doc handled it by phone and Zoom, saving me a substantial drive and a great deal of time. Not sure why you would have an issue with your ophthalmologist screening for serious conditions until a full exam can be conducted. Not all change is bad.


----------



## Mike Petrik

Okay now that you are all done with taking Eagle to the woodshed, will one of you kindly explain how the ophthalmologist is going to check Eagle's eyes by telephone? Even Zoom would have its limits for a true eye check up. I mean how does a doc perform an eye pressure for glaucoma?


----------



## iam.mike

I agree with smmrfld here.

There are so many services that can legitimately be virtual, but most of them never considered offering that option until now -- or possibly because consumers didn't demand it.

Why subject myself to driving to a doctor, pay $$$ for parking, waiting in the lobby, then again in the exam room, only to see my doctor for 5-10 minutes, and have them bill insurance an exorbitant fee? I essentially got 5-10 minutes of care and wasted 2 hours of my day, and had to pay for gas and parking, and the frustration.

Instead, I can set an appointment for a virtual/video consult, connect in at that time, see the doc, and be done without any inconvenience on my part.

When all this is mostly behind us, I do hope every business that starting offering Tele/Video service continues to offer it as an option.

I still want the CHOICE of in-person or virtual, but if I can be more productive and efficient doing something remotely, I definitely want the option if it can be done so effectively.


----------



## Flanderian

eagle2250 said:


> Since we first embarked on this social distancing adventure of ours I have had a urologist, a family Doctor and now an Ophthalmologist suggesting I participate in what they call "telemedicine appointments" to attend to my needs. With the urologists and the family physicians appointments I concluded that while it was not an optimal way to complete a doctors visit it was arguably doable, but with this most recent eye appointment I find it almost tragically laughable. How is this medical dolt going to check my eyes over the telephone? Gawd bless the medical hero's among us, but come on now...let's get serious! :angry: Are any others out there being subjected to or offered these "Telemedicine" appointments, or is this just a central Florida thing?


Yes, and where used appropriately, I feel it can be a godsend. Long overdue, in fact. But the key is it has to be used appropriately. I had been involved to a limited degree in consulting on teleconferencing beginning roughly 40 years ago. Some things can be accomplished as well, and a few even better via teleconferencing. But it's not suitable for all things. Some either absolutely require, or are far more effective in-person.

Two examples: My wife has a chronic disorder that requires bi-annual visits with a specialist. During this visit the doctor observes my wife's symptoms and discusses them with her, and if needed, adjusts the medication. Her last scheduled visit was the end of this past March. It was conducted via teleconference. Not only was it entirely effective, but it eliminated the need for a trip and visit that ordinarily consumes most of the day for a 1/2 hour appointment.

My urologist likes me to visit him once year. I don't know why, but he seems to enjoy these visits far more than me. :icon_scratch: And while I might wish to spoil his fun, I can't see how without his physical examination the purposes of the visit could be accomplished.


----------



## smmrfld

Mike Petrik said:


> Okay now that you are all done with taking Eagle to the woodshed, will one of you kindly explain how the ophthalmologist is going to check Eagle's eyes by telephone? Even Zoom would have its limits for a true eye check up. I mean how does a doc perform an eye pressure for glaucoma?


Where exactly does he say his eyes are being examined or tested for glaucoma? Oh wait...he doesn't. Screenings, such as inquiring about headaches, vision changes, etc. can certainly done via telemed as a first step. Do some research...you may learn something.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

My experience with tele health, once I got over the weirdness, was excellent.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Dhaller

In fairness, I mostly self-diagnose (I wound up having open heart surgery once because I caught something physicians had missed, and I wouldn't be typing now if I hadn't!), so I just need physicians to write prescriptions for me. Telemed suits me just fine for *that*.

I, too, need to have an eye appointment though; I won't even bother doing it Telemed. *That* needs to be on-site. Ditto for cardiologist appointments (a cardiologist's ear is one of the best-trained sensors out there, but only through a stethoscope... again, on-site only.)

Nowadays you can actually do plenty of labs yourself, just ordering kits from CVS (or wherever). Diabetics can monitor their own A1C, for example.

I'm going into LabCorp for a blood draw tomorrow - I'm at a phase transition in my fitness protocol, and want to have some labs done (creatine kinase, things like that), because I've plotted my quarterly blood chemistry on graphs for many years - so I did a Telemed yesterday (with a medical assistant).

Play that system! 

DH


----------



## Mike Petrik

smmrfld said:


> Where exactly does he say his eyes are being examined or tested for glaucoma? Oh wait...he doesn't. Screenings, such as inquiring about headaches, vision changes, etc. can certainly done via telemed as a first step. Do some research...you may learn something.


Excuse my ignorance. I've never been to an ophthalmologist who did not test for glaucoma.
I think telemed can be terrific, but in most cases eye exams strike me as a bit of a stretch. That said, you obviously are more knowledgeable.


----------



## Flanderian

Dhaller said:


> Ditto for cardiologist appointments (a cardiologist's ear is one of the best-trained sensors out there, but only through a stethoscope... again, on-site only.)


I've been thinking about this myself as my routine checkup is due in about a month. First, we'll see if he's doing routine checkups by then, and then I'll weigh the risk versus benefit, as everything has been stable for years.

Though I like my guy, he's old like me. Very experienced and well respected in his specialty. I've found I prefer physicians of roughly my vintage. We seem to understand each other better.


----------



## Dhaller

Flanderian said:


> I've been thinking about this myself as my routine checkup is due in about a month. First, we'll see if he's doing routine checkups by then, and then I'll weigh the risk versus benefit, as everything has been stable for years.
> 
> Though I like my guy, he's old like me. Very experienced and well respected in his specialty. I've found I prefer physicians of roughly my vintage. We seem to understand each other better.


I just don't see how a cardiologist can rely on an interview ("have you experienced shortness of breath?", etc) when many CAD patients are also T2 diabetics (and can have neuropathies which might mask pain or discomfort).

I tried to train myself to listen to heart rhythms (there's a curriculum), and it is extremely difficult to tease out the subtle auditory signatures. I have great respect for the specialty.

Funny story: I started seeing a cardiologist in 2009 (after I self-diagnosed CAD), a very excellent one at the Fuqua Heart Center in Atlanta. He's the one who performed a cath procedure and verified it, and sent me down the surgery assembly line. I then saw him twice a year for a standard checkup until two years ago, when he retired.

My new cardiologist, a younger fellow, remarked that I really only needed an annual visit (I'm basically perfectly fine, and it's just a formality at this point), and went on to confide that my previous cardiologist really didn't like office days - he was a procedure guy - so he stacked his office calendar with easy patients he liked by seeing them twice a year! That way he seldom had to deal with troublesome patients in the office (though he found them interesting on the table!)

I was honored, I guess?

DH


----------



## eagle2250

As an addendum to my earlier post #711, my Ophthalmologist sees me every 3 months to check the status of macular degeneration occurring in my left eye. Contrary to what others have said, I really don't see how that can be done over the phone. In any event, after contacting the doctors office earlier today, they will be seeing me in the office...perhaps for one last visit. We will see.


----------



## Big T

First my PC is a young lady who is superb (best advice dear departed dad gave me, was get a good looking woman as your doc, particularly with long slender fingers...). Anyhow, several years ago, she set-up a website to gradually move into remote visits and it works very well, as she is available 24/7 for questions, concerns, etc.

Second, my controller, who's office is across the hall from mine, this past Monday, had to take her son for Covid testing, plus herself. Her son came back pisitive, hers is negative, but her family is quarantined for 14 days. As I have had constant contact with her, I'm glad she was negative, but I remain concerned.

Here in rural PA, Covid has raised it's ugly head, by a traveling nurse infecting several people, including a high school senior, that went on to infect other kids at a bonfire/drinking party, that graduates seem to do. PA's Department of Health is doing an excellent job of contact tracing.


----------



## iam.mike

@bigt -- you had me at long slender fingers...


----------



## Big T

mikel said:


> @bigt -- you had me at long slender fingers...


She also has a good sense of humor! First time for my prostate exam with her, I balked because my PSA number was so low, and she said either I get checked by her, with her long slender finger, or I go to the urologist, who she described as "fat, hairy fingers with huge knuckles"!

A few years ago, one of her nurses left (a peach of a woman), very friendly and you didn't feel the shots when she gave them. One visit she told me that would be the last I would see her as she was leaving the area. When it came time for the digital exam, doc had to get her to witness. I was bent over, with my drawers down when she came into the room. She wasn't saying anything, so I broke the ice by saying "here's a going away present for you".

I may joke about this, but my father and his father both died from cancer that started as prostate cancer, so I'm bit "anal" about getting regularly tested, as we all should be!


----------



## iam.mike

@Big T - if we lived near each other, you and I would be best friends


----------



## Flanderian

This thread was begun as a query concerning the effectiveness of public health policy on March 5th, and obviously there's been a lot that has transpired since then.

And this issue of public health policy quickly became a political football.

My own opinion is that I don't know if it would have been markedly different were a Democrat administration in office. And frankly, I'm sick of that entire aspect of the issue, or of trying to convince anyone that public health policy should be different from what it is.

Apologists, some very skilled, abound to rationalize actions when the reality is that these statistics will likely consume decades of scholarly revisions, and as they have been compiled, method *will* have influenced outcome.

Example: assuming that the actual number of infections is understated, while the number of fatalities is accurate, or even overstated to create projections and draw conclusions. The number of reported cases is unquestionably less than the actual number of infected, but that will vary unpredictably from one place in the country to another, and from country to country.

And I see no way the same wouldn't be true for fatalities.

Both the statistics and the tools in use to analyze them are currently uncertain and in a state of flux. Believe what you will.

So, I'll leave it to others to propound the proper public health policy, and focus on my perspective of the current situation as I best understand it to inform my personal actions and those of my loved ones. Hopefully everyone is doing the same.

1. In roughly 3 months about 2 million Americans have been diagnosed as infected, and over 115,000 have died.

2. Currently, 15,000 to 20,000 new cases are being identified in the U.S. each day. And at the current rate 30,000 are dying each month.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
3. The IHME projections of the course of the disease have varied markedly since being developed, and as the assumptions concerning public health policy have been changed to reflect the actual changes being made in those policies.

4. This projection shows that by October the U.S. will have suffered roughly 170,000 deaths, and after reaching a low in the beginning of August of only 15,000 deaths per month, it beings to rise again and by the end of the projection period in October is again 30,000 per month.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
5. My opinion is that some countries have done pretty well from a public health policy perspective, and others more poorly. And that's true in comparing what the U.S. has achieved. But I conclude that considering the magnitude of what the U.S. has and likely will suffer, the U.S. has done poorly. Others may view it differently.


----------



## Oldsarge

Everybody: At least 2020 can't get any worse.

2020: Hol' mah beer!


----------



## Flanderian

Sad update -

The IHME (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation) has again revised their modeling forecast. The model now predicts that by October 1st over 200,000 Americans will have succumbed, and the mortality rate will have risen back to a rate of 42,000 fatalities per month.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Oldsarge

Well, here's one slight ray of sunshine:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Something that works, is already approved for use on humans and doesn't cost $10K per dose.


----------



## roman totale XVII

Oldsarge said:


> ...and doesn't cost $10K per dose.


Yet...


----------



## Pentheos

I've been treating covid pts since the beginning...AMA!


----------



## Flanderian

Oldsarge said:


> Well, here's one slight ray of sunshine:
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
> Something that works, is already approved for use on humans and doesn't cost $10K per dose.


PBS News Hour did a piece on this. British study showed significant effects for patients with the worst symptoms. Saved 1 in 5 patients on respirators. And I don't remember what percentage of patients on oxygen. Evidently these most severe symptoms result from some patients' immune systems being unable to modulate immune response effectively so that it's actually the immune response at this point causing the damage and threatening life.

I know I've read that other steroids that have been tried have caused more problems, but as this seems to help some patients significantly, and is well tolerated, it's quite a breakthrough.

Sadly though, they also interviewed a physician/researcher who looked to be in his 60's who was infected and recovered. He confirmed what I had read before, that those who become most seriously ill but recover can sustain permanent organ damage. Specifically, he mentioned lungs, heart and kidneys.


----------



## eagle2250

Perhaps the greatest failure of our Health Care System, or at least the CDD's portion of it, is the inability to transmit the realities of the pandemics threat to all of us in a way convincingly enough to persuade many of us to endure reasonable precautions with regard to our personal behaviors necessary to minimize the potential spread of the illness. As time passes people are getting careless with their use of protective equipment (not wearing face masks in public, not wearing surgical gloves, not even washing their hands properly). They are frequently not avoiding crowds, but rather participating in open air public events such as street demonstrations, organized athletic/sports events, etc. It seems some are actually daring the virus to come and get me or perhaps they are saying screw all others because I'm going to do what I'm going to do! Perhaps village idiocy is the pandemic we should be addressing. :icon_scratch: Im off my soap box now.


----------



## Peak and Pine

eagle2250 said:


> Perhaps the greatest failure of our Health Care System, or at least the CDD's portion of it, is the inability to transmit the realities of the pandemics threat to all of us in a way convincingly enough to persuade many of us to endure reasonable precautions...


I don't know what the CDD is, but I think your take on this is errant. I have been overloaded with cautionary info from every possible source, from the CDC down thru WalMart to my corner grocery to every possible on-line shopping site. And it's all remarkably consistent.

What you overlook is the politic. While you and I (in different political trenches I believe) wear a mask in public and wonder how the wearing of one could be anything outside pf precaution, and it's not, the _refusal_ to wear one is completely political, an unspoken dictum passed down from the tippy top. At the Oklahoma rally this coming Saturday, how many do you think will be masked? Live free or die dammit.


----------



## Tiger

Peak and Pine said:


> I don't know what the CDD is, but I think your take on this is errant. I have been overloaded with cautionary info from every possible source, from the CDC down thru WalMart to my corner grocery to every possible on-line shopping site. And it's all remarkably consistent.
> 
> What you overlook is the politic. While you and I (in different political trenches I believe) wear a mask in public and wonder how the wearing of one could be anything outside pf precaution, and it's not, the _refusal_ to wear one is completely political, an unspoken dictum passed down from the tippy top. At the Oklahoma rally this coming Saturday, how many do you think will be masked? Live free or die dammit.


You should visit my state (New York), Peak - Democratic Governor Cuomo and NYC Mayor De Blasio, as well as many people in the streets partying and protesting, all have been outside and interacting with others, refusing to wear face masks.

Are you sure this is, "completely political, an unspoken dictum passed down from the tippy top"?


----------



## Peak and Pine

Tiger said:


> Are you sure this is, "completely political, an unspoken dictum passed down from the tippy top"?


No, Tiger, I'm not sure of much these days and shouldn't have made my claim so dogmatically. Just a hunch. That's all.


----------



## Tiger

Peak and Pine said:


> No, Tiger, I'm not sure of much these days and shouldn't have made my claim so dogmatically. Just a hunch. That's all.


Thank you for being so gracious and honest!


----------



## eagle2250

Peak and Pine said:


> I don't know what the CDD is, but I think your take on this is errant. I have been overloaded with cautionary info from every possible source, from the CDC down thru WalMart to my corner grocery to every possible on-line shopping site. And it's all remarkably consistent.
> 
> What you overlook is the politic. While you and I (in different political trenches I believe) wear a mask in public and wonder how the wearing of one could be anything outside pf precaution, and it's not, the _refusal_ to wear one is completely political, an unspoken dictum passed down from the tippy top. At the Oklahoma rally this coming Saturday, how many do you think will be masked? Live free or die dammit.


My friend, I'm not sure what I meant by typing CDD (Community Development District) , a term largely unique to Florida which adds almost $7000 to my annual property tax bill:crazy:. I intended to type CDC, as you suggested, but perhaps I simply committed another typo, as I seem to be doing with greater frequency as my years on this earth continue to add up. You are also right that I overlook the politic of the moment and let me assure you that that is intentional. The point that really matters is how maturely we each respond to the demands of this present pandemic. Last Thursday I watched a grown man almost get into a fistfight with a local Publix Supermarket employee, who looked to still be a teenager. Store policy requires that customers wear masks and adhere to the stores social distancing guidance. If the moron didn't want to follow the stores and societies safety precautions, why was he in there? Just two weeks ago on the evening news they showed a fellow getting put out of the Orlando Costco store for the same reason.

Over the past several weeks we have experienced many very necessary demonstrations of public dissatisfaction with the status quo. Few of the demonstrators were responsible enough to take minimum precautions for going out to engage in public gatherings/activities.

Every day it seems we see news footage of public gatherings in bars and other social events where not even minimal precautions are being taken. Even sports activities are jumping the gun. On Tuesday and again today our high school aged grandsons participated in/are participating in invitational wrestling meets...Personally, I think this is nuts!

Just two nights ago, Norah O'Donnell was telling us that the rates of corona virus cases had gone up in 26 States and possibly seven others. This is not the time for us to go stupid, but many seem to be doing just that and our governmental entities seem to be unwilling to exercise much effort to enforce the guidance that is issued. That is all I was trying to say.


----------



## Peak and Pine

The sign below was posted next to the gas pump I was using today, promising that the fat-assing of America continues even in this Time of Cholera by listing the four essentials we all must have, all available here, so put the ol' nozzle back in its slot and step right inside.


----------



## eagle2250

Peak and Pine said:


> The sign below was posted next to the gas pump I was using today, promising that the fat-assing of America continues even in this Time of Cholera by listing the four essentials we all must have, all available here, so put the ol' nozzle back in its slot and step right inside.
> 
> View attachment 45799


LOL, my friend, you are spot on with your assessment. Last night, while watching the local news, we were treated to a clip showing another gentleman punching out a Walmart Greeter who had advised him (an unmasked customer) that he couldn't enter the store without a mask! When the police arrived, I hope they charged him with attempted murder, as well as assault and disorderly conduct. Who, but a certifiable A**H*** would punch out a Walmart greeter...they are always such nice and friendly ladies and/or gentlemen? Something tells me that our's is not the "Greatest Generation!"


----------



## Peak and Pine

eagle2250 said:


> LOL, my friend, you are spot on with your assessment. Last night, while watching the local news, we were treated to a clip showing another gentleman punching out a Walmart Greeter who had advised him (an unmasked customer) that he couldn't enter the store without a mask! When the police arrived, I hope they charged him with attempted murder, as well as assault and disorderly conduct. Who, but a certifiable A**H*** would punch out a Walmart greeter...they are always such nice and friendly ladies and/or gentlemen? Something tells me that our's is not the "Greatest Generation!"


I saw that clip. And I know that WalMart, stocking up on hotel room eatables from there on my yearly trip to Orlando. He was a little old guy, spry though, fell on his a**, but got right up. Was offered a mask by an employee and refused. Bad politics at work here.


----------



## Flanderian

The IHME (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.) has enhanced its modeling projections.

The IHME is an independent global research center based at the University of Washington. Since the beginning of the Covid pandemic they have been modeling the data to produce detailed, broad projections as to the course of the disease. And their projections have been widely sited among authoritative sources.

The accuracy of these projections, as well as those of any other source, are legitimate subjects of debate. Certainly, those from the IHME have had to change as reality outstripped projections. Two unquestionable causes for differences between the projections and the actual course of the disease have been the breadth and degree of specificity of the projections, and the assumptions underlying them. (A third is, of course, the validity of the public health data available for study: I.e., GIGO.)

The first factor makes the effort more complex, offering greater opportunity for departure from the models, and the second affects them even more. Differences in assumptions can and will drastically change the projections.

In the past, the IHME has simply updated the projections when public mitigation policy was changed in an attempt to better mirror these assumptions which are crucial to their models. But their most recent models and the graphs they yield include different plot lines for different assumptions reflecting differing public policies. The differences can be dramatic as shown in projections below for the state of Florida.

Given current public policies, the models predict 15,393 Covid fatalities by October 1st. Whereas if universal masking occurred, that number would drop to 7,492. Of course, each is only a projection of current modeling, with all the inherent limitations I attempted to explain above, but I do feel they offer a very real example of the potential for consistent and rigorous mitigation public policies.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/florida


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Dark days are ahead. 

In consult with “knowledgeable sources” things will probably be off the rails in 3 weeks. By this time, the young folks who have been partying since Memorial Day will have infected their elders and the virus will have had time to make us middle aged and older folks sick.

When I see the number of young people hanging out on the street at the local bar without masks, I have little hope for a good outcome. This has been going on nightly for 3 weeks.

I suggest that a run to the store is in order.

Ugh.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Peak and Pine

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> When I see the number of young people hanging out on the street at the local bar without masks, I have little hope for a good outcome. This has been going on nightly for 3 weeks.


Where are _you_ hanging out for three weeks where you see this?

The young'ins undoubtedly and by now have heard of the efficacy of masking up while staying a grave's depth distance between heavy-drinking bodies dancing their way through the night so the answer to this abrogation of common sense is either of two or both. They're drunk. Or they're glued to the politics that nay say these precautions. Both will not change. So stay inside and do as Miniver Cheevy did.


----------



## Howard

So what will happen after all the phases are over?


----------



## Flanderian

Howard said:


> So what will happen after all the phases are over?


They'll be phased out.

(Me too! )


----------



## Oldsarge

We all need proper masks.


----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> We all need proper masks.
> 
> View attachment 46025


I suspect the use of this next generation mask will be met with much less resistance than those we are presently using! LOL.


----------



## drpeter

My old state of Kerala, India, has one of the most successful COVID-19 programs in the world. It has been recognized by many analysts and observers around the world, and yet has barely been reported in American media because of a kind of blindness to the outside world that is part of our media's view.

Kerala is a densely populated, coastal, southern state one-tenth the size of California, but with almost as many people (34 million). Until early June, the number of deaths was around 5, but after large numbers of people returned from the Gulf countries where they worked, the deaths have risen to 25 as of July 5th.

Currently they have 5429 confirmed cases. This is astonishing when we compare these numbers to a state in the US with a comparable population, let alone population density. Kerala's per capita income is less than 1% that of the US, so wealth isn't exactly why the state has shown such a fine response to the illness.

Medical facilities are extremely good, and the government's public health programme is outstanding, highly decentralized and fast.

From February onward, Kerala instituted a model action programme, with testing, tracing and hospitalization where needed. Kerala has a very highly literate and contentious population, politically conscious, argumentative and active.

It is usually ruled by a coalition of three or more parties spanning the political spectrum from left to right, and was one of the first states in the world to elect a Marxist government back in the mid-1950s. Nevertheless, in times of crisis, people and leaders pull together with alacrity, and respond well.

Here is a picture of COVID in Kerala, updated yesterday:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Kerala
Inevitably, one has to ask: What has happened to us, the wealthiest and most advanced nation in history, with great knowledge and enviable technology? Why have we been unable to help our citizens, and why are so many of our citizens so resistant to science, medical advice, or even basic reason?

I believe the answer is in our culture, and those elements of it that foster the kind of national leadership we have. Somewhere along the way, the divisions and fault lines in our society began to cause a loss of the sense of community and shared lives that any serviceable society must have, resulting in the extreme polarization we see now.

Sadly, it does not look promising for us as a country, or a people.


----------



## eagle2250

drpeter said:


> My old state of Kerala, India, has one of the most successful COVID-19 programs in the world. It has been recognized by many analysts and observers around the world, and yet has barely been reported in American media because of a kind of blindness to the outside world that is part of our media's view. Kerala is a densely populated, coastal, southern state one-tenth the size of California, but with almost as many people (34 million). Until early June, the number of deaths were around 5, but after large numbers of people returned from the Gulf countries where they worked, the deaths have risen to 25 as of July 5th. Currently they have 5429 confirmed cases. This is astonishing when we compare these numbers to a state in the US with a comparable population, let alone population density. Kerala's per capita income is less than 1% that of the US, so wealth isn't exactly why the state has shown such a fine response to the illness. Medical facilities are extremely good, and the government's public health programme is outstanding, highly decentralized and fast.
> 
> From February onward, Kerala instituted a model action programme, with testing, tracing and hospitalization where needed. Kerala has a very highly literate and contentious population, politically conscious, argumentative and active. It is usually ruled by a coalition of three or more parties spanning the political spectrum from left to right, and was one of the first states in the world to elect a Marxist government back in the mid-1950s. Nevertheless, in times of crisis, people and leaders pull together with alacrity, and respond well. Here is a picture of COVID in Kerala, updated yesterday:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Kerala
> Inevitably, one has to ask: What has happened to us, the wealthiest and most advanced nation in history, with great knowledge and enviable technology? Why have we been unable to help our citizens, and why are so many of our citizens so resistant to science, medical advice, or even basic reason? I believe the answer is in our culture, and those elements of it that foster the kind of national leadership we have. Somewhere along the way, the divisions and fault lines in our society began to cause a loss of the sense of community and shared lives that any serviceable society must have, resulting in the extreme polarization we see now. Sadly, it does not look promising for us as a country, or a people.


A very thoughtful review and I think it to be spot-on! Thank you for sharing these thoughts with us.


----------



## drpeter

Thank you, my friend.


----------



## Peak and Pine

drpeter said:


> My old state of Kerala, India, has one of the most successful COVID-19 programs in the world. It has been recognized by many analysts and observers around the world, and yet has barely been reported in American media because of a kind of blindness to the outside world that is part of our media's view. Kerala is a densely populated, coastal, southern state one-tenth the size of California, but with almost as many people (34 million). Until early June, the number of deaths were around 5, but after large numbers of people returned from the Gulf countries where they worked, the deaths have risen to 25 as of July 5th. Currently they have 5429 confirmed cases. This is astonishing when we compare these numbers to a state in the US with a comparable population, let alone population density. Kerala's per capita income is less than 1% that of the US, so wealth isn't exactly why the state has shown such a fine response to the illness. Medical facilities are extremely good, and the government's public health programme is outstanding, highly decentralized and fast.
> 
> From February onward, Kerala instituted a model action programme, with testing, tracing and hospitalization where needed. Kerala has a very highly literate and contentious population, politically conscious, argumentative and active. It is usually ruled by a coalition of three or more parties spanning the political spectrum from left to right, and was one of the first states in the world to elect a Marxist government back in the mid-1950s. Nevertheless, in times of crisis, people and leaders pull together with alacrity, and respond well. Here is a picture of COVID in Kerala, updated yesterday:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Kerala
> Inevitably, one has to ask: What has happened to us, the wealthiest and most advanced nation in history, with great knowledge and enviable technology? Why have we been unable to help our citizens, and why are so many of our citizens so resistant to science, medical advice, or even basic reason? I believe the answer is in our culture, and those elements of it that foster the kind of national leadership we have. Somewhere along the way, the divisions and fault lines in our society began to cause a loss of the sense of community and shared lives that any serviceable society must have, resulting in the extreme polarization we see now. Sadly, it does not look promising for us as a country, or a people.


Outstanding. Both in the info and the way you wrote it.


----------



## drpeter

Thank you, @Peaks. You are very kind.

And here is another model response, this time that of an entire country Vietnam. I quote from their wiki entry for Covid-19:

_As of 6 July 2020, the country (Vietnam) had 369 confirmed cases, 341 recoveries, and no deaths. _

And these results are for a country of about 94 million people. The tragedy is that we have their responses available to us for study and even implementation in our own country, but no one wants to look or learn. When we are leading the world in number of cases and number of deaths, isn't it high time that we learned from the more successful models? Does our leadership not owe this, at the very least, to the people they govern?


----------



## Flanderian

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/why-covid-death-rate-down/613945/


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^^
You know Flanderian there's no doubt that there's been failure. A perfect analogy would be to say that it was a "Shameless Failure" of U.S. defense strategists to leave Pearl Harbor so vulnerable to attack on Dec. 7, 1941.
Or, one could place the responsibility with the perpetrators of the surprise attack,......

I believe that it is generally good that we avoid politics to one degree or another here at AAAC.

But if we were to open up this pandemic to politics and discussing "Shameless Failure," I live in a town that has been destroyed by lawless rioting and looting for 39 or 40 straight days while political leadership exclusively *NOT from the right* refuse to let police restore order,....

Political leadership who refuse to draw any distinction between peaceful assembly as guaranteed under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and lawless rioting, looting, and attempted razing of buildings. There is not one political leader in the city of Portland, Oregon who is from the right, not one.

Decades old family businesses like a close friend at Watch Works who will not be opening his 30 year business ever again because of the "Shameless Failure" of Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler and City Commissioners Jo Ann Hardesty, Chloe Eudaily, and Amanda Fritz. These City Commissioners felt and still feel that "Peaceful Protesters need to express themselves." Portland Police, under orders from city elected leaders whom are "*Not from the right*" have not been allowed to restore order.

To be clear, this was not because of the covid lock-down,.....After the lock-down he brought back all of his inventory and then George Floyd was killed and the rioting and looting began. His quote to me was: "We were hit hard."
https://www.watchworkspdx.com/
Yes. Flanderian, nerves are a little raw.

But I am sure in your way of thinking that if we had a different Chief Executive there would have been no miscues and all would be well.

Just curious, have you mentioned to any friends or family just whom you hold primarily responsible for a million or so people flying out of the Wuhan Provence to the rest of the world,....... All while the Chinese Government took swift action to see to it that the virus did not reach Beijing?


----------



## smmrfld

127.72 MHz said:


> if we had a different Chief Executive there would have been no miscues and all would be well


Pretty damn close to the truest words ever written.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

smmrfld said:


> Pretty damn close to the truest words ever written.


As sure as you are of yourself, no doubt, that is your objective truth. You should expand more about the depth of your truths.

For what it's worth I am a registered Democrat and lifelong progressive. But to me, being a progressive does not mean that I am obligated to gulp down the Leftist Kool-Aid.

I read that some of the signatories to the Harper's article condemning Cancel Culture may be backpedaling,.....They're finding out that if one doesn't agree with the Leftists with enough enthusiasm that they too may be "Struggled" against! (Look up "Struggle session" from Mao Zedong's China)

Just like the days of McCarthyism they don't want to be consumed by the storm.

https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^^
> You know Flanderian there's no doubt that there's been failure. A perfect analogy would be to say that it was a "Shameless Failure" of U.S. defense strategists to leave Pearl Harbor so vulnerable to attack on Dec. 7, 1941.
> Or, one could place the responsibility with the perpetrators of the surprise attack,......
> 
> I believe that it is generally good that we avoid politics to one degree or another here at AAAC.
> 
> But if we were to open up this pandemic to politics and discussing "Shameless Failure," I live in a town that has been destroyed by lawless rioting and looting for 39 or 40 straight days while political leadership exclusively *NOT from the right* refuse to let police restore order,....
> 
> Political leadership who refuse to draw any distinction between peaceful assembly as guaranteed under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and lawless rioting, looting, and attempted razing of buildings. There is not one political leader in the city of Portland, Oregon who is from the right, not one.
> 
> Decades old family businesses like a close friend at Watch Works who will not be opening his 30 year business ever again because of the "Shameless Failure" of Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler and City Commissioners Jo Ann Hardesty, Chloe Eudaily, and Amanda Fritz. These City Commissioners felt and still feel that "Peaceful Protesters need to express themselves." Portland Police, under orders from city elected leaders whom are "*Not from the right*" have not been allowed to restore order.
> 
> To be clear, this was not because of the covid lock-down,.....After the lock-down he brought back all of his inventory and then George Floyd was killed and the rioting and looting began. His quote to me was: "We were hit hard."
> https://www.watchworkspdx.com/
> Yes. Flanderian, nerves are a little raw.
> 
> But I am sure in your way of thinking that if we had a different Chief Executive there would have been no miscues and all would be well.
> 
> Just curious, have you mentioned to any friends or family just whom you hold primarily responsible for a million or so people flying out of the Wuhan Provence to the rest of the world,....... All while the Chinese Government took swift action to see to it that the virus did not reach Beijing?


I am deeply sympathetic with all the angst you're so understandably experiencing, and largely in agreement with your assertions. But am sincerely at a total loss as to what _The Atlantic_ article which explores likely potential causes to explain an obvious question raised by reported data!? :icon_scratch: :icon_scratch: :icon_scratch:

But to your point, I don't view public health as a right-left, or Republican-Democrat issue. It's either right or wrong, effective or ineffective, and so far the data says that there are individuals of all stripes that have done a lousy job.

I just don't believe all, or in fact any, issues break down into a false binary fiction that was created and is maintained to largely serve interests other than those of the people of America at large.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Okay, I'll connect the dots.

*I too would like to believe that public health is an objective study but it is not.* For years I have dealt with some very bright statisticians with MPH who's specific area of study involves skewing statistics, blatantly betraying their political activism.

The Atlantic, which I subscribe to, is rated as a left leaning news source by both Media bias fact and All Sides.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/atlantic
Being a left leanings news source The Atlantic is not interested in exploring a wide spectrum of political thought. Moreover, the statement; "*The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hallow victory in the face of shameless failure, what's really going on?" *Is in and of itself a highly subjective, speculative, and clearly biased statement.

So, that is the connection between your post and The Atlantic's skewed data manipulation masquerading as objective fact.

I would be interested in seeing The Atlantic, The New Yorker, NYTimes, Wa.Po., MSNBC, or NPR do an in depth exposé regarding demonstrable facts concerning the spread of the covid19 virus.

And who, specifically, is responsible for actions that were not incompetence or a mistake, but willful and harmful actions to the entire world. But I have to admit, that would not sell near as much media as using this crisis as a divisive political club to beat about half of the USA's populace.

From watching your posts over a period of years I believe you to be an academic. That being said I hope that you will agree that tracking the data concerning this pandemic is so complex that it leaves wide openings for subjective politically biased interpretation. And, the USA is living in a hyper-polarized environment.


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> Okay, I'll connect the dots.
> 
> *I too would like to believe that public health is an objective study but it is not.* For years I have dealt with some very bright statisticians with MPH who's specific area of study involves skewing statistics, blatantly betraying their political activism.
> 
> The Atlantic, which I subscribe to, is rated as a left leaning news source by both Media bias fact and All Sides.
> 
> https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
> https://www.allsides.com/news-source/atlantic
> Being a left leanings news source The Atlantic is not interested in exploring a wide spectrum of political thought. Moreover, the statement; "*The gap between soaring soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hallow victory in the face of shameless failure, what's really going on?" *Is in and of itself a highly subjective, speculative, and clearly biased statement.
> 
> So, that is the connection between your post and The Atlantic's skewed data manipulation masquerading as objective fact.
> 
> I would be interested in seeing The Atlantic, The New Yorker, NYTimes, Wa.Po., MSNBC, or NPR do an in depth exposé regarding demonstrable facts concerning the spread of the covid19 virus.
> 
> And who, specifically, is responsible for actions that were not incompetence or a mistake, but willful and harmful actions to the entire world. But I have to admit that would not sell near as much media as using this crisis as a decisive political club to beat about half of the USA populace.
> 
> From watching your posts over a period of years I believe you to be an academic. That being said I hope that you will agree that tracking the data concerning this pandemic is so complex that it leaves wide openings for subjective politically biased interpretation. And, the USA is living in a hyper-polarized environment.


I have no interest in the left-right debate, and none in debate for its own sake. Nothing wrong with debate, it's both a skill and art, and good for training several abilities, but I have no interest in it. The whole left-right ping pong match is very, very tiresome to me. I know others enjoy it. Sorry, I don't.

I didn't post The Atlantic article because of its political views, I posted it because I consider this article a pretty good article on a topic that's puzzled and interested me. I.e., why are cases soaring, when deaths have not risen proportionately? I think anyone, and probably pretty much everyone, who has been following the data has wondered the same thing.

Your quoted sensational lead aside, the balance of the article explores in a methodical and reasonable way 5 hypothetical/likely reasons to explain this. And none of them are really new, they've all been mentioned previously elsewhere in the press, and in interviews with various medical authorities. All he does is put them in order, relate them, and explore each in a systematic, though brief section. I don't see the skewed data manipulation.

He doesn't suggest that Republican governors are manipulating some states' data, or that it's all some sort of conspiracy, he just provides information. For example, while I might have had it in the back of my mind that there's a lag between the reporting of one data set, cases, and that of another, fatalities, he explains simply (So that I can understand it! ) why there would be a lag, and what it would be.(I.e., it can be 3 or 4 weeks.) I had never really attempted to quantify it, so that's helpful to me. If it was already obvious to others, more power to 'ya!

Far from skewing data, in 3 of his 5 reasons he points out that more testing will find less sick patients, and younger patients less likely to die, and that medical care has improved due to experience in treating the disease, all reasons that do not strengthen the premise for his "gotcha phrase" (Now students, always begin an article with a sensational statement the will grab the reader's interest! ) that you quoted.

But obviously, different folks apparently will derive different things from this article. I found it interesting and informative, sorry that you did not.


----------



## Big T

Our country's leaders have made the pandemic a selective, political issue (both sides of the aisle). We have/had the ability to contain, but we also let emotions get ginned up, by the extremes of both sides (I'm a right leaning libertarian).

In my rural county, we have a low infection rate, lower than average. My controller's (her office is across the hall from) son, is infected. PA has been doing an above average job of contact tracing, and all in my office, have been given instructions for ALL to get tested, if anyone shows symptoms. This is now 3-1/2 weeks in, so we are pretty safe. No one else in my controller's family has shown symptoms, and neither has anyone in my office. Why? I suppose every single one of us has abided by the guidelines.

Politics will be the ruination of this great republic. It is nothing but a game for both parties, with those of us in the middle left holding the bag. Where else would a guy like Trump (I voted for him) get elected? Lesser of two evils, but as George Carlin said, still evil. Why would a major party field a tainted candidate such as H. Clinton? Or presently Uncle Joe (not tainted, but way, way past his prime)?


----------



## Tiger

smmrfld said:


> Pretty damn close to the truest words ever written.


As ignorant and wildly biased as could be. It epitomizes much of the propaganda that Americans are subjected to on a daily basis from our "objective" media whose tendentiousness is a disgrace to the profession.


----------



## Tiger

Flanderian said:


> I have no interest in the left-right debate, and none in debate for its own sake. Nothing wrong with debate, it's both a skill and art, and good for training several abilities, but I have no interest in it. The whole left-right ping pong match is very, very tiresome to me. I know others enjoy it. Sorry, I don't.


Yet, you have posted - on multiple occasions - articles or your own thoughts that were politically motivated and slanted, and have attacked others on an ad hominem basis rather than on an objective, factual one.


----------



## Flanderian

Vaccine timeline update -

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma...zer-biontech-ceos-sound-off-vaccine-timelines


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Looking forward to where this discussion will be in mid August when things are completely off the rails. 

My prediction is that none participating will have altered their position on any aspect one iota.

A bit like a soap opera. Years pass and the plot never seems to advance.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## 127.72 MHz

It is my sincere hope that you are incorrect on the "off the rails" part.



Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Looking forward to where this discussion will be in mid August when things are completely off the rails.
> 
> My prediction is that none participating will have altered their position on any aspect one iota.
> 
> A bit like a soap opera. Years pass and the plot never seems to advance.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


----------



## Big T

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Looking forward to where this discussion will be in mid August when things are completely off the rails.
> 
> My prediction is that none participating will have altered their position on any aspect one iota.
> 
> A bit like a soap opera. Years pass and the plot never seems to advance.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


What do you expect? We're in a presidential election year, and one candidate is trying his best to not appear off his rocker and the other continues to poke the beast with his outlandish blather.

Is that fiddlin' I hear?

PS: I disagree that positions won't change! I don't believe any here are politicians, and in today's US, at least on the national level, that is the litmus test for acceptance into the "off yer nut' club. Bear in mind, I am not referring to guv'mint employees, as I believe (for the most part) they all try to do their best, given the sometime influence of patronize by the elected that are their bosses.

Shut the polly's up, let Dr. Birx, Fauci and so forth, do their job, unimpeded by the blather. Their views may differ, but as scientists, they generally reach statistical concensus.


----------



## Flanderian

Big T said:


> Shut the polly's up, let Dr. Birx, Fauci and so forth, do their job, unimpeded by the blather. Their views may differ, but as scientists, they generally reach statistical concensus.


Hear! Hear! 👍


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Here in Atlanta, things seem to be going off the rails. In the southeast, they might be heading off the rails, down the gorge, and in a smoldering mass of twisted metal, going over a Niagara like waterfall.

But that is just an opinion. The massive increase in virus cases, filling hospitals, arguments between the mayor of the capital city and the governor, a return of the capital to phase 1 measures, children being killed in the streets by armed vigilantes, the national guard being called out to protect government property from armed vandals...can certainly be interpreted as an overall positive if one is an anarchist.

And anarchy is a system we haven’t given a fair shake, so who is to judge....

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## Big T

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> Here in Atlanta, things seem to be going off the rails. In the southeast, they might be heading off the rails, down the gorge, and in a smoldering mass of twisted metal, going over a Niagara like waterfall.
> 
> But that is just an opinion. The massive increase in virus cases, filling hospitals, arguments between the mayor of the capital city and the governor, a return of the capital to phase 1 measures, children being killed in the streets by armed vigilantes, the national guard being called out to protect government property from armed vandals...can certainly be interpreted as an overall positive if one is an anarchist.
> 
> And anarchy is a system we haven't given a fair shake, so who is to judge....
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


And the anarchists are chasing a tiger, grabbing for the tail. What will they do when they have the tiger by the tail?

Politicians all need to shut up! Remove the attention from the anarchists! Leave the scientists and medical profession handle the pandemic. Above all ( and this us a pipe dream) we citizens deserve the truth.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

But the politicians, their campaign's and handlers, are not to going to shut up or even quiet down, it's an election year.

And, in the midst of a pandemic the truth, which leaves wide openings for political rhetoric, centrally involves the word, "Safety." (Over the years I've been involved in many hospital staff meetings that devolved into accomplishing nothing because "Safety" is highly subjective.)

If one's definition of safety* only involves not becoming infected with the covid19 virus*, the safest thing to do is lock down everyone with food being delivered via a central source until an effective vaccine is developed,.....Of course this is absurd.

So whomever sets policy in this pandemic leaves wide openings for the subjective judgement of their opponent's.

Yesterday I listened to Dr. Fauci say that he was concerned about virus hot spots and, in his opinion, those areas might need to be shut down, again. (*The "Safest" thing if infection is one's only concern.*)

And then the headline will be that whomever did not lockdown cares more about money, (the economy) than the live's of citizens,.........And we all know where it goes from there.

We're all in for quite a ride.



Big T said:


> And the anarchists are chasing a tiger, grabbing for the tail. What will they do when they have the tiger by the tail?
> 
> Politicians all need to shut up! Remove the attention from the anarchists! Leave the scientists and medical profession handle the pandemic. Above all ( and this us a pipe dream) we citizens deserve the truth.


----------



## Flanderian

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> And anarchy is a system we haven't given a fair shake, so who is to judge....


IMO, anarchy is innately incompatible with the human species. I think we too often ignore that we too are a species . And I view humans as the most social of all animal species, one whose entire concept of reality is the product of evolutionary social interaction, and that we are hard-wired to adopt certain behaviors as forms of coping. As such, I believe anarchy is at most a transitory state to evolving new hierarchies.


----------



## eagle2250

Big T said:


> And the anarchists are chasing a tiger, grabbing for the tail. What will they do when they have the tiger by the tail?
> 
> Politicians all need to shut up! Remove the attention from the anarchists! Leave the scientists and medical profession handle the pandemic. Above all ( and this us a pipe dream) we citizens deserve the truth.


Perhaps it's time for the brotherhood to pause and reflect and watch (or re-watch) the movie Soylent Green. "What's your favorite color?" LOL.


----------



## thefringthing

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> The massive increase in virus cases, filling hospitals, arguments between the mayor of the capital city and the governor, a return of the capital to phase 1 measures, children being killed in the streets by armed vigilantes, the national guard being called out to protect government property from armed vandals...can certainly be interpreted as an overall positive if one is an anarchist.


This is off-topic, but anarchism is not pro-chaos, but rather anti-hierarchy (both social and economic). If you're interested in learning what anarchism is actually about, some classics include Alexander Berkman's _What is Anarchism?_, Rudolph Rocker's _Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice_, Murray Bookchin's _Post-Scarcity Anarchism_, and Piotr Kropotkin's _The Conquest of Bread_, all of which were published as a series by AK Press and are readily available wherever you get used books. (And all were written long before the current president began referring to anyone opposing him in the street as an anarchist.)


----------



## Tiger

thefringthing said:


> This is off-topic, but anarchism is not pro-chaos, but rather anti-hierarchy (both social and economic). If you're interested in learning what anarchism is actually about, some classics include Alexander Berkman's _What is Anarchism?_, Rudolph Rocker's _Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice_, Murray Bookchin's _Post-Scarcity Anarchism_, and Piotr Kropotkin's _The Conquest of Bread_, all of which were published as a series by AK Press and are readily available wherever you get used books. (And all were written long before the current president began referring to anyone opposing him in the street as an anarchist.)


_Anarchism_ and _anarchy_ are not the same things. An _anarchist_ could be a supporter of either.

In addition, the "people in the streets" are clearly opposed to far more things than Mr. Trump, although seem quite reticent to speak out against certain types of violent and murderous behavior, even when prevalent. Very peculiar...


----------



## 127.72 MHz

thefringthing said:


> This is off-topic, but anarchism is not pro-chaos, but rather anti-hierarchy (both social and economic). If you're interested in learning what anarchism is actually about, some classics include Alexander Berkman's _What is Anarchism?_, Rudolph Rocker's _Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice_, Murray Bookchin's _Post-Scarcity Anarchism_, and Piotr Kropotkin's _The Conquest of Bread_, all of which were published as a series by AK Press and are readily available wherever you get used books. (And all were written long before the current president began referring to anyone opposing him in the street as an anarchist.)


I can say with little doubt that the vast majority of individuals who are vandalizing private property, looting, attempting to raze buildings, and spray painting the "A" logo surrounded by a circle cannot even spell anarchy, let alone intellectualize it's meaning,.....


----------



## Flanderian

There's far more that's uncertain about Covid-19, than what is certain. As more experience is gained in treating the disease caused by this novel virus, it's been observed that for some the process of recovery is uncertain, with some suffering long-term consequences from the infection. -

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/8/21251899/coronavirus-long-term-effects-symptoms


----------



## Flanderian

127.72 MHz said:


> I can say with little doubt that the vast majority of individuals who are vandalizing private property, looting, attempting to raze buildings, and spray painting the "A" logo surrounded by a circle cannot even spell anarchy, let alone intellectualize it's meaning,.....


+1!


----------



## Acct2000

Wow. I'm not happy about it, but I generally wear masks. Our Michigan governor, who has pushed people to accost people not wearing masks is probably proud. Someone who was not happy about being served at a Quality Dairy store near Lansing, MI, where I live accosted someone who was not happy about being refused service because he was not wearing a mask.

The non-mask guy (age 43) stabbed his 77 year old accoster, who lived and is in the hospital. The stabber was chased down by police and was shot when he refused to drop his knife.

This whole thing is escalating more and more with people going berzerk on both ends. I hope lefties and righties are both proud of themselves.

When we need to respect, communicate and learn the most, the ends of the spectrum are gleefully promoting violence. I wish the middle would rise and vote nearly all the current extremist politicians ON BOTH SIDES out of office.

This just happened around noon today. The stabber has died from his bullet wounds.

I'm just hoping the extremists are loving their "victory." I would hate to see their desire to push their will on others no matter what go unfulfilled, you know. (That last sentence was sarcasm.)

As far as I can see, this is what the Covid "crisis" is really all about.


----------



## Big T

I cannot comprehend how some get themselves worked supporting either side and your descriptive word "gleefully" tells the tale. I fear our country has truly become a land of lemmings.

I don't care what others might do, but I have (and will) continue to wear a mask. I hope others don't mind me not being chummy or touch-feely, but quite frankly, I am not ready to meet my maker, as I got way too many amends to make before that time!


----------



## Mike Petrik

Acct2000 said:


> Wow. I'm not happy about it, but I generally wear masks. Our Michigan governor, who has pushed people to accost people not wearing masks is probably proud. Someone who was not happy about being served at a Quality Dairy store near Lansing, MI, where I live accosted someone who was not happy about being refused service because he was not wearing a mask.
> 
> The non-mask guy (age 43) stabbed his 77 year old accoster, who lived and is in the hospital. The stabber was chased down by police and was shot when he refused to drop his knife.
> 
> This whole thing is escalating more and more with people going berzerk on both ends. I hope lefties and righties are both proud of themselves.
> 
> When we need to respect, communicate and learn the most, the ends of the spectrum are gleefully promoting violence. I wish the middle would rise and vote nearly all the current extremist politicians ON BOTH SIDES out of office.
> 
> This just happened around noon today. The stabber has died from his bullet wounds.
> 
> I'm just hoping the extremists are loving their "victory." I would hate to see their desire to push their will on others no matter what go unfulfilled, you know. (That last sentence was sarcasm.)
> 
> As far as I can see, this is what the Covid "crisis" is really all about.


I share your basic sentiment, but to be fair I am not aware of anybody on the Left who is in a position of responsibility actually promoting violence, even if there are a few who flirt with excusing it. I'm not aware of anyone on the Right who is in a position of responsibility promoting or excusing violence.

The politically-charged violence we have seen and experienced recently is driven by a disordered "rush" of anger grounded in an exaggerated sense of grievance. Tragically, there are people in positions of responsibility who have cultivated and encouraged that sense of grievance with impressive intentionality. In some cases their positions are dependent on it.


----------



## Big T

Mike Petrik said:


> ...Tragically, there are people in positions of responsibility who have cultivated and encouraged that sense of grievance with impressive intentionality. In some cases their positions are dependent on it.


Very true, and people from both sides of the aisle. Sad.


----------



## Flanderian

A quarter million dead by Christmas?

The IHME projections for the progress of Covid-19, which have gone up, down and sideways as it's been readjusted for changing circumstances now has U.S. fatalities on track for around a quarter million dead by Christamas. The forecast period has currently been extended only to November 1st, but projects 224,000 dead by that time, and the death rate still accelerating. Plotting the daily death rate projected as of the November 1st date out another 7 weeks yields over a quarter million dead.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson

Flanderian said:


> A quarter million dead by Christmas?
> 
> The IHME projections for the progress of Covid-19, which have gone up, down and sideways as it's been readjusted for changing circumstances now has U.S. fatalities on track for around a quarter million dead by Christamas. The forecast period has currently been extended only to November 1st, but projects 224,000 dead by that time, and the death rate still accelerating. Plotting the daily death rate projected as of the November 1st date out another 7 weeks yields over a quarter million dead.
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


And add the inevitable flu numbers to these for a particularly un-joyous holiday season.

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## challer

While COVID infection rates are up, the death rate is down more than 75% from the peak, not accelerating. Given the financial incentives of hospitals to intentionally misreport C19 deaths (reimbursement triples), we in the industry know the deaths are over reported but by how much is not knowable. The irony is that preventable health deaths far exceed what C19 might do. There is irony observing a person in line for McDonalds wearing a mask. Hospital mistakes cause about 500,000 deaths/year, about twice C19 projections. Tens of thousands have died putting off need medical procedures, substance abuse, and suicide. There are always two sides to it and striking the balance is challenging.



Flanderian said:


> A quarter million dead by Christmas?
> 
> The IHME projections for the progress of Covid-19, which have gone up, down and sideways as it's been readjusted for changing circumstances now has U.S. fatalities on track for around a quarter million dead by Christamas. The forecast period has currently been extended only to November 1st, but projects 224,000 dead by that time, and the death rate still accelerating. Plotting the daily death rate projected as of the November 1st date out another 7 weeks yields over a quarter million dead.
> 
> https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## Guest

challer said:


> While COVID infection rates are up, the death rate is down more than 75% from the peak, not accelerating. Given the financial incentives of hospitals to intentionally misreport C19 deaths (reimbursement triples), we in the industry know the deaths are over reported but by how much is not knowable. The irony is that preventable health deaths far exceed what C19 might do. There is irony observing a person in line for McDonalds wearing a mask. Hospital mistakes cause about 500,000 deaths/year, about twice C19 projections. Tens of thousands have died putting off need medical procedures, substance abuse, and suicide. There are always two sides to it and striking the balance is challenging.


How can this person be allowed to continually promote misleading and erroneous information on this site?
From the beginning of this pandemic he has decried it, minimised it, and professed a knowledge of facts which has been proven wrong time and time again.

No wonder you are loading members when you give people like this a voice.


----------



## Flanderian

challer said:


> While COVID infection rates are up, the death rate is down more than 75% from the peak, not accelerating. Given the financial incentives of hospitals to intentionally misreport C19 deaths (reimbursement triples), we in the industry know the deaths are over reported but by how much is not knowable. The irony is that preventable health deaths far exceed what C19 might do. There is irony observing a person in line for McDonalds wearing a mask. Hospital mistakes cause about 500,000 deaths/year, about twice C19 projections. Tens of thousands have died putting off need medical procedures, substance abuse, and suicide. There are always two sides to it and striking the balance is challenging.


https://slate.com/technology/2020/07/covid-19-florida-hospitalization-rates-desantis.html
https://www.wral.com/fact-check-do-hospitals-get-paid-more-to-treat-covid-19-patients/19156357/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...ovid-19-coronavirus-data-to-cdc/#addddef60f8a


----------



## Mike Petrik

While hospitals are paid a 20% premium for accepting patients to be treated for COVID, there is no evidence (yet) of hospitals gaming the system. That said, a person who follows hospital industry financial news would not bet too much in favor of hospital integrity. Moreover, even if relaxing the threshold for COVID admissions might be appropriate (or at least supportable as such), such changes would necessarily render longitudinal hospital admission comparisons deceptive.

The Forbes article included a couple of benign facts and then added a ton of innuendo, surmise, and speculation. It's a good example for what passes as journalism these days.


----------



## challer

Flanderian said:


> https://slate.com/technology/2020/07/covid-19-florida-hospitalization-rates-desantis.html
> https://www.wral.com/fact-check-do-hospitals-get-paid-more-to-treat-covid-19-patients/19156357/
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...ovid-19-coronavirus-data-to-cdc/#addddef60f8a


Interesting but not relevant. I work with hospitals everyday. The ERs are generally very quiet. Of course Trump doesn't want over reporting of C19 and as a taxpayer neither do I. Hospital admins I know very well confirm, $12K for flu, $30+ for C19 with a ventilator. And the CDC has proven themselves fools throughout the whole thing. There is plenty of evidence hospitals are gaming the system but don't expect to see it reported. Hospitals game reimbursement on all matters.


----------



## iam.mike

Mike Petrik said:


> ...article included a couple of benign facts and then added a ton of innuendo, surmise, and speculation. It's a good example for what passes as journalism these days.


I couldn't agree with you more on this, regarding the media at-large.

Phrases like "there is no evidence" are used to justify the writer's (or reporter's) opinion only. Or used by others to validate that their _*opinion*_ is the correct one.

Maybe there is evidence, but no one is exposing it at the moment -- or ever. Normally when people are doing bad things, they go out of their way to do a good job of hiding it.

To think that a system designed to be paid/reimbursed by insurance can't be or isn't being gamed is naive at best.

Is there systemic abuse & mis-reporting? I don't know. Is it happening, most likely.


----------



## Big T

Here in Pennsyltucky, our governor has once again instituted confusing mandates: bars and night clubs shuttered. Restaurants restricted to 25% capacity. Alcoholic drinks only served at sit-down restaurants and so forth. People work from home, if they can. Masks worn when you leave your home. Crowds limited to between 25 and 250 people (depending upon type of gathering).

I'm just a dumb, old manufacturing plant owner and here in PA, we have some very rural areas (my area) and densely populated areas (Philly, Pittsburgh). Our area still pretty much rolls up the carpet around 10 to 11PM. Our cases of infection are very low, with one death in our tri-county area.

I remain very, very puzzled with cookie cutter approaches to combatting this virus and further why accelerated efforts into contact tracing, is not taking place.


----------



## Flanderian

Vaccine update -

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200610/covid-19-latest-updates


----------



## ChrisRS

It’s humorous to go back and read this from the beginning. I have (had) it and am now symptom free. More than a few in my family have it to varying degrees of severity. Go ahead, ask me anything.


----------



## Peak and Pine

^

How old are you?
What were your symtoms?
How soon after symtoms were you tested?
Hospitalized ?
Start to finish, how long?
Residuals?
Knowledge of how caught?.
What sort of doctor, PCP?
How much out of pocket?

Congratulations, because I can't think of anything more appropriate to say to someone recovered.


----------



## ChrisRS

Peak and Pine said:


> ^
> 
> How old are you?
> What were your symtoms?
> How soon after symtoms were you tested?
> Hospitalized ?
> Start to finish, how long?
> Residuals?
> Knowledge of how caught?.
> What sort of doctor, PCP?
> How much out of pocket?
> 
> Congratulations, because I can't think of anything more appropriate to say to someone recovered.


I am mid-50s in good health. 
Fever and body ache the first three days followed by constant headache for two more days.
Not hospitalized, managed symptoms using over the counter medications. 
No residuals
No idea how I got it. I follow the rules for being in public and work requires maintaining appropriate social distancing. No known contact with anyone symptomatic. It did start with me. My wife developed symptoms three days after me. 
No doctor. Has a test performed at CVS because of my symptoms and an abundance of caution. By the time I got my positive test results back, I was symptom free. As a result, nothing out of pocket for me.

My wife is a different story. She is undergoing a "second week decomposition". Apparently this is well known in the medical community, not well reported to the public, at least from my news sources. She is in the hospital, the primary concern being low blood oxygen. All other markers and tests are normal.


----------



## ChrisRS

You are correct. Had it not been for the notoriety of 19, I would have treated it as a normal summer crud. 

I’m glad I got tested because it helped frame my wife’s illness. She had fever, body aches and a sore throat for about four days. Having gotten past that and feeling better for a couple of days, she quickly declined into a persistant cough and shallow breathing. Easy decision to bring her to the ER.


----------



## Peak and Pine

ChrisRS said:


> You are correct. Had it not been for the notoriety of 19, I would have treated it as a normal summer crud.
> 
> I'm glad I got tested because it helped frame my wife's illness. She had fever, body aches and a sore throat for about four days. Having gotten past that and feeling better for a couple of days, she quickly declined into a persistant cough and shallow breathing. Easy decision to bring her to the ER.


Editing note. When Chris, above, says, "You are correct", he is referring to a ghost post, something I wrote about his illness that also contained personal info which I belatedly decided against sharing, so took the post down.

Chris, sorry to hear about your wife, but it seems toughness might run in your neighborhood and hope her ilness is fleeting. Best.


----------



## eagle2250

ChrisRS said:


> You are correct. Had it not been for the notoriety of 19, I would have treated it as a normal summer crud.
> 
> I'm glad I got tested because it helped frame my wife's illness. She had fever, body aches and a sore throat for about four days. Having gotten past that and feeling better for a couple of days, she quickly declined into a persistant cough and shallow breathing. Easy decision to bring her to the ER.


Chris, with your permission I will keep you and your wife in our thoughts and prayers...here's to a quick and complete recovery!


----------



## Flanderian

ChrisRS said:


> I am mid-50s in good health.
> Fever and body ache the first three days followed by constant headache for two more days.
> Not hospitalized, managed symptoms using over the counter medications.
> No residuals
> No idea how I got it. I follow the rules for being in public and work requires maintaining appropriate social distancing. No known contact with anyone symptomatic. It did start with me. My wife developed symptoms three days after me.
> No doctor. Has a test performed at CVS because of my symptoms and an abundance of caution. By the time I got my positive test results back, I was symptom free. As a result, nothing out of pocket for me.
> 
> My wife is a different story. She is undergoing a "second week decomposition". Apparently this is well known in the medical community, not well reported to the public, at least from my news sources. She is in the hospital, the primary concern being low blood oxygen. All other markers and tests are normal.


Thanks for offering your first-hand experience with this. Delighted you've come round so well, and have every hope your wife will soon be joining you!

👍 👍 👍


----------



## eagle2250

Flanderian said:


> Thanks for offering your first-hand experience with this. Delighted you've come round so well, and have every hope your wife will soon be joining you!
> 
> 👍 👍 👍


Ditto on the reply! Stay well, ChrisRS and hoping your wife experiences a full and speedy recovery.


----------



## ChrisRS

eagle2250 said:


> Ditto on the reply! Stay well, ChrisRS and hoping your wife experiences a full and speedy recovery.


Thank you for the best wishes. She is experiencing the cytokine storm at this point. Inflammatory response.


----------



## Oldsarge

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...racker-how-they-work-latest-developments-cvd/
We could have one or more approved by the end of the year.


----------



## Dhaller

Oldsarge said:


> https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...racker-how-they-work-latest-developments-cvd/
> We could have one or more approved by the end of the year.


Hope abides!

My daughter's 8th birthday is tomorrow.

Historically, she's always had the big shindig (we did a ninja training camp last year, bringing in a Parkour instructor to teach wall-running and the like... good times), usually around 40-50 people. This year, just the three of us (Dad, Mom, daughter). Of course, she is so *uncomplaining* - in many ways kids better weather the vicissitudes of random chance better than adults - which I appreciate, but still, it is very frustrating indeed.

Yes, First World Problems, but sometimes it's the little things that bring calamity into focus.

DH


----------



## Big T

Though I was not anywhere approaching a fan (or even liking him!), Donald Rumsfield had a saying very appropriate to our understanding of the COVID pandemic, and this understanding the unknown unknowns. No amount of blather from any politician helps, and badgering of medical people exaccerbates the situation (I'm referring to JimJordan's grilling of Dr. Fauci, yesterday).

Individual application of common sense, is much needed, to permit us to reach the time when vaccines will be available.


----------



## eagle2250

Big T said:


> Though I was not anywhere approaching a fan (or even liking him!), Donald Rumsfield had a saying very appropriate to our understanding of the COVID pandemic, and this understanding the unknown unknowns. No amount of blather from any politician helps, and badgering of medical people exaccerbates the situation (I'm referring to JimJordan's grilling of Dr. Fauci, yesterday).
> 
> Individual application of common sense, is much needed, to permit us to reach the time when vaccines will be available.


IMHO you are spot-on with your assessment. We, the American people, have so unnecessarily complicated this pandemic response process. We are quick to lay it all on the politicians, but the reality is so many of us have failed to recognize and accept our individual responsibility...1) avoid crowds; 2) wash our hands properly and as frequently as necessary and 3) wear a mask and if necessary, protective gloves when we must go out. While it is true that virtually all of our elective officials in both the Executive and Legislative Branches of our Federal government bring nothing of value to the plate, that does not excuse any one of us for abdicating our personal responsibilities. We are the key to our personal survival...not the politicians!


----------



## Flanderian

Big T said:


> Though I was not anywhere approaching a fan (or even liking him!), Donald Rumsfield had a saying very appropriate to our understanding of the COVID pandemic, and this understanding the unknown unknowns. No amount of blather from any politician helps, and badgering of medical people exaccerbates the situation (I'm referring to JimJordan's grilling of Dr. Fauci, yesterday).
> 
> Individual application of common sense, is much needed, to permit us to reach the time when vaccines will be available.





eagle2250 said:


> IMHO you are spot-on with your assessment. We, the American people, have so unnecessarily complicated this pandemic response process. We are quick to lay it all on the politicians, but the reality is so many of us have failed to recognize and accept our individual responsibility...1) avoid crowds; 2) wash our hands properly and as frequently as necessary and 3) wear a mask and if necessary, protective gloves when we must go out. While it is true that virtually all of our elective officials in both the Executive and Legislative Branches of our Federal government bring nothing of value to the plate, that does not excuse any one of us for abdicating our personal responsibilities. We are the key to our personal survival...not the politicians!


+1! 👍 👍 👍


----------



## Flanderian

The IHME has updated their projections for Covid-19 from a few weeks ago. They have now extended the projection to December 1st. And rather than in the last projection which projected a quarter million dead by Christmas, it now projects a quarter million dead before Thanksgiving, with almost 300,000 dead by December 1st. They've updated their projections many times, let's hope their wrong.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america


----------



## The Irishman

Here in Ireland we are in a situation where following a quite strict 'lockdown' we have seen a resurgence of the virus in several counties. Daily case numbers have risen again. On the plus side, there seems to be less community transmission than we feared, and the new clusters seem to mainly be related to specific sites that are associated with close working conditions and low paid (often migrant) workers who are living together in pretty crowded accommodation. 

This spike in cases has been a bit of a dry-run for us to see whether we will go back to a strict lockdown or not. What seems to be being trialled is a kind of middle way where we have the public health advice and closure orders for certain things like gyms and restaurants and café bars within indoor seating only ... But we are allowing outdoor socially distanced sports training to continue, playgrounds remain open, outdoor restaurant seating continues and so on. We have travel restrictions for the worst affected counties, but police are giving advice only - there is no enforcement possible, unlike during lockdown. 

My feeling is that this somewhat lighter approach to lockdown would likely be the model replicated elsewhere in the country, and perhaps countrywide, if our numbers continue to creep up.

It seems that hospital admissions are down and deaths are down. I am not following this as closely as I once did, but my impression is that this is likely because our new clusters are largely affecting younger people and people of working age and they are generally recovering well. In comparison, our previous experience saw clusters in care homes which accounted for a large number of our serious cases and fatalities.

A major goal here is to see the full reopening of schools in September, and in general I would say that the desire for parents to go to school and for most workers to be able to work as "normally" as possible is now almost overwhelming in political terms. Unless we see something like a Northern Italy style crisis in the Winter then there is absolutely no appetite for further public health measures which will deepen the recession any more.

I would also say that even many doctors are warning the public health advice aimed at tackling the virus must be take into account the maths of 'competing mortalities', that is, that we cannot again have a system where diagnostics and treatment for other medical conditions is being deferred for weeks and months, and where people are discouraged from attending GP surgeries.

Financial supports in place for businesses and workers are gradually going to be withdrawn. Our pub sector remains closed and is unlikely to reopen for the foreseeable. Business insolvencies so far have not been as high as you would expect... But the financial supports disincentivised businesses from shutting up shop. When they go we will see a lot of businesses go to the wall, and then we will see this thing really bite. Not to be negative, but a cascade of mortgage defaults are inevitable. The only good thing for the people who will fall afoul of this in Ireland is that there is little appetite for evictions except in the most extreme cases and after many years of legal efforts.


----------



## eagle2250

The Irishman said:


> Here in Ireland we are in a situation where following a quite strict 'lockdown' we have seen a resurgence of the virus in several counties. Daily case numbers have risen again. On the plus side, there seems to be less community transmission than we feared, and the new clusters seem to mainly be related to specific sites that are associated with close working conditions and low paid (often migrant) workers who are living together in pretty crowded accommodation.
> 
> This spike in cases has been a bit of a dry-run for us to see whether we will go back to a strict lockdown or not. What seems to be being trialled is a kind of middle way where we have the public health advice and closure orders for certain things like gyms and restaurants and café bars within indoor seating only ... But we are allowing outdoor socially distanced sports training to continue, playgrounds remain open, outdoor restaurant seating continues and so on. We have travel restrictions for the worst affected counties, but police are giving advice only - there is no enforcement possible, unlike during lockdown.
> 
> My feeling is that this somewhat lighter approach to lockdown would likely be the model replicated elsewhere in the country, and perhaps countrywide, if our numbers continue to creep up.
> 
> It seems that hospital admissions are down and deaths are down. I am not following this as closely as I once did, but my impression is that this is likely because our new clusters are largely affecting younger people and people of working age and they are generally recovering well. In comparison, our previous experience saw clusters in care homes which accounted for a large number of our serious cases and fatalities.
> 
> A major goal here is to see the full reopening of schools in September, and in general I would say that the desire for parents to go to school and for most workers to be able to work as "normally" as possible is now almost overwhelming in political terms. Unless we see something like a Northern Italy style crisis in the Winter then there is absolutely no appetite for further public health measures which will deepen the recession any more.
> 
> I would also say that even many doctors are warning the public health advice aimed at tackling the virus must be take into account the maths of 'competing mortalities', that is, that we cannot again have a system where diagnostics and treatment for other medical conditions is being deferred for weeks and months, and where people are discouraged from attending GP surgeries.
> 
> Financial supports in place for businesses and workers are gradually going to be withdrawn. Our pub sector remains closed and is unlikely to reopen for the foreseeable. Business insolvencies so far have not been as high as you would expect... But the financial supports disincentivised businesses from shutting up shop. When they go we will see a lot of businesses go to the wall, and then we will see this thing really bite. Not to be negative, but a cascade of mortgage defaults are inevitable. The only good thing for the people who will fall afoul of this in Ireland is that there is little appetite for evictions except in the most extreme cases and after many years of legal efforts.


Thank you for that very informative, thorough and very thoughtful status review of the Covid 19 threat in your area. You touch on an area that so many seem to overlook, as they consider this crisis...that is the post medical crisis long term financial realities with which we are most certainly going to be forced to deal. Our lives may never quite return to what they were prior to this pandemic!


----------



## winghus

127.72 MHz said:


> I see that this has been touched on by another member but it is worth reinforcing; Creating and maintaining a state public health system is the *exclusive purview of that state*. I have been involved in public health policy for awhile and there is an explanation why, given our state's and federal model, the covid19 crisis has found a notable weak spot. But it can quickly turn into a dissertation beyond the scope of this thread.
> *"The Party in Power."*
> Just a couple of notes about my state: (And yes, it is unavoidable that politics enter into this because it is state legislature and a state's executive branch *exclusively* who sets policy, in short, *not* the federal government.)
> 1.) Oregon has the lowest number of hospital beds per citizen than *any* state in the USA.
> 2.) In Oregon the Democratic party has a super-majority in the legislature. (meaning they own the political process in the state.)
> 3.) For lack of testing and out of desperation Oregon contracted with Quest Diagnostics to conduct 20K covid19 tests. Only to find out that our* state* public health system did not even have the cotton on a stick "Swabs" to collect the samples so that they could be forwarded to Quest. So as of now Quest has processed *zero* tests for Oregon.
> 4.) Look at the color coded map of the USA that illustrates the numbers of covid19 positive patients. You see California and Washington in bright red and Oregon in pink. This is much less about Oregon having done a good job and more about *Oregon being in the bottom three states in the USA in testing.*
> 
> Creating and maintaining a state public health system is not, politically speaking, sexy. But it is definitely a topic that is bipartisan and if Oregon's supermajority party made it a priority it could have been done,....And still could be done!


This post didn't age well, did it?


----------



## Mike Petrik

winghus said:


> This post didn't age well, did it?


Not sure what you mean.
That (i) under our legal system states bear the primary responsibility for public health and (ii) virtually all (red and blue) were grossly inadequately prepared for a serious respiratory virus epidemic are pretty much unassailable observations, are they not?


----------



## medhat

Mike Petrik said:


> Not sure what you mean.
> That (i) under our legal system states bear the primary responsibility for public health and (ii) virtually all were grossly inadequately prepared for a serious respiratory virus epidemic are pretty much unassailable observations, are they not?


Would welcome the reference(s) in the legal system that states bear primary responsibility for the public health response to a global pandemic that has affected the entire nation. TIA.


----------



## Mike Petrik

medhat --

I'm sure our inimitable Tiger can provide more scholarly sources, but .....

From CDC
(slide 22)

From ABA
https://www.americanbar.org/news/ab...l-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/

From HHS
https://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/mscc/handbook/chapter7/Pages/therole.aspx

From State Governments:
https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/public-health-chart.aspx

It is long and well-established that states have the primary responsibility for public health, though the federal government has an important supporting role especially regarding epidemics. Neither was sufficiently prepared for COVID, and MHz's contention that his state was woefully ill-prepared is undoubtedly true. Moreover, his state was tragically typical of virtually all states, red or blue.

Indeed, one can make a reasonable case the federal government's supportive response would have been adequate if states had been properly prepared. In other words HHS's preparation was based on the predicate that states were generally properly prepared.

It is disappointing that so many Americans do not understand that under our constitutional federal republic powers and responsibilities rest with the states unless delegated otherwise in the constitution.

Regrettably, all too many Americans suffer under the rather simplistic illusion that the federal government is in charge of all the big stuff and states are in charge of all the little stuff.


----------



## medhat

Mike Petrik said:


> medhat --
> 
> I'm sure our inimitable Tiger can provide more scholarly sources, but .....
> 
> From CDC
> (slide 22)
> 
> From ABA
> https://www.americanbar.org/news/ab...l-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/
> 
> From HHS
> https://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/mscc/handbook/chapter7/Pages/therole.aspx
> 
> From State Governments:
> https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/public-health-chart.aspx
> 
> It is long and well-established that states have the primary responsibility for public health, though the federal government has an important supporting role especially regarding epidemics. Neither was sufficiently prepared for COVID, and MHz's contention that his state was woefully ill-prepared is undoubtedly true. Moreover, his state was tragically typical of virtually all states, red or blue.
> 
> Indeed, one can make a reasonable case the federal government's supportive response would have been adequate if states had been properly prepared. In other words HHS's preparation was based on the predicate that states were generally properly prepared.
> 
> It is disappointing that so many Americans do not understand that under our constitutional federal republic powers and responsibilities rest with the states unless delegated otherwise in the constitution.
> 
> Regrettably, all too many Americans suffer under the rather simplistic illusion that the federal government is in charge of all the big stuff and states are in charge of all the little stuff.


Thanks! Although I think we're going to have to disagree.

On each of your links, it's stated, sometimes explicitly, that there is a clear (and almost certainly legal, if not yet tested) role for federal involvement in public health.

In the multiple examples cited in these great links you've supplied I find it nearly impossible for someone to legitimately claim that this pandemic doesn't fit the bill of a "above and beyond" circumstance where a federalized national response wasn't warranted.

I looked at the links thinking there's be a "bright line" separating and defining a state's public health role, but in each example, including your CDC link, (on the 3 slides 23-25 immediately following Slide 22 which you pointed out), that clearly outline the federal role.

In the case of the current pandemic I think the federal response has been neither adequate nor in any way coherent in anything but a knee-jerk reactionary fashion. And that was without even remembering (until just now) the fiasco over hydroxychloroquine (I'm going to be polite and not even reference the "cures" promoted by the My Pillow guy).

No, as someone in health care, our federal response sucked. I'm embarrassed in retrospect by my 2016 vote. I abhorred the alternative, but in no way, shape, or form would I think she would have allowed the unnecessary excess deaths due to our pathetic federal non-response.


----------



## iam.mike

medhat said:


> I'm embarrassed in retrospect by my 2016 vote. I abhorred the alternative, but in no way, shape, or form would I think she would have allowed the unnecessary excess deaths due to our pathetic federal non-response.


With respect, I struggle with statements like this.

To predict what another administration would do in the exact same situation would be equivalent to traveling back in time, changing the timeline, and knowing in advance what would happen in the new timeline.

Frankly, it's impossible to do that (as far as I know). So, to predict how the exact same circumstance would be handled by anyone else, regardless of their political affiliation, is an exercise in pure speculation.

Sure, we all have certain convictions, and are happy to espouse them onto others who are willing to listen. But most of these convictions are based on our interpretation of what we believe to be the truth. It's subjective entirely. It's neither purely right, nor purely wrong. It's how someone *feels*.

There are likely examples that each side could say about the other side as to what the other side did wrong, or where they missed the mark.

I'm not suggesting that the current administration did a good job. Nor am I suggesting that the current administration failed miserably.

I'm simply admitting that I have no idea how any other federal administration would have truly handled the exact same circumstance, at the exact same time, with all the other exact same contributing factors, if the roles were 100% reversed.

There are too many what-ifs IMO to be 100% certain of anything.


----------



## Mike Petrik

medhat said:


> Thanks! Although I think we're going to have to disagree.
> 
> On each of your links, it's stated, sometimes explicitly, that there is a clear (and almost certainly legal, if not yet tested) role for federal involvement in public health.
> 
> In the multiple examples cited in these great links you've supplied I find it nearly impossible for someone to legitimately claim that this pandemic doesn't fit the bill of a "above and beyond" circumstance where a federalized national response wasn't warranted.
> 
> I looked at the links thinking there's be a "bright line" separating and defining a state's public health role, but in each example, including your CDC link, (on the 3 slides 23-25 immediately following Slide 22 which you pointed out), that clearly outline the federal role.
> 
> In the case of the current pandemic I think the federal response has been neither adequate nor in any way coherent in anything but a knee-jerk reactionary fashion. And that was without even remembering (until just now) the fiasco over hydroxychloroquine (I'm going to be polite and not even reference the "cures" promoted by the My Pillow guy).
> 
> No, as someone in health care, our federal response sucked. I'm embarrassed in retrospect by my 2016 vote. I abhorred the alternative, but in no way, shape, or form would I think she would have allowed the unnecessary excess deaths due to our pathetic federal non-response.


medhat -- 
Nobody said there was no federal role. You are arguing against a straw man of your own creation.


----------



## medhat

iam.mike said:


> With respect, I struggle with statements like this.
> 
> To predict what another administration would do in the exact same situation would be equivalent to traveling back in time, changing the timeline, and knowing in advance what would happen in the new timeline.
> 
> Frankly, it's impossible to do that (as far as I know). So, to predict how the exact same circumstance would be handled by anyone else, regardless of their political affiliation, is an exercise in pure speculation.
> 
> Sure, we all have certain convictions, and are happy to espouse them onto others who are willing to listen. But most of these convictions are based on our interpretation of what we believe to be the truth. It's subjective entirely. It's neither purely right, nor purely wrong. It's how someone *feels*.
> 
> There are likely examples that each side could say about the other side as to what the other side did wrong, or where they missed the mark.
> 
> I'm not suggesting that the current administration did a good job. Nor am I suggesting that the current administration failed miserably.
> 
> I'm simply admitting that I have no idea how any other federal administration would have truly handled the exact same circumstance, at the exact same time, with all the other exact same contributing factors, if the roles were 100% reversed.
> 
> There are too many what-ifs IMO to be 100% certain of anything.


True, no 100% certainty, but to draw an equivalence to the actions of the current administration to any prior admin's response (yes, COVID is a new one with regards to magnitude) is IMO a false equivalence. I'm contrasting this admin's response to pretty much any other admin response (in this case one by a Clinton #2 administration, which for all their presumed faults would have likely excelled at working the bureaucratic levers), and conclude that any other response would have been better.


----------



## medhat

Mike Petrik said:


> medhat --
> Nobody said there was no federal role. You are arguing against a straw man of your own creation.





Mike Petrik said:


> medhat --
> Nobody said there was no federal role. You are arguing against a straw man of your own creation.


Agreed, so I'll clarify. I think the federal response (if you wish to consider their actions a "response") has been simply poor, full stop.

You statement, " Indeed, one can make a reasonable case the federal government's supportive response would have been adequate if states had been properly prepared" is something I simply disagree with. I don't believe there's a reasonable case that can be made to defend this administration's actions in response to the pandemic.

And I consider myself someone inclined to give any administration the benefit of the doubt, and won't persecute them over the timeliness of their initial response, because so much was unclear.

But the actions once it became more clear that this was a global pandemic IMO were more than lacking, they were made not with the public health of Americans in mind, but with the focus on how this might affect the perceptions of Americans regarding the economy.

Which in turn led to manipulation and interference with otherwise well-intentioned public health experts in this administration who had both efforts and statements edited to fit a reelection narrative.


----------



## Mike Petrik

medhat said:


> Agreed, so I'll clarify. I think the federal response (if you wish to consider their actions a "response") has been simply poor, full stop.
> 
> You statement, " Indeed, one can make a reasonable case the federal government's supportive response would have been adequate if states had been properly prepared" is something I simply disagree with. I don't believe there's a reasonable case that can be made to defend this administration's actions in response to the pandemic.
> 
> And I consider myself someone inclined to give any administration the benefit of the doubt, and won't persecute them over the timeliness of their initial response, because so much was unclear.
> 
> But the actions once it became more clear that this was a global pandemic IMO were more than lacking, they were made not with the public health of Americans in mind, but with the focus on how this might affect the perceptions of Americans regarding the economy.
> 
> Which in turn led to manipulation and interference with otherwise well-intentioned public health experts in this administration who had both efforts and statements edited to fit a reelection narrative.


The fact that states had inadequate PPE, beds, respirators, etc. is 100% on them. Inexcusable. The federal government did a Herculean job of filling that breach IMO.

The fact that states looked to the federal government for guidance on what to do during a pandemic is also inexcusable. This is exactly what states should have been prepared for.

I am convinced that the Trump Administration messaging was very imperfect, but in the big picture of things this was a comparatively minor failure.


----------



## Tiger

I believe the first step in determining if there's a federal role in this or any instance is to locate the part of the Constitution (the document that specifies the powers that the federal government possesses) that delegates which branch, if any, has that power. 

If no such power has been given to any part of the federal government, that power belongs to the states and their people. That is the underlying governmental logic (the system of "federalism") of the Constitution, and lest we believe that it is "merely" implicit, such logic is certainly made explicit by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.

Ignoring the Constitution has been the recipe for creating the behemoth that is now the federal government, destroying the notion of limited central government that the overwhelming number of the founding generation desired - and with very good reason!

Of course, if certain powers are deemed desirable for the federal government to possess, Article V of the Constitution delineates the amendment procedure...and requires the ratification of 75% of the states, also for very good reason.


----------



## winghus

Mike Petrik said:


> Not sure what you mean.
> That (i) under our legal system states bear the primary responsibility for public health and (ii) virtually all (red and blue) were grossly inadequately prepared for a serious respiratory virus epidemic are pretty much unassailable observations, are they not?


My statement was the implication that the Democrat-run states were where all the trouble was and it was because they were Democratic-run. Take a look at a COVID map now and where the cases have been rising sharply the few months.


----------



## Mike Petrik

winghus said:


> My statement was the implication that the Democrat-run states were where all the trouble was and it was because they were Democratic-run. Take a look at a COVID map now and where the cases have been rising sharply the few months.


Fair enough, but I think you may have been drawing an unfair inference. The post's criticism was leveled at states generally noting that his own state specifically dropped the ball even though one party had complete power. But yes, perhaps it was a partisan shot.

With respect to handling the pandemic I have generally not been critical of governors, Dem or GOP, because there is simply no perfect solution. There are so many competing considerations, medical, social, and economic. But these difficult balancing acts do not apply to preparation, and on that score I can only hope states have learned an important lesson.


----------



## Howard

My Mother has it, she's having some coughing fits, My Father will be home real soon from the hospital and yesterday after waiting 3 hours on line got tested for coronavirus and came back negative so that's some good news.


----------



## David J. Cooper

That’s great news about your father. All the best to your mom and dad Howard.


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> My Mother has it, she's having some coughing fits, My Father will be home real soon from the hospital and yesterday after waiting 3 hours on line got tested for coronavirus and came back negative so that's some good news.


 Hoping for the best for them and I will say a prayer tonight for their recovery.

T


----------



## fishertw

Please be safe Howard and good thoughts for your parents quick healing. Thanks for letting us all know.
Tom


----------



## Howard

David J. Cooper said:


> That's great news about your father. All the best to your mom and dad Howard.


Thank You David, it's been a rough year.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> Hoping for the best for them and I will say a prayer tonight for their recovery.
> 
> T


Thank You, My Mother is panicking cause she don't know what to do, I'm trying my best to take care of her but what she really needs is a hospital right now to take care of her symptoms.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard, I am saddened to hear of the medical trials with which you and your parents are having to contend. If you haven't a;ready done so, call your family doctor and seek his guidance on how to deal with your mothers symptoms. Should the doctor recommend your mother needs hospitalization, get her there as soon as possible. My wife and I will keep you and yours in our prayers. Take care my friend.


----------



## Howard

fishertw said:


> Please be safe Howard and good thoughts for your parents quick healing. Thanks for letting us all know.
> Tom


I was tested negative which is good on my part so I'm not symptomatic at all but My Father has the COVID and My Mother is panicking so as of this writing she didn't need a hospital after all but just take cough medicine and drink lots of water.


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> Howard, I am saddened to hear of the medical trials with which you and your parents are having to contend. If you haven't a;ready done so, call your family doctor and seek his guidance on how to deal with your mothers symptoms. Should the doctor recommend your mother needs hospitalization, get her there as soon as possible. My wife and I will keep you and yours in our prayers. Take care my friend.


She chose no hospitalization and an ambulance so she will take cough medicine and drink loads of water but all in all she has me which right now I'm her only son that she has and I'll do my best to help her out as much as I can.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> She chose no hospitalization and an ambulance so she will take cough medicine and drink loads of water but all in all she has me which right now I'm her only son that she has and I'll do my best to help her out as much as I can.


Your family doctor might be able to provide prescriptions for medications that might provide some relief for your mom's symptoms.


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> Your family doctor might be able to provide prescriptions for medications that might provide some relief for your mom's symptoms.


She's taking Tylenol and cough medicine plus she needs to drink juice for Vitamin C and water for hydration.


----------



## Howard

Just before I got a call from NYC COVID Test, has anyone else on here got a call from them and how did it go?


----------



## Howard

Just yesterday My Father came home from the hospital, he's feeling OK, he's had a bit of pneumonia and a bit of The COVID plus My Mother's still coughing up a lung.


----------



## Howard

As of this writing, My Mother is still coughing up a lot, I know it's tough for her but she needs to do something about it.


----------



## Howard

Has anyone gotten calls from The COVID Test And Trace lately, They want you to fill out a form to make sure you're alright and feeling OK every day up until this isolation is over. They want you to stay home until December 8th and I already told the front end supervisor December 3rd that I will return to work and I'm not taking anymore days off, I already told her and that's that.


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> Has anyone gotten calls from The COVID Test And Trace lately, They want you to fill out a form to make sure you're alright and feeling OK every day up until this isolation is over. They want you to stay home until December 8th and I already told the front end supervisor December 3rd that I will return to work and I'm not taking anymore days off, I already told her and that's that.


Howard, do what you gotta do! No one will think anything less of you! Only be mindful that you were exposed & might get COVID. Wear a mask, and try to keep as much distance between yourself and others.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> Howard, do what you gotta do! No one will think anything less of you! Only be mindful that you were exposed & might get COVID. Wear a mask, and try to keep as much distance between yourself and others.


Thanks Big T, Have you gotten a call from them lately?


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> Thanks Big T, Have you gotten a call from them lately?


No, I've been lucky in being able to practice socially distancing" from most others, and taking precautions when needed.


----------



## Retired EE

Interesting newspaper article on the "Spanish Flu" in my great-grandfather's hometown paper. Provides a contemporary point of view towards that pandemic. Scroll down to the November 1, 1918 edition, page 3 "Spanish Influenza-- What It Is and How it Should be treated", and on page 4 "Uncle Sam's Advice on the Flu".

Here's the link: http://alexoklahoma.net/alexhistory/trib/newspapers/1918/1918.Pt4.Oct-Dec.pdf

From the 2nd article: ..._"Coughs and Sneezes Spread Diseases"_

Found this while searching for my great-grandfather's obituary, who died of the Spanish flu.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> No, I've been lucky in being able to practice socially distancing" from most others, and taking precautions when needed.


That's what I've been doing lately, practicing social distancing, wear face masks and use hand sanitizer.


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> That's what I've been doing lately, practicing social distancing, wear face masks and use hand sanitizer.


Common sense stuff, Howard! Do the things we do in flu and cold season, including staying away from crowds or going anywhere construed as "at risk, non-essential gathering".


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> Common sense stuff, Howard! Do the things we do in flu and cold season, including staying away from crowds or going anywhere construed as "at risk, non-essential gathering".


That's what I've been doing but where I work it's hard to avoid crowds as I'm a cart attendant at Stop N Shop.


----------



## Howard

My Mother is doing well, they're giving her medicine to treat blood clot on the lungs due to coronavirus and My Father is getting his voice back slowly but surely, some days can't get his head on straight.

And for the 2nd time I tested negative.


----------



## David J. Cooper

Good news Howard. Keep on keeping on.


----------



## Howard

David J. Cooper said:


> Good news Howard. Keep on keeping on.


Thanks Ran, I'm feeling better, got my scent back.

I think being tested 2 times is enough I can't stand waiting on a stupid line to get tested waiting for the doors to open even if it's outside in the cold once for 3 1/2 hours and the other for about an hour and a half, never again. :angry:


----------



## Howard

So far, My Mother's feeling a bit better, She'll be going to rehab to try getting her strength back.


----------



## Howard

But the problem is she can't come home just yet until she tests negative and now My Mother knows how serious this pandemic has been over the past number of months.


----------



## Howard

My Mother is doing better, she has tested negative a second time so now she will get rehab and she will be back home in 14 days, probably after Christmas or early 2021.


----------



## David J. Cooper

That’s good news Howard. How is your dad?


----------



## Howard

David J. Cooper said:


> That's good news Howard. How is your dad?


He's feeling a bit tired and exhausted from all those medications he takes for his urinary problems and other pills for his heart problems too, you can see it in his face.


----------



## Howard

Good News, My Mother came home from the hospital yesterday after a small battle with coronavirus and despite some lingering coughs, she's feeling much better.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> Good News, My Mother came home from the hospital yesterday after a small battle with coronavirus and despite some lingering coughs, she's feeling much better.


This is really great news Howard. Here's wishing the very best, for all of you!


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> This is really great news Howard. Here's wishing the very best, for all of you!


Thank You.


----------



## Howard

She's feeling a bit better despite some coughing here and there but it will take a while before she gets it all back so right now she's taking it easy.


----------



## eagle2250

I was rather saddened to hear on the evening newscast Tuesday evening that the number of American losses due to this damned pandemic exceeded the number of American lives lost during WWII. The news was made even more poignant by my wife's 95 year old uncle dying at the hands of the Covid 19 virus on Monday. Her uncle was a grand old country gentleman, one of the American survivors of WWII, having been decorated for valor By General Mark Clark and after experiencing the many horrors of combat, he was one of the lucky one's who returned home, got married and worked at General Motors for most of his adult life.After retiring he and his family returned to the land and homestead where he had been born and raised. His children were raised on those same acres and he was still living independently at 95 years of age, when the covid 19 virus took this wonderful gentleman from us. What the Axis powers couldn't do the covid virus did in a period of two weeks. He will be greatly missed!


----------



## Oldsarge

I am scheduled to go to the Portland VA for my first vaccination this afternoon. Another one in three weeks and I can travel again. Eagle, have they contacted you about an appointment?


----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> I am scheduled to go to the Portland VA for my first vaccination this afternoon. Another one in three weeks and I can travel again. Eagle, have they contacted you about an appointment?


Not yet. Our local Publix is supposed to be giving the vaccinations in the near future. In the mean time, we are continuing to spend a lot of time at home! . .


----------



## Big T

Wife and I got our first shots this afternoon!


----------



## Tweedlover

I'm of the "older" generation which our state has recently decide is next on the list. However, our local health department unlike nearly every county around us has taken the ignorant position that it will give them out only on a first come, first serve basis. My wife and I cannot spend multiple hours in a car in line, (drive-through clinic). We've gone out twice a little over an hour early and both times turned away as they had no more available vaccine.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

My wife and I have got our first jabs. Austin Public Health said they would contact us for our second. I hope this isn't like a RomCom where "he never calls."


----------



## smmrfld

Easy here in NorCal...took my parents for their first the other day (many options for initial appointments), and they won’t let you leave without an appointment for your second.


----------



## Big T

I’ve used Rite-Aid, as a pharmacy, for years. They offer, IMO, top notch service, and for at least, the past half dozen years, it is where I not only have prescriptions filled, but get my inoculations.

Yesterday, the pharmacist telephoned me, asking “you want a COVID shot?”. I shouted yes! He then said stop over at 3:00. I then asked if he could also inoculate my wife, and he said he think he would have enough. Five minutes later, he called back, saying bring her over and he said she would get her shot. 

When we got there, after signing the CDC paperwork, he said he never had anyone so excited to get a shot. Love that place!


----------



## eagle2250

TKI67 said:


> My wife and I have got our first jabs. Austin Public Health said they would contact us for our second. I hope this isn't like a RomCom where "he never calls."


From what I've read/heard, the optimal wait between shots is three weeks. Good luck in your quest!


----------



## Mike Petrik

eagle2250 said:


> From what I've read/heard, the optimal wait between shots is three weeks. Good luck in your quest!


Even more precisely three weeks is the minimum recommended for optimal efficacy. If one has to wait a bit longer it will not adversely affect the second shot's efficacy.


----------



## Howard

I am finally getting my shot later this morning at a High School, wish me good luck.


----------



## eagle2250

Howard said:


> I am finally getting my shot later this morning at a High School, wish me good luck.


Good luck, my friend!


----------



## Howard

eagle2250 said:


> Good luck, my friend!


I got my shot, the first one and I am getting 2nd in just a few weeks.


----------



## Big T

We got Our second over a week ago, and had some minor discomfort, but it was all gone in 36 hours.


----------



## Andy

Howard said:


> I am finally getting my shot later this morning at a High School, wish me good luck.


Howard:

You'll be fine, probably already if you went this morning! My wife and I got our first shots yesterday morning. I guess we're half shot now!









They were very organized and didn't feel anything from the shot. No problems/pain today. My wife had a slight sensation at the vaccination area this morning but it went away within an hour.

I'm thinking with no problems for me, they might have missed my arm!! ?


----------



## challer

Virginia has me on the list for the fall. They've got real problems with the registration. My mom, 90, just got her second shot


----------



## Tweedlover

We got our first 8 days ago without problems afterward. But, several people we know including my cardiologist talked about having a lot of issues following their second dose to the point of not feeling good enough to work for a few days.


----------



## eagle2250

The wife and I will be getting our second shots on 25 March 2021. We waited in line for perhaps two and one half hours for out first shot, but have been assigned a 15 minute window to go in for our second shot.


----------



## Howard

I'm feeling fine, no fever just a bit of discomfort and a black and blue mark.


----------



## eagle2250

On the TV news this past weekend, I saw a good deal of coverage of the masses of college students celebrating Spring Break in Miami, Florida. At least the city of Miami wisely instituted a curfew to somewhat limit the damage,but here presumably our best and brightest, potentially in the throes of the final months of this pandemic and these young people are massing on the beaches and in the bars, participating in what could become the most destructive of the super-spreader events committed by we misguided American, as these young folks return to their respective college campuses and spread the germs among the student bodies on those campuses. Acting thoughtlesly...is this how we make America great again? I don't think so.


----------



## Big T

Dear wife and I had our second shots, on 3/9/21 and we both had very minor discomfort the next day. But all is good now!

I don't understand the need for spring break travel! Kids are on break when at college: yes they mostly work, but it is not as if they're home. When we had breaks at PSU, I always worked full time (yes I worked part time whenever I could while in school). I just started a young guy, at my plant, this past Friday. He called to see if I would hire him for summer work (material engineering) and I told him to stop by, for an interview. He told me he works Fridays, as he does not have classes on that day during this spring semester. I told him I would give him summer work, and if he wanted, he could also work Fridays. He jumped all over that!

Different times and different values? Don't know, but I would bet the number of students that actually travel, might be quite low, as a percentage.


----------



## ran23

I understand J&J is with our local hospital, getting mine tomorrow.


----------



## Big T

ran23 said:


> I understand J&J is with our local hospital, getting mine tomorrow.


Single shot, correct? When talk of vaccines heated up late last year and early this year, the idea of a single shot would have been my choice, but when I was able to get Moderna (2 shots), I went with it.

The key is herd immunity and the sooner more are vaccinated, the better!


----------



## drlivingston

Received my first shot of Moderna on Thursday, March 18. I was completely fine on Friday and Saturday. Then, on Sunday, I started feeling a little dizzy. My temperature shot up to 101.5 and hovered in that range for almost 30 hours. I just ate soup and stayed in bed. When I woke up Tuesday morning, I felt perfectly normal again, like nothing had ever happened. For the sake of herd immunity, I consider it a small sacrifice. I look forward to receiving my second shot on April 15 (Moderna has a longer gap between shots than Pfizer). If I have the same symptoms again, no worries... I'll gladly endure a little reactionary fever to get back to some semblance of normality.


----------



## ran23

Hospital staff gave me the Pfizer first shot, didn't know when the J&J would be out. no problems.


----------



## eagle2250

The wife and I received our second Pfizer shots this afternoon. My shot went without incident, but my wife's walking around with a bit of a sore arm. A small inconvenience for a life saving degree of immunity. Seems a fair exchange, methinks!


----------



## Howard

Just yesterday I got my 2nd vaccine shot and that's it, no more shots for me.
I felt fine the next morning.


----------



## Peak and Pine

Got my number two this morning. Had a late breakfast and climbed into an open coffin. Just in case.


----------



## Howard

I don't know what happened to my sense of smell lately, I don't have COVID at all but I am asymptomatic and Parents had it last year, I thought the loss of my sense of smell was from wearing the mask for a year and a half cause I thought there was something in the mask that's making my sense of smell way off. My Father said it will go away cause right now I am smelling things and the scent is very weird, I just can't describe it. Has anyone on here experienced it?


----------



## 127.72 MHz

I have not personally heard of people losing their sense of smell and being otherwise asymptomatic Howard,...

However, given the way that a virus can mutate I suspect that we will continue to see symptoms not previously documented with covid.

I agree with your father in that what you have experienced will likely pass with no progression to active infection.

Best regards,


----------



## eagle2250

This past Thursday was spent completing a series of pre-surgical testing activities in preparation for a non-elective surgical procedure to be completed this coming Tuesday. Not surprisingly the testing included an EKG, Lab tests, and a COVID test. Given the reality of this pandemic, I guess that is understandable, but why do they need to verify my height, weight, etc. However, the real pain in the butt aspect of the COVID Pandemic restrictions is that the surgery is taking place in a surgical center that is an hour away from our home and longer when traffic is heavy. Only the patient is allowed in the front door and the person who drove them is expected to wait in the car in the parking lot for four to five hours, to drive the patient home when they are released. I understand that reasonable precautions are necessary, but my wife and I are both vaccinated and tested negative for Covid this past Thursday. If it is safe to admit me as the patient, why not admit my vaccinated covid free driver, whom the hospital requires for a patient that has been under anesthesia. That's it. I am done complaining and I'm off my soap box!


----------



## Howard

127.72 MHz said:


> I have not personally heard of people losing their sense of smell and being otherwise asymptomatic Howard,...
> 
> However, given the way that a virus can mutate I suspect that we will continue to see symptoms not previously documented with covid.
> 
> I agree with your father in that what you have experienced will likely pass with no progression to active infection.
> 
> Best regards,


He says I gave them the virus but how can you give someone a virus when you don't have it in the first place? I don't get it.

With certain foods I can smell but others I can't, it's just weird.


----------



## fishertw

eagle2250 said:


> This past Thursday was spent completing a series of pre-surgical testing activities in preparation for a non-elective surgical procedure to be completed this coming Tuesday. Not surprisingly the testing included an EKG, Lab tests, and a COVID test. Given the reality of this pandemic, I guess that is understandable, but why do they need to verify my height, weight, etc. However, the real pain in the butt aspect of the COVID Pandemic restrictions is that the surgery is taking place in a surgical center that is an hour away from our home and longer when traffic is heavy. Only the patient is allowed in the front door and the person who drove them is expected to wait in the car in the parking lot for four to five hours, to drive the patient home when they are released. I understand that reasonable precautions are necessary, but my wife and I are both vaccinated and tested negative for Covid this past Thursday. If it is safe to admit me as the patient, why not admit my vaccinated covid free driver, whom the hospital requires for a patient that has been under anesthesia. That's it. I am done complaining and I'm off my soap box!


Best wishes to you Eagle! Sorry this has taken a turn in this direction. Hope all works out well. Let us know how you fare. We'll be thinking of you.


----------



## eagle2250

fishertw said:


> Best wishes to you Eagle! Sorry this has taken a turn in this direction. Hope all works out well. Let us know how you fare. We'll be thinking of you.


Thank you for your kind words and thoughts, my friend.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

eagle2250 said:


> This past Thursday was spent completing a series of pre-surgical testing activities in preparation for a non-elective surgical procedure to be completed this coming Tuesday. Not surprisingly the testing included an EKG, Lab tests, and a COVID test. Given the reality of this pandemic, I guess that is understandable, but why do they need to verify my height, weight, etc. However, the real pain in the butt aspect of the COVID Pandemic restrictions is that the surgery is taking place in a surgical center that is an hour away from our home and longer when traffic is heavy. Only the patient is allowed in the front door and the person who drove them is expected to wait in the car in the parking lot for four to five hours, to drive the patient home when they are released. I understand that reasonable precautions are necessary, but my wife and I are both vaccinated and tested negative for Covid this past Thursday. If it is safe to admit me as the patient, why not admit my vaccinated covid free driver, whom the hospital requires for a patient that has been under anesthesia. That's it. I am done complaining and I'm off my soap box!


Eagle:
Wow! Only allowing the patient in the front door and making your ride stay in the parking lot over a four to five hour period is as hard core a policy as I have ever heard of. My wife is a Trauma R.N. and she's shocked as well.

Even at our busy Level 1 Trauma Center we allow one visitor for each in-patient or day patient.

We will indeed be thinking of you Sir.


----------



## Tweedlover

127.72 MHz said:


> Eagle:
> Wow! Only allowing the patient in the front door and making your ride stay in the parking lot over a four to five hour period is as hard core a policy as I have ever heard of. My wife is a Trauma R.N. and she's shocked as well.
> 
> Even at our busy Level 1 Trauma Center we allow one visitor for each in-patient or day patient.
> 
> We will indeed be thinking of you Sir.


Indeed. My wife and I both had outpatient surgical procedures done in the past few months and each of us was allowed to await within the facility for the other. Buncha BS. :angry:


----------



## Howard

Hey MHZ, I have to make an appointment with my doctor for my yearly physical, from there I will tell him about my loss of sense of smell from COVID which I don't have cause this is just bothering me so much, I don't know what he'll say to me and I'm not sure if this will go away anytime soon but maybe he'll give me a prescription for something or just cotton swab my nose.


----------



## Big T

eagle2250 said:


> This past Thursday was spent completing a series of pre-surgical testing activities in preparation for a non-elective surgical procedure to be completed this coming Tuesday. Not surprisingly the testing included an EKG, Lab tests, and a COVID test. Given the reality of this pandemic, I guess that is understandable, but why do they need to verify my height, weight, etc. However, the real pain in the butt aspect of the COVID Pandemic restrictions is that the surgery is taking place in a surgical center that is an hour away from our home and longer when traffic is heavy. Only the patient is allowed in the front door and the person who drove them is expected to wait in the car in the parking lot for four to five hours, to drive the patient home when they are released. I understand that reasonable precautions are necessary, but my wife and I are both vaccinated and tested negative for Covid this past Thursday. If it is safe to admit me as the patient, why not admit my vaccinated covid free driver, whom the hospital requires for a patient that has been under anesthesia. That's it. I am done complaining and I'm off my soap box!


You shall be in my prayers for successful and complete recovery! Keep us posted.

T.


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> Hey MHZ, I have to make an appointment with my doctor for my yearly physical, from there I will tell him about my loss of sense of smell from COVID which I don't have cause this is just bothering me so much, I don't know what he'll say to me and I'm not sure if this will go away anytime soon but maybe he'll give me a prescription for something or just cotton swab my nose.


Here, in very rural Pennsyltucky, you might or might not, get a Covid test! Criteria for testing, varies from place to place and seems, at the least strange, for being 1-1/2 years into a global pandemic.


----------



## eagle2250

Big T said:


> You shall be in my prayers for successful and complete recovery! Keep us posted.
> 
> T.


Thank you, my friend, for the kind thoughts and prayers.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> Here, in very rural Pennsyltucky, you might or might not, get a Covid test! Criteria for testing, varies from place to place and seems, at the least strange, for being 1-1/2 years into a global pandemic.


You mean for what I'm experiencing now? It's just my sense of smell that's off.


----------



## Big T

Howard said:


> You mean for what I'm experiencing now? It's just my sense of smell that's off.


You very well might have Covid, with the loss of your smell the only symptom. I believe you said your parents had it and if so, you should get tested.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> You very well might have Covid, with the loss of your smell the only symptom. I believe you said your parents had it and if so, you should get tested.


I'm going to the walk-in clinic on Thursday, my day off and see if my loss of sense of smell is COVID related or not, hopefully it will go away by itself and I will get my sense of smell back again.

I got tested early this year in March and April and it came back negative.


----------



## Howard

Good News everyone, I got the results this morning from the walk-in clinic and the test turned out negative, My Father thinks it could be a side effect from COVID which I don't have at all and that eventually will go away on it's own most likely within weeks OR my assumption could be that It might be allergies with a stuffed up nose. By The Way, I was thinking about "smell therapy", Would that be a good idea?


----------



## ran23

If you have access to Essential Oils, that keeps my nose clear. Even put a few drops into the shower floor each morning.


----------



## Howard

ran23 said:


> If you have access to Essential Oils, that keeps my nose clear. Even put a few drops into the shower floor each morning.


Where do you buy essential oils?


----------



## Flanderian

Howard said:


> Good News everyone, I got the results this morning from the walk-in clinic and the test turned out negative, My Father thinks it could be a side effect from COVID which I don't have at all and that eventually will go away on it's own most likely within weeks OR my assumption could be that It might be allergies with a stuffed up nose. By The Way, I was thinking about "smell therapy", Would that be a good idea?


Good news indeed, Howard!

Stay well! 👍


----------



## ran23

Practically any store sells them.. Peppermint, Tea Tree or Lemongrass to start.


----------



## Howard

ran23 said:


> Practically any store sells them.. Peppermint, Tea Tree or Lemongrass to start.


I will look into that when I go into a CVS.


----------



## Oldsarge




----------



## eagle2250

Oldsarge said:


> View attachment 63661


At once sage, as well as timely advice!


----------



## Big T

Still hoping the dayam talking heads would shut their pie hole! Let people listen to their doc instead of getting ginned up by 24 hours news goomers.


----------



## eagle2250

No offense intended toward any anti-vaxxers, but how do we explain intelligent people refusing to take a vaccine to protect themselves from Covid 19 or wear masks to protect themselves, but they will rush out and buy up all the Ivermectin, a de-worming medication used by veterinarians, that they can find and take it to fight the virus once they are infected with Covid 19? I find myself befuddled by any thought process that leads to those conclusions. Just saying...... :icon_scratch:


----------



## Big T

eagle2250 said:


> No offense intended toward any anti-vaxxers, but how do we explain intelligent people refusing to take a vaccine to protect themselves from Covid 19 or wear masks to protect themselves, but they will rush out and buy up all the Ivermectin, a de-worming medication used by veterinarians, that they can find and take it to fight the virus once they are infected with Covid 19? I find myself befuddled by any thought process that leads to those conclusions. Just saying...... :icon_scratch:


I respect those choosing to not get vaccinated, when they have drawn that conclusion for themselves. My issue is with those that are influenced multiple ways, every day.

What we are seeing today, with increasing cases with youngsters, just reinforces the need for vaccines: as the original roll out for vaccinations, was for adults, the remaining portion of the population (kids) is now susceptible to Covid.

Now, with that said, I will not mandate my employees to get vaccinated, though they do have to put up with my explanation to them, why they should!


----------



## Howard

I can't believe as to how many stores now sell masks, gloves and hand sanitizers, you'd never see that many years ago.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

My biggest concern is that large scale behaviors, the amalgamation of millions of individual choices, will ensure that the virus has an ample supply of hospitable hosts in which to replicate and eventually mutate. No replication means no mutation. A virus with massive lethality will eventually become more lethal, and this may occur faster than we can handle.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

^^
Possible, but not likely.

Peer reviewed science published in "*Nature*"*** from researchers at Yale and The University of Sidney :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7095397/Nat Microbiol. 2020 Feb 18 : 1-2.
doi: 10.1038/s41564-020-0690-4 [Epub ahead of print]
(All authors are Epidemiologists, or Infectious disease specialists, not social scientists.)
From the paper:
"Mutation. The word naturally conjures fears of unexpected and freakish changes. Ill-informed discussions of mutations thrive during virus outbreaks, including the ongoing spread of SARS-CoV-2. In reality, mutations are a natural part of the virus life cycle and rarely impact outbreaks dramatically."

** *Note: It is considered a remarkable accomplishment, even career defining, for a scientist of any ilk to publish in either "Nature" or "Science."


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^
> Possible, but not likely.
> 
> Peer reviewed science published in "*Nature*"*** from researchers at Yale and The University of Sidney :
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7095397/Nat Microbiol. 2020 Feb 18 : 1-2.
> doi: 10.1038/s41564-020-0690-4 [Epub ahead of print]
> (All authors are Epidemiologists, or Infectious disease specialists, not social scientists.)
> From the paper:
> "Mutation. The word naturally conjures fears of unexpected and freakish changes. Ill-informed discussions of mutations thrive during virus outbreaks, including the ongoing spread of SARS-CoV-2. In reality, mutations are a natural part of the virus life cycle and rarely impact outbreaks dramatically."
> 
> ** *Note: It is considered a remarkable accomplishment, even career defining, for a scientist of any ilk to publish in either "Nature" or "Science."


Excellent info. My main source has been the Lancet via Elsevier. I'll add this one! While it is true that mutations are a natural phenomenon in the virus world, we have had at least one, Delta, that has presented very real challenges, both to management of protocols and to know how or if to adjust our vaccinations. I'd prefer to lower the likelihood of such curve balls.


----------



## Big T

After receiving both doses of Moderna vaccine (2/5 and 3/5), I contracted covid. Today is day 12, after first significant symptoms, and the first day I am beginning to feel normal. I shudder to think how bad it would have been without the vaccine, but suffice to say, it was rougher than the common cold or flu.

To those who do not want the vaccine or to wear a mask, well that's your choice, but don't make it political or try to influence others to follow your views.

Dear Wife did not contract the virus.


----------



## Howard

Big T said:


> After receiving both doses of Moderna vaccine (2/5 and 3/5), I contracted covid. Today is day 12, after first significant symptoms, and the first day I am beginning to feel normal. I shudder to think how bad it would have been without the vaccine, but suffice to say, it was rougher than the common cold or flu.
> 
> To those who do not want the vaccine or to wear a mask, well that's your choice, but don't make it political or try to influence others to follow your views.
> 
> Dear Wife did not contract the virus.


Hope you feel better T.


----------



## eagle2250

In this mornings Yahoo News feed, I read about a healthcare worker who had been fired for refusing to be vaccinated and her response to the firing was, "I wouldn't get vaccinated even if God spoke to me directly and told me to do it!" While I will honor the personal choices of others with regard to covid19 vaccines, I must tell you that I continue to privately wonder...what the hell is wrong with these people? Are they nuts? :icon_scratch:


----------



## Big T

eagle2250 said:


> In this mornings Yahoo News feed, I read about a healthcare worker who had been fired for refusing to be vaccinated and her response to the firing was, "I wouldn't get vaccinated even if God spoke to me directly and told me to do it!" While I will honor the personal choices of others with regard to covid18 vaccines, I must tell you that I continue to privately wonder...what the hell is wrong with these people? Are they nuts? :icon_scratch:


They're nuts! We've got a country that has badly fallen prey to the 24 hours news cycle where you must fall in lock step to this side or to the other side. We are losing middle America!

I have employees that will not get vaccinated nor will they wear masks. Yet they scream bloody murder when someone comes with a mask on. Which is it?

For me, I'll take every precaution afforded. I don't believe there's a boogeyman waiting to jump out from behind every tree, but our days on this earth are all numbered. I don't want to hasten my departure any sooner than when our good Lord wants me.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

eagle2250 said:


> In this mornings Yahoo News feed, I read about a healthcare worker who had been fired for refusing to be vaccinated and her response to the firing was, "I wouldn't get vaccinated even if God spoke to me directly and told me to do it!" While I will honor the personal choices of others with regard to covid19 vaccines, I must tell you that I continue to privately wonder...what the hell is wrong with these people? Are they nuts? :icon_scratch:


My wife and I have thought long about the questions you pose.

*(I apologize for the lengthy post.) *

We have a population of 330 million people so there must be a variety of explanations why some refuse the vaccine.

Some people are clearly irrational, period.

But I do have a theory regarding others. Some people are bombarded by so much conflicting information that they do not know what to believe,....*Millions of Americans have seen that some media will simply refuse to cover issues that may not fit the narrative du jour for their propaganda outlet who masquerades as a member of the Free Press. (And this goes for the political left as well as the right.)*

Trust is paramount in a free country when trying to help the public make decisions about health matters. Our government does not seem to understand this simple concept.

The reality is that the government's health guidance from the beginning has been as much about psychological gamesmanship as it has been about public health. This started from the very beginning of the pandemic when* the then-surgeon general tweeted on Feb. 29, 2020: "Seriously people - STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus."

Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials made the same point.* They followed that up months later by not just recommending masks but mandating them. We know now that the initial anti-mask argument was designed to save masks for the public health professionals who needed them most. *You wonder if they ever considered just saying that*. If they understood the importance of trust, they certainly should have.

The second area of government psychological gamesmanship was herd immunity, or the point at which enough people would be vaccinated to essentially snuff out the virus. Fauci initially said the U.S. would need 60-70% of people to be vaccinated in order to reach herd immunity, according to The New York Times. He later cited higher numbers of 75-80% or more in a CNBC interview in December of 2020.

*The NY Times asked Fauci why he had been "moving the goal posts." Fauci revealed then that the true number may be close to 90% and that he wanted to keep his public estimates low because so many Americans were skeptical about the vaccine. As more people became comfortable with getting a vaccine, he was more willing to increase his estimate to the true projections, according to the Times.
(For Pete's sake, at what point does one just call someone who knowingly lies, a liar?)*

There are numerous other examples of the government not being straight with the American people on COVID-19.

No. 1: Outdoor transmission of the virus is extremely rare, yet government guidance suggested, and many communities required, masking-even outside.

No. 2: The risks from the virus for the young and healthy are extremely low, yet the government allowed schools all over the country to close, ostensibly to protect students.

No. 3: Bans on travel and dining were flouted by the very same elected leaders pushing them.

The list goes on. (And on,...)

The result of this gamesmanship is a erosion of national trust. *The groups with the lowest trust levels are the hardest to win back. *Studying all the mistruths leveled to date, it's hard not to wonder if the newest mask mandate isn't some misguided attempt to encourage vaccinated Americans to pressure the unvaccinated.

We have never had absolute safety as a public policy goal. Without risk, our society could not function. We wouldn't be able to drive. We would forgo most medical procedures. We would essentially never leave home. Risk-free makes no sense as a goal.

*As a result of our government's covid "Policy decisions" I believe that millions of Americans who once trusted our government have now learned that the government is not trustworthy and they do not believe one word that they say.

The United States also has a cohort who are strangers to critical thought. Those who are just bright enough to know a liar when they see one over and over again. They are dug in on their position because, in their mind's, whatever the liar says they will oppose. This may end up costing them their life or the lives of their fellow Americans.*

I told some colleagues at work, if Joe Biden preempted all visual media and said: "As of now no American can take the covid shot. Moreover, it will become a federal crime to take the covid shot," *there would be a stampede to get the shot!*


----------



## Howard

You got people who forget to put on their masks. :angry:


----------



## Mike Petrik

127.72 MHz said:


> My wife and I have thought long about the questions you pose.
> 
> *(I apologize for the lengthy post.) *
> 
> We have a population of 330 million people so there must be a variety of explanations why some refuse the vaccine.
> 
> Some people are clearly irrational, period.
> 
> But I do have a theory regarding others. Some people are bombarded by so much conflicting information that they do not know what to believe,....*Millions of Americans have seen that some media will simply refuse to cover issues that may not fit the narrative du jour for their propaganda outlet who masquerades as a member of the Free Press. (And this goes for the political left as well as the right.)*
> 
> Trust is paramount in a free country when trying to help the public make decisions about health matters. Our government does not seem to understand this simple concept.
> 
> The reality is that the government's health guidance from the beginning has been as much about psychological gamesmanship as it has been about public health. This started from the very beginning of the pandemic when* the then-surgeon general tweeted on Feb. 29, 2020: "Seriously people - STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus."
> 
> Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials made the same point.* They followed that up months later by not just recommending masks but mandating them. We know now that the initial anti-mask argument was designed to save masks for the public health professionals who needed them most. *You wonder if they ever considered just saying that*. If they understood the importance of trust, they certainly should have.
> 
> The second area of government psychological gamesmanship was herd immunity, or the point at which enough people would be vaccinated to essentially snuff out the virus. Fauci initially said the U.S. would need 60-70% of people to be vaccinated in order to reach herd immunity, according to The New York Times. He later cited higher numbers of 75-80% or more in a CNBC interview in December of 2020.
> 
> *The NY Times asked Fauci why he had been "moving the goal posts." Fauci revealed then that the true number may be close to 90% and that he wanted to keep his public estimates low because so many Americans were skeptical about the vaccine. As more people became comfortable with getting a vaccine, he was more willing to increase his estimate to the true projections, according to the Times.
> (For Pete's sake, at what point does one just call someone who knowingly lies, a liar?)*
> 
> There are numerous other examples of the government not being straight with the American people on COVID-19.
> 
> No. 1: Outdoor transmission of the virus is extremely rare, yet government guidance suggested, and many communities required, masking-even outside.
> 
> No. 2: The risks from the virus for the young and healthy are extremely low, yet the government allowed schools all over the country to close, ostensibly to protect students.
> 
> No. 3: Bans on travel and dining were flouted by the very same elected leaders pushing them.
> 
> The list goes on. (And on,...)
> 
> The result of this gamesmanship is a erosion of national trust. *The groups with the lowest trust levels are the hardest to win back. *Studying all the mistruths leveled to date, it's hard not to wonder if the newest mask mandate isn't some misguided attempt to encourage vaccinated Americans to pressure the unvaccinated.
> 
> We have never had absolute safety as a public policy goal. Without risk, our society could not function. We wouldn't be able to drive. We would forgo most medical procedures. We would essentially never leave home. Risk-free makes no sense as a goal.
> 
> *As a result of our government's covid "Policy decisions" I believe that millions of Americans who once trusted our government have now learned that the government is not trustworthy and they do not believe one word that they say.*
> 
> I told some colleagues at work that if Joe Biden preempted all visual media and said: "As of now no American can take the covid shot. Moreover, it will become a federal crime to take the covid shot," *there would be a stampede to get the shot!*


Congratulations and thank you for an articulate and insightful post.
Biden missed an opportunity by not calling the vaccine the Trump vaccine. Giving such credit to Trump would likely have elicited more comfort from Trump supporters and more enthusiasm from Trump himself. It would also have been seen as a unifying statesmanlike gesture of putting country first. Sadly, I suspect it was never even considered.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

Do children still have to receive certain vaccines before they are allowed to attend public schools?


----------



## Oldsarge

Absolutely. That's why the whole anti-vax kerfuffle is a sign of deficient intelligence.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Oldsarge said:


> Absolutely. That's why the whole anti-vax kerfuffle is a sign of deficient intelligence.


I would agree. Most medical professionals would agree that the Anti-vax movement is filled with the willfully ignorant, paranoid, and mentally deficient in our society. (But the 44% of our nation that has yet to be vaccinated are not all activist Anti-vaxers,......)

In the same paragraph I would add that poor messaging and chronic outright lies from our highest political institutions have contributed to create a dangerous and intractable situation in terms of getting our citizens vaccinated.

It would be a gross oversimplification to charge the low covid vaccination rate off exclusively to those of "deficient intelligence," (Although they have contributed significantly.)

As of 6 a.m. EDT Oct. 4, a total of 185,788,098 Americans had been fully vaccinated, or 56 percent of the country's population, according to the CDC's data.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.c...entage-of-population-vaccinated-march-15.html


----------



## Big T

Every member of our family, immediate and extended, except for the young grandbabies, are vaccinated. Our political views go from some very liberal, to centrist, to far right.

Our politicians and our news media grossly mishandled the pandemic. Many citizens have been made pawns to put forth ill conceived opinions of so-called leaders.

What would I do different? Immediately tone down the BS! Stop showing injections every five minutes. Have two bipartisan, respected leaders become the face of information. Remove the word mandate and make everyone subject to inoculations, with no exceptions.


----------



## Tiger

"Deficient intelligence" of "anti-vaxxers"? "Make everyone subject to inoculations"? _Some things to consider:_

People opposed to getting the COVID vaccine typically are not opposed to vaccines per se...just the COVID ones, pejorative labels notwithstanding
Areas in various parts of the world - including the United States (e.g., New England) - that have been highly vaccinated are experiencing major surges in COVID outbreaks. Take a peek at Singapore, too
Studies indicate that the outbreaks are not caused by the "delta variant" but rather by the lack of vaccine durability
A related point: Studies by Pfizer and others have shown that the vaccines lose effectiveness within months, often precipitously
Philosophically, if the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated, then perhaps the vaccines are failing to protect as advertised, and vaccinating the unvaccinated will not yield the results some expect them to, especially in light of the above comments
COVID vaccines are not remotely analogous to the vaccines that eradicated smallpox, polio, et al. To claim otherwise is patently false
Young people 17 years old or younger have a minuscule chance of serious illness from COVID and an even smaller chance of death (six ten-thousands of a percent, i.e., .0006%). Some age brackets are a thousand times less likely to die from COVID than others; it is absurd to treat everyone as being in the same risk class
Young people are far more in jeopardy of suicide, murder, drug overdose and car accidents. Do our politicians fight those scourges with the same fervor they purport to battle COVID? In fact, don't they often promote policies that exacerbate these horrors?
Many studies have shown natural immunity to offer equal and often superior protection versus being vaccinated. Why would it be irrational or "deficient intellectually" to refuse vaccination for the millions of people in this situation?
Not all of the vaccines have FDA approval (and there's confusion regarding _Comirnaty_), and no one knows the potential long-term effects, if any, of any of these palliative vaccines. For many, the risk is not worth the reward. For others, it is
Under what section of the U.S. Constitution does the federal government have the power to mandate _anything_? Which state governments have this power, as permitted by their constitutions? If the answer is "none" then anyone decreeing/supporting such mandates is violating the very system of government they claim to support!
If the federal government can mandate, or as someone expressed, "Make everyone subject to inoculations" even though there is no constitutional power to do so, what else can it mandate? Euthanasia? Celibacy? Sterilization? Wearing bell bottoms?
Is it medically sound to force young people and those who have had COVID to get a vaccine with a waning efficacy and unknown long-term effects, especially when these people are in minute danger of COVID?
It is immensely disturbing that some are willing to attack the intellect of others, while supporting governmental powers typically wielded by totalitarian regimes. I always thought intelligent and moral people opposed such ideologies
There are dozens of examples of the political and entertainment class flouting the draconian rules they mandate/urge on others, or supporting events that would normally be labeled as dangerous if engaged in by others whose politics they disapprove. It is very difficult to take these fools and hypocrites seriously
The unscientific nonsense pumped out by the CDC and NIH (and its NIAID) over the past year and a half - even though there has been much evidence to the contrary - is enough to make any intelligent person wonder about the competency of these agencies
Please read the CDC guidance regarding the upcoming holiday season. It is laughable!
Sorry for the long message. I in no way believe that *you* should not take the vaccine; I believe each person must make the wisest decision for themselves and their families, without the jackboot of government/corporate America on their necks threatening their livelihood.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

Tiger said:


> "Deficient intelligence" of "anti-vaxxers"? "Make everyone subject to inoculations"? _Some things to consider:_
> 
> People opposed to getting the COVID vaccine typically are not opposed to vaccines per se...just the COVID ones, pejorative labels notwithstanding
> Areas in various parts of the world - including the United States (e.g., New England) - that have been highly vaccinated are experiencing major surges in COVID outbreaks. Take a peek at Singapore, too
> Studies indicate that the outbreaks are not caused by the "delta variant" but rather by the lack of vaccine durability
> A related point: Studies by Pfizer and others have shown that the vaccines lose effectiveness within months, often precipitously
> Philosophically, if the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated, then perhaps the vaccines are failing to protect as advertised, and vaccinating the unvaccinated will not yield the results some expect them to, especially in light of the above comments
> COVID vaccines are not remotely analogous to the vaccines that eradicated smallpox, polio, et al. To claim otherwise is patently false
> Young people 17 years old or younger have a minuscule chance of serious illness from COVID and an even smaller chance of death (six ten-thousands of a percent, i.e., .0006%). Some age brackets are a thousand times less likely to die from COVID than others; it is absurd to treat everyone as being in the same risk class
> Young people are far more in jeopardy of suicide, murder, drug overdose and car accidents. Do our politicians fight those scourges with the same fervor they purport to battle COVID? In fact, don't they often promote policies that exacerbate these horrors?
> Many studies have shown natural immunity to offer equal and often superior protection versus being vaccinated. Why would it be irrational or "deficient intellectually" to refuse vaccination for the millions of people in this situation?
> Not all of the vaccines have FDA approval (and there's confusion regarding _Comirnaty_), and no one knows the potential long-term effects, if any, of any of these palliative vaccines. For many, the risk is not worth the reward. For others, it is
> Under what section of the U.S. Constitution does the federal government have the power to mandate _anything_? Which state governments have this power, as permitted by their constitutions? If the answer is "none" then anyone decreeing/supporting such mandates is violating the very system of government they claim to support!
> If the federal government can mandate, or as someone expressed, "Make everyone subject to inoculations" even though there is no constitutional power to do so, what else can it mandate? Euthanasia? Celibacy? Sterilization? Wearing bell bottoms?
> Is it medically sound to force young people and those who have had COVID to get a vaccine with a waning efficacy and unknown long-term effects, especially when these people are in minute danger of COVID?
> It is immensely disturbing that some are willing to attack the intellect of others, while supporting governmental powers typically wielded by totalitarian regimes. I always thought intelligent and moral people opposed such ideologies
> There are dozens of examples of the political and entertainment class flouting the draconian rules they mandate/urge on others, or supporting events that would normally be labeled as dangerous if engaged in by others whose politics they disapprove. It is very difficult to take these fools and hypocrites seriously
> The unscientific nonsense pumped out by the CDC and NIH (and its NIAID) over the past year and a half - even though there has been much evidence to the contrary - is enough to make any intelligent person wonder about the competency of these agencies
> Please read the CDC guidance regarding the upcoming holiday season. It is laughable!
> Sorry for the long message. I in no way believe that *you* should not take the vaccine; I believe each person must make the wisest decision for themselves and their families, without the jackboot of government/corporate America on their necks threatening their livelihood.


I was following appreciatively your well laid out argument until you used the term jackboot. In one person's opinion it was not needed and in some respects undermined your effectiveness.


----------



## Tiger

Vecchio Vespa said:


> I was following appreciatively your well laid out argument until you used the term jackboot. In one person's opinion it was not needed and in some respects undermined your effectiveness.


Thank you.

I used the term _jackboot_ because it is synonymous with authoritarian government, which has increasingly become apparent in the United States over the past two centuries, as we are a far cry from the limited federal government envisioned and created by the vast majority of our founding generation.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

Tiger said:


> Thank you.
> 
> I used the term _jackboot_ because it is synonymous with authoritarian government, which has increasingly become apparent in the United States over the past two centuries, as we are a far cry from the limited federal government envisioned and created by the vast majority of our founding generation.


It is not entirely synonymous in my view and injects an implication that our government, whatever it may be at any given moment, is not only not trying to do its best for us but is actively and violently oppressing us. While we have had too many elected officials who have overreached, if I do not assume the best intentions then I am at risk of imputing bad intentions to the other half of the electorate. Whether you or I agree on political matters we assuredly agree on many things and have much in common. I would rather build on that. Of course that is just my view and it is not very cathartic or galvanizing.


----------



## Tiger

Vecchio Vespa said:


> It is not entirely synonymous in my view and injects an implication that our government, whatever it may be at any given moment, is not only not trying to do its best for us but is actively and violently oppressing us. While we have had too many elected officials who have overreached, if I do not assume the best intentions then I am at risk of imputing bad intentions to the other half of the electorate. Whether you or I agree on political matters we assuredly agree on many things and have much in common. I would rather build on that. Of course that is just my view and it is not very cathartic or galvanizing.


I understand, and largely agree.

Please keep in mind that I used the word _jackboot_ not just in regard to today's federal and state/local governments (I live in New York City, so I've witnessed many mandates that have destroyed people's livelihoods - even ones who just a few months ago were recognized as heroes), but to encompass a very large stretch of history. My perspective is far more historical than modern-day political, if that makes sense.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

Tiger said:


> "Deficient intelligence" of "anti-vaxxers"? "Make everyone subject to inoculations"? _Some things to consider:_
> 
> People opposed to getting the COVID vaccine typically are not opposed to vaccines per se...just the COVID ones, pejorative labels notwithstanding
> Areas in various parts of the world - including the United States (e.g., New England) - that have been highly vaccinated are experiencing major surges in COVID outbreaks. Take a peek at Singapore, too
> Studies indicate that the outbreaks are not caused by the "delta variant" but rather by the lack of vaccine durability
> A related point: Studies by Pfizer and others have shown that the vaccines lose effectiveness within months, often precipitously
> Philosophically, if the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated, then perhaps the vaccines are failing to protect as advertised, and vaccinating the unvaccinated will not yield the results some expect them to, especially in light of the above comments
> COVID vaccines are not remotely analogous to the vaccines that eradicated smallpox, polio, et al. To claim otherwise is patently false
> Young people 17 years old or younger have a minuscule chance of serious illness from COVID and an even smaller chance of death (six ten-thousands of a percent, i.e., .0006%). Some age brackets are a thousand times less likely to die from COVID than others; it is absurd to treat everyone as being in the same risk class
> Young people are far more in jeopardy of suicide, murder, drug overdose and car accidents. Do our politicians fight those scourges with the same fervor they purport to battle COVID? In fact, don't they often promote policies that exacerbate these horrors?
> Many studies have shown natural immunity to offer equal and often superior protection versus being vaccinated. Why would it be irrational or "deficient intellectually" to refuse vaccination for the millions of people in this situation?
> Not all of the vaccines have FDA approval (and there's confusion regarding _Comirnaty_), and no one knows the potential long-term effects, if any, of any of these palliative vaccines. For many, the risk is not worth the reward. For others, it is
> Under what section of the U.S. Constitution does the federal government have the power to mandate _anything_? Which state governments have this power, as permitted by their constitutions? If the answer is "none" then anyone decreeing/supporting such mandates is violating the very system of government they claim to support!
> If the federal government can mandate, or as someone expressed, "Make everyone subject to inoculations" even though there is no constitutional power to do so, what else can it mandate? Euthanasia? Celibacy? Sterilization? Wearing bell bottoms?
> Is it medically sound to force young people and those who have had COVID to get a vaccine with a waning efficacy and unknown long-term effects, especially when these people are in minute danger of COVID?
> It is immensely disturbing that some are willing to attack the intellect of others, while supporting governmental powers typically wielded by totalitarian regimes. I always thought intelligent and moral people opposed such ideologies
> There are dozens of examples of the political and entertainment class flouting the draconian rules they mandate/urge on others, or supporting events that would normally be labeled as dangerous if engaged in by others whose politics they disapprove. It is very difficult to take these fools and hypocrites seriously
> The unscientific nonsense pumped out by the CDC and NIH (and its NIAID) over the past year and a half - even though there has been much evidence to the contrary - is enough to make any intelligent person wonder about the competency of these agencies
> Please read the CDC guidance regarding the upcoming holiday season. It is laughable!
> Sorry for the long message. I in no way believe that *you* should not take the vaccine; I believe each person must make the wisest decision for themselves and their families, without the jackboot of government/corporate America on their necks threatening their livelihood.


In general I agree with personal choice.

*I am also highly suspicious of "Studies have shown." *Often "Studies have shown" is not peer reviewed science but a "Purchased Trial" paid for by someone, usually a corporation or social justice organization, with an agenda.

*I would appreciate the names of the Principal Investigator(s) and their funding sources for the "Studies have shown" that you have mentioned.*

As far as the U.S. Constitution goes I have no problem in recognizing that the authors did not have strong scientific backgrounds in immunology and virology, not to mention modern science. *(I also realize the dangers of political swamp rats using infectious disease as cover for their tyranny.)*

So, in broad strokes and theoretically speaking, no one has the right to force a vaccine upon you. On that same note, given sufficient evidence of a real health danger, an infected individual does not have the right to infect myself or my loved one's with potentially fatal outcome.

*You mention: * "COVID vaccines are not remotely analogous to the vaccines that eradicated smallpox, polio, et al. To claim otherwise is patently false."

*Please state what precisely what you are implying or what your specific concerns.* 
[HEADING=2] * Here's How the COVID-19 Vaccines Stack Up Against the Flu Vaccine * [/HEADING]

*Though the coronavirus vaccines and flu shots use different technologies, they still have the same job of teaching our immune system how to attack a virus.*

* www.healthline.com *
* The shots are very different but have the same goal*
Though the coronavirus vaccinesTrusted Source and flu shotsTrusted Source use distinctly different technologies against two unique viruses, they still, on a basic level, have the same job.

The shots "provide an opportunity for the immune response to recognize a foreign protein or antigen," explained Litjen Tan, PhD, the chief strategy officer of the Immunization Action Coalition.

These vaccines' goal is to give the immune system a way to recognize a foreign pathogen and develop a memory response. If and when the body is exposed to the virus, the immune response can be activated faster.

This quick activation of the immune system can either prevent illness or reduce the severity of the disease to varying degrees.

"How you give the opportunity to the immune response to look at this foreign antigen varies [with each type of vaccine]," Tan said.


----------



## Tiger

127.72 MHz said:


> In general I agree with personal choice.
> 
> *I am also highly suspicious of "Studies have shown." *Often "Studies have shown" is not peer reviewed science but a "Purchased Trial" paid for by someone, usually a corporation or social justice organization, with an agenda.
> 
> *I would appreciate the names of the Principal Investigator(s) and their funding sources for the "Studies have shown" that you have mentioned.*
> 
> As far as the U.S. Constitution goes I have no problem in recognizing that the authors did not have strong scientific backgrounds in immunology and virology, not to mention modern science. *(I also realize the dangers of political swamp rats using infectious disease as cover for their tyranny.)*
> 
> So, in broad strokes and theoretically speaking, no one has the right to force a vaccine upon you. On that same note, given sufficient evidence of a real health danger, an infected individual does not have the right to infect myself or my loved one's with potentially fatal outcome.
> 
> *You mention: * "COVID vaccines are not remotely analogous to the vaccines that eradicated smallpox, polio, et al. To claim otherwise is patently false."
> 
> *Please state what precisely what you are implying or what your specific concerns.*
> [HEADING=2] * Here's How the COVID-19 Vaccines Stack Up Against the Flu Vaccine * [/HEADING]
> 
> *Though the coronavirus vaccines and flu shots use different technologies, they still have the same job of teaching our immune system how to attack a virus.*
> 
> * www.healthline.com *
> * The shots are very different but have the same goal*
> Though the coronavirus vaccinesTrusted Source and flu shotsTrusted Source use distinctly different technologies against two unique viruses, they still, on a basic level, have the same job.
> 
> The shots "provide an opportunity for the immune response to recognize a foreign protein or antigen," explained Litjen Tan, PhD, the chief strategy officer of the Immunization Action Coalition.
> 
> These vaccines' goal is to give the immune system a way to recognize a foreign pathogen and develop a memory response. If and when the body is exposed to the virus, the immune response can be activated faster.
> 
> This quick activation of the immune system can either prevent illness or reduce the severity of the disease to varying degrees.
> 
> "How you give the opportunity to the immune response to look at this foreign antigen varies [with each type of vaccine]," Tan said.


One of the problems with COVID is that we often have experts that are in disagreement about the data and the meaning of that data. The attacks on Dr. Scott Atlas of Stanford last year illustrated that, as did the ones against the tens of thousands of scientific and medical professionals who supported the Great Barrington Declaration.

The studies that mentioned the declining efficacy of the vaccines were published in the _Lancet_, as per an article by attorney Jeff Childers. Of course, we know ipso facto that this is true, otherwise, why the boosters? Scientists at Pfizer have also admitted that the effectiveness of the vaccines wane over time, and the _Lancet_ study stated that the cause was not the delta variant. As per Childers' article:

_A new study published in the Lancet - the most prestigious medical journal in the world - concludes that Pfizer injection's effectiveness at preventing Covid infections dropped below 50% (to 47%) only six months after the second dose. More significantly, the researchers said the data suggests that the drop is due to waning efficacy, and not more contagious variants like delta. The researchers pointed out that the falling efficacy could not have been due to vaccine escape by the delta variant, because "If it was, we would probably not have seen high protection after vaccination, because vaccination would not be working [at all] in that case. It would start low, and stay low." _

You are missing the point of my constitutional argument - there is no power delegated to the federal government to mandate anything, including vaccines. It has nothing to do with immunology or epidemiology. It is a governmental/political issue. If we wish to add such power, the Constitution should be amended. States may have such power; it depends on _their_ constitutions.

If one is particularly worried about their health, shouldn't they just get vaccinated and take other precautions? Why the urge to wield illicit authoritarian political power?

I did not compare flu shots with COVID vaccines; I compared smallpox and polio vaccines to the COVID ones. The former eradicated the diseases in question; the latter is more palliative than anything else, as it does not eradicate COVID - vaccinated people still get COVID and are hospitalized and die from it, although perhaps in lesser amounts (but maybe more so than those with natural immunity, as per various studies in the U.S. and Israel). This does not happen with polio & smallpox vaccinated people.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

"Scott Atlas of Stanford." (How about just Dr. Scott Atlas, M.D.?)

I worked with Scott Atlas in the department of diagnostic Imaging at Oregon Health Sciences University. Scott Atlas is a Radiologist. And he practiced as a Radiologist at Stanford after he left O.H.S.U..

Dr. Atlas has opinions, as a board certified Radiologist and physician he certainly has the edge over most laypersons in terms of having a scientific background. But Dr. Atlas is not an immunologist, a virologist, or a public health expert.

*Please state specifically what point that you are trying to make when you correctly point out that the covid vaccine's efficacy wains? **

Published:September 14, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00472-2
*Prevention of host-to-host transmission by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines*
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext
"As vaccine uptake increases globally, we are beginning to see suppression of person-to-person SARS-CoV-2 transmission."

**Long story short, the vaccine works.*

Your Constitutional point is taken. But for you to stand on a Constitutional point and refuse to address your remedy for a potentially fatal outcome for medically vulnerable citizens that can be caused by individuals who refuse an effective remedy is well, just weak.

Covid aside, theoretically speaking, do you believe that contagious individuals should be allowed to infect others? *Your always articulate reply is both welcome and appreciated. *


----------



## Tiger

127.72 MHz said:


> "Scott Atlas of Stanford." (How about just Dr. Scott Atlas, M.D.?)
> 
> I worked with Scott Atlas in the department of diagnostic Imaging at Oregon Health Sciences University. Scott Atlas is a Radiologist. And he practiced as a Radiologist at Stanford after he left O.H.S.U..
> 
> Dr. Atlas has opinions, as a board certified Radiologist and physician he certainly has the edge over most laypersons in terms of having a scientific background. But Dr. Atlas is not an immunologist, a virologist, or a public health expert.
> 
> *Please state specifically what point that you are trying to make when you correctly point out that the covid vaccine's efficacy wains? **
> 
> Published:September 14, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00472-2
> *Prevention of host-to-host transmission by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines*
> https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext
> "As vaccine uptake increases globally, we are beginning to see suppression of person-to-person SARS-CoV-2 transmission."
> 
> **Long story short, the vaccine works.*
> 
> Your Constitutional point is taken. But for you to stand on a Constitutional point and refuse to address your remedy for a potentially fatal outcome for medically vulnerable citizens that can be caused by individuals who refuse an effective remedy is well, just weak.
> 
> Covid aside, theoretically speaking, do you believe that contagious individuals should be allowed to infect others? *Your always articulate reply is both welcome and appreciated. *


Dr. Atlas is a Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution and was chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center. He was an ad hoc member of the Nominating Committee for the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology, and senior health care advisor to multiple presidential candidates and Special Advisor to President Trump. He made a number of policy recommendations that were attacked - including by people without any medical background at all. (Have you read his piece on _Science, Politics, and COVID: Will Truth Prevail? _Very enlightening!) Certainly superior to Jeff Zients, the current White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, who has no medical experience - none! I know you won't argue about the credentials of the tens of thousands of professionals supporting the Great Barrington Declaration, who were also attacked. The point is, many have disagreed on this topic, regardless of credentials. Hell, Anthony Fauci is in the habit of disagreeing with himself fairly regularly, it seems!

The waning efficacy of the vaccines displays how different the results are with this vaccine compared to the many others that have been developed that have eradicated so many diseases. Seems like some here believe that children should be COVID vaccinated, because they are also vaccinated against smallpox, polio, rubella et al., but the effectiveness of these vaccines are far superior to the COVID ones, and besides, children are the least at-risk for COVID group on the planet. To view and treat them in the same way we view and treat those in their 70s and older is absurd...and dangerous.

You said the vaccine works - compared to what? Not compared to the vaccines mentioned above, and not to natural immunity. Not even compared to the promises made by the "experts" many months ago. Better than nothing? - probably, but I think it depends on other variables, such as health, age and occupation. That's why the blanket recommendations suggested (demanded?) by some in this thread are not just authoritarian, but unscientific. Many experts (sorry about that!) have argued that COVID mitigation techniques have been far more damaging to children than the virus itself.

This "vaccine that works" is not preventing outbreaks in heavily vaccinated areas. Please review what's happening in Singapore, and the remarkable pronouncements of Duke scientists who believe the prolific outbreaks in Singapore among the vaccinated are good things, because now people will have more powerful natural immunity from the anti-bodies!

I already answered the issue re: medically vulnerable citizens. Those citizens should do whatever is necessary to lessen their risk - including vaccination, isolation, etc. This can be done without the intervention of the federal government. Don't we all do this? Why does every issue that impacts people have to result in a federal action/policy (and most of those "solutions" are abject failures)? Besides, how does John's decision to not vaccinate impact Fred's vulnerability? If Fred is vaccinated with the "vaccine that works" and does all of the other mitigating things, how is John putting him in jeopardy? If I am hypersensitive to certain automobile exhaust fumes, or seriously allergic to perfume, should cars and scents be outlawed? Should we have the federal government do that, too? What limits now remain on the federal government? Seems like the answer is none...and that's why I've made multiple comments about authoritarianism. Governments with no limits become dictatorial; the historical evidence is abundantly clear. The founding generation wasn't comprised of dummies.

My wife and I are leaving early tomorrow for an out-of-state wedding, so I'll be silent on this thread for a few days. Please don't think I'm ignoring the topic(s), and thank you for your measured and thoughtful responses.


----------



## 127.72 MHz

The written word is a wonderful thing. One can be fascinated daily by the seemingly endless knowledge available, especially on the worldwide web.

But there is also much to be said for brevity.

In this case refusing to be concise clouds the issue.

A paragraph about Dr. Scott Atlas, really? I could list the achievements of any one of a number of esteemed physicians as well as the think tanks and policy boards that they are member's of,.......*Yet that gives them no remarkable insight into immunology, virology, or public health policy.*

In rebuttal you imply a disparaging notion to the covid vaccine by pointing out that it does not work like smallpox and polio vaccines? * That has nothing to do with the covid vaccine's efficacy.

Yes, the vaccine, as a matter of scientific fact, works. *The Lancet article I provided clearly states that. Rather than pose new questions like: "As compared to what?"* Why don't you plainly refute the article's summation? (If that is what you intend to do.)

"As vaccine uptake increases globally, we are beginning to see suppression of person-to-person SARS-CoV-2 transmission." Published:September 14, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00472-2*
In addition, there are scores of peer reviewed scientific articles from worldwide sources that clearly demonstrate that the covid shot(s) solicit an immune response and thus, a degree of immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. * It is wrong, and scientifically incorrect, for you to imply or out-rightly disparage the efficacy of the currently available covid shots.*

You site The Lancet as "**the most prestigious medical journal in the world"* then refuse to concisely address a Lancet article as a cited source?

***(Incidentally it is an overstatement to call The Lancet _*the *most prestigious medical journal in the world,...The Lancet is *one *of the most prestigious medical journals in the world.)
Other medical journals that are, arguably, equally as "Prestigious" as The Lancet.
* The Journal of the American Medical Association. (JAMA)
* The British Medical Journal (BMJ)_
* The New England Journal of Medicine, (NEJM)
* Annals of Internal Medicine

Of course, in the scientific realm, *Nature* and *Science *transcend specializations. It is recognized as a career defining moment for a scientist of any ilk to publish in Science or Nature.

And yes, you did already answer my question about how to help to protect venerable cohorts in our population.

*You believe that after they have taken the covid shot that they should "Isolate" themselves,....(Et cetera)* Those who think like this will lose that debate in the public forum and they should. It would be equally absurd to suggest that, like hoof-stock, our society should isolate those who think like this from the rest of the herd. (Both pathetic and frightening even in jest.)

Yes, there are Constitutional issues involved and I am personally highly sensitive to them.

I am in complete agreement with you in that Governments with no limits do in fact become dictatorial. (And in my opinion we are on a Precipice towards that end.)

I am not for vaccine mandates. While I have a vaccine record and an issued card, I have never removed it from it's storage envelope and *I will never show it upon request*.

Of the 44% of people who live in the USA who have not taken a covid shot I believe a single digit percentage are members of the willfully ignorant and irrational "Anti-Vax" movement. Those remaining are citizens who have witnessed a barrage of lies and mismanagement from our government.

I place the majority of the blame for "Vaccine Hesitancy" on our federal government's institutions for their contradictory messaging and plain dishonesty where the SARS-CoV-2 shot is concerned.

Travel Safe Tiger,


----------



## Tiger

127.72 MHz said:


> The written word is a wonderful thing. One can be fascinated daily by the seemingly endless knowledge available, especially on the worldwide web.
> 
> But there is also much to be said for brevity.
> 
> In this case refusing to be concise clouds the issue.
> 
> A paragraph about Dr. Scott Atlas, really? I could list the achievements of anyone of a number of esteemed physicians as well as the think tanks and policy boards that they are member's of,.......*Yet that gives them no remarkable insight into immunology, virology, or public health policy.
> 
> Yes, the vaccine works and the Lancet article I provided clearly states that. Rather than pose new questions like: "As compared to what?" * There are scores to peer reviewed scientific articles from worldwide sources that clearly demonstrate that the covid shot(s) solicit an immune response and thus, a degree of immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. * It is wrong for you to cloud the issue by implying or out-rightly disparaging the current covid shot's effectiveness.
> 
> Why don't you address the article's summation?: "As vaccine uptake increases globally, we are beginning to see suppression of person-to-person SARS-CoV-2 transmission."*
> 
> You site The Lancet as "**the most prestigious medical journal in the world"* then refuse to concisely address a Lancet article as a cited source?
> 
> ***(Incidentally it is an overstatement to call The Lancet _*the *most prestigious medical journal in the world,...The Lancet is *one *of the most prestigious medial journals in the world.)
> Other medical journals equally as "Prestigious" as The Lancet.
> * The Journal of the American Medical Association. (JAMA)_
> * The New England Journal of Medicine, (NEJM)
> * The British Medical Journal (BMJ)
> * Annals of Internal Medicine
> 
> Of course, in the scientific community *Nature* and *Science *transcend specializations. For a scientist of any ilk to publish in Science or Nature is a career defining moment. (But I digress)
> 
> In rebuttal you imply a disparaging notion to the covid vaccine by pointing out that it does not work like smallpox and polio vaccines? That has nothing to do with the covid vaccine's efficacy.
> 
> And yes, you did already answer my question about how to help to protect venerable cohorts of our population.
> 
> *You believe that after they have taken the covid shot that they should "Isolate" themselves,....(Et cetera)* Those who think like this will lose that debate in the public forum and they should. It would be equally absurd to suggest that, like hoof-stock, our society should isolate those who think like this from the rest of the herd. (Both pathetic and frightening even in jest.)
> 
> Yes, there are Constitutional issues involved and I am personally highly sensitive to them.
> 
> I am in complete agreement with you in that Governments with no limits do in fact become dictatorial. (And in my opinion we are frighteningly close to heading down that path.)
> 
> I am not for vaccine mandates. While I have a vaccine record and issued card, I have never removed it from it's storage envelope and I will never show it upon request.


I *will* be brief, as I must head out!

The point of mentioning Atlas was that he was attacked by some without any knowledge/experience at all, often without a scientific basis. Read the piece I mentioned for Dr. Atlas' self-defense.

The COVID vaccines are limited in their effectiveness both over time (perhaps dramatically so) and with regard to age and health. Most likely they are not as effective as natural immunity. They are clearly not as effective as polio and smallpox vaccines in eradication and amelioration, even though many have tried to draw a false equivalence to them.

Attorney Jeff Childers described _Lancet_ in the manner quoted, not I.

My apologies; by "isolate" I meant both to social distance and to be wary of where one goes if particularly vulnerable to COVID. I believe that is in line with advice we've received for a year and half from the CDC, NIH, et al. Nothing nefarious at all!

Hope that helps!


----------

