So you can blame all of the deaths of Americans on Trump, but who do blame for all the deaths in the rest of the world ?
Yeah, right, that would also be Trump ...
Usually you'd blame the virus/disease. Other countries will judge their own government's response...
Trump's doing a fine job of blaming everyone but himself. For example:
Trump is not a leader. If you had to wait for Trump to drive the federal government's response to this pandemic, the number of infected and dead would be enormous.
My two previous articles, Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now and The Hammer and the Dance, have gathered over 50 million views together and have been translated into over 30 languages each. This article focuses on the situation in the US as of March 31st 2020.
Summary: It makes political and economic sense for the US to suppress the coronavirus. For that, states and the federal government each have their own roles that they need to adjust.
The US is now the country with most coronavirus cases in the world. It is likely to keep that title in the history books. Two key reasons are government decentralization and concerns about the economic impact of aggressive social distancing measures.
Hereâs what weâre going to cover today, with a lot of data, charts and sources:
Whatâs the situation in the US and its states
Why the coronavirus should be a bipartisan issue
The economics of controlling the virus
Which decisions should be left to the federal government or to states
Hereâs what youâll take away:
The coronavirus is growing everywhere in the US. Some states are on their way to controlling it. Others have massive outbreaks that make Chinaâs outbreak pale in comparison. Many are unprepared, and will suffer some of the worst outbreaks. All voters care about this, Democrats and Republicans. Democrats were hit first. But Republicans have more to lose. Theyâre older and more likely to die. Most hesitation comes from the perceived cost of suppressing the virus. Fortunately, itâs cheaper to suppress it than to let it run loose. We should do it. But right now, states are left fending for themselves. Itâs a mess. They are competing against each other instead of collaborating. They might be forced to seal their borders with each other. There is a role for states and a role for the federal government. The federal government coordinates, the states execute. If both step up, we will save lives and increase the GDP.
So these WHO tests are the ones than everyone complained about Trump not using at the earliest stages of the breakout of the virus, right ? By not using these tests it is one of the main reasons for saying that Trump did not act fast enough to get testing going here in the USA, right ? Not using these WHO tests are the proof that Trump was derelict in his duties, right ?
This is the same WHO that said that face masks were unnecessary and that there was no human to human transmission of the virus, right ?
Right ???
The WHO screwed up some things but at that time, no one knew there was human to human transmission. Trump was denying the problem long after the Chinese figured out that there was human-human transmission and informed the world about it. I disagree with the WHO *and* all other countries including the US saying the public did not need to use face masks. But I understand why they did it - primarily to reserve supplies for the health workers who desperately needed them and because masks provide only limited protection for the general public who are not trained. The thing is that the seamstresses could have been churning out surgical-style cloth masks much earlier that IMO are more appropriate for the public. The N95 masks with vent valves allow air you exhale to be expelled without filtration and that mostly defeats the goal of protecting others. The main thing a mask does for you is to keep you from absent mindedly touching your mouth and nose. They are not recommending masks here although I'm seeing more around. I mainly wear mine when checking in on my home-bound friend - to protect her.
And yes, not using the WHO tests was dereliction of duty. You use what you have and work to improve things as you go. Not putting in place the failed CDC tests instead.
I saw it broken down a few weeks ago that an 85% accuracy rate is typical for flu tests and is the standard, but the WHO tests were about 65%. So early on, every person was being tested twice. That 60% + 60% of 40% brought the reliability up to 80-some%. So anyway. If you got negative twice, it was 85% sure that you were negative.
So these WHO tests are the ones than everyone complained about Trump not using at the earliest stages of the breakout of the virus, right ? By not using these tests it is one of the main reasons for saying that Trump did not act fast enough to get testing going here in the USA, right ? Not using these WHO tests are the proof that Trump was derelict in his duties, right ?
This is the same WHO that said that face masks were unnecessary and that there was no human to human transmission of the virus, right ?
It's really hard to understand the logic on this one, other than Fox News is trying to "get in front" of the recovery since they were so late to the pandemic. If the focus is the President's wanting to "get America going again", then maybe voters will blame the Dems for not being able to pay their rent or buy food?
The time to win this war was before the fighting started. If POTUS would have moved early, we would be coming out of the worst of it now, instead, he's going to go back too soon and will likely end up in another lockdown before the election. If that happens, he's DOA in November. What's worse...all of the Governors he's attacking will be proven wise for their aggressive tactics. Sadly (or not), his idea of long-term strategy is how long it takes to tweet 280 characters.
If I were him, I'd be really worried about large scale outbreaks in rural places (like a meatpacking plant in South Dakota with 500 infected people). The damn virus takes so long to incubate, we're likely to see huge spikes randomly as he pushes forward with the re-opening. Things will be OK for a month or so (as we ride the coattails of our current lockdown, but then things will turn. When it does, the damage to our economy will be beyond short term recovery.
This is mile 3 of the marathon....the problem is that POTUS thinks he can claim victory at the 5K marker. Take a look at Singapore if you're wondering what we're in for.
In addition to the âYou Canât Close Americaâ rally in Austin, Texas, on Saturday, modest demonstrations took place in the capitals of Nevada, Indiana and Maryland.
Mr. Shroyer told his Infowars audience this past week that the coronavirus was part of a scheme by the Chinese Communist Party and the âDeep Stateâ to undermine Mr. Trump, that President Barack Obama âsold China the Wuhan virusâ and that reports of overwhelmed hospitals were âpropaganda.â
It's really hard to understand the logic on this one, other than Fox News is trying to "get in front" of the recovery since they were so late to the pandemic. If the focus is the President's wanting to "get America going again", then maybe voters will blame the Dems for not being able to pay their rent or buy food?
The time to win this war was before the fighting started. If POTUS would have moved early, we would be coming out of the worst of it now, instead, he's going to go back too soon and will likely end up in another lockdown before the election. If that happens, he's DOA in November. What's worse...all of the Governors he's attacking will be proven wise for their aggressive tactics. Sadly (or not), his idea of long-term strategy is how long it takes to tweet 280 characters.
If I were him, I'd be really worried about large scale outbreaks in rural places (like a meatpacking plant in South Dakota with 500 infected people). The damn virus takes so long to incubate, we're likely to see huge spikes randomly as he pushes forward with the re-opening. Things will be OK for a month or so (as we ride the coattails of our current lockdown, but then things will turn. When it does, the damage to our economy will be beyond short term recovery.
This is mile 3 of the marathon....the problem is that POTUS thinks he can claim victory at the 5K marker. Take a look at Singapore if you're wondering what we're in for.
In addition to the âYou Canât Close Americaâ rally in Austin, Texas, on Saturday, modest demonstrations took place in the capitals of Nevada, Indiana and Maryland.
... The rally in Texas was organized by Owen Shroyer, the host of a show on Infowars, which is headquartered in Austin. He disrupted a House impeachment hearing in December by shouting that the Democrats were committing treason and that Mr. Trump was innocent.
Mr. Shroyer told his Infowars audience this past week that the coronavirus was part of a scheme by the Chinese Communist Party and the âDeep Stateâ to undermine Mr. Trump, that President Barack Obama âsold China the Wuhan virusâ and that reports of overwhelmed hospitals were âpropaganda.â
This is the video that talks about the sensitivity; I'm still looking for the article that explains why the CDC was allocating 2 tests for every patient tested... it was to get that sensitivity % up.
If 35% refers to the false positive rate, and 1% of the population of 100 have it, 36 out 100 will test positive. If you test positive, you only have a 3% , 1/36, chance of being sick.
I think you're apples and oranges on your math.
If 35% of positives are false, then 65% are true positive. If the test comes back positive, you have a 65% chance of actually being infected. There are millions possibly walking around who are infected but without symptoms. Since they can't get tested (even if they want), they aren't screwing up the stats.
Right. I realize now that my source was one of the videos that Miamizsun posted a week or two ago, and it wasn't about positive tests, it was negative tests. The question is whether the tests are sensitive enough or administered correctly often enough to catch the virus on the swab... and the standard test is 65% accurate when it comes back negative. That doesn't mean 35% are positive, it means 35% really don't know. If they take a second test and it's negative, then the odds of them being negative are 85/100, the remaining 15% are still not then definitely positive, but are as healthy as the general population.
And according to the video, 85% certainty that you don't have it is sort of the acceptable standard.
If you are tested positive, I would expect the reliability of that to be much higher. I guess I should go look for that number.
If 35% refers to the false positive rate, and 1% of the population of 100 have it, 36 out 100 will test positive. If you test positive, you only have a 3% , 1/36, chance of being sick.
I think you're apples and oranges on your math.
If 35% of positives are false, then 65% are true positive. If the test comes back positive, you have a 65% chance of actually being infected. There are millions possibly walking around who are infected but without symptoms. Since they can't get tested (even if they want), they aren't screwing up the stats.
I saw it broken down a few weeks ago that an 85% accuracy rate is typical for flu tests and is the standard, but the WHO tests were about 65%. So early on, every person was being tested twice. That 60% + 60% of 40% brought the reliability up to 80-some%. So anyway. If you got negative twice, it was 85% sure that you were negative.
If 35% refers to the false positive rate, and 1% of the population of 100 have it, 36 out 100 will test positive. If you test positive, you only have a 3% , 1/36, chance of being sick.
Sunlight destroys virus quickly, new govt. tests find, but experts say pandemic could last through summer
Couldn't post link, it kept borking the thread and I cannot embed link at this site here at work for some reason. Anyway, it is easy to look up article. Basically it is ok to step outside your door and if you cannot step outside your door and be 10 ft. away or more from other humans then I am truly sorry.
Preliminary results from government lab experiments show that the coronavirus does not survive long in high temperatures and high humidity, and is quickly destroyed by sunlight, providing evidence from controlled tests of what scientists believed — but had not yet proved — to be true.
A briefing on the preliminary results, marked for official use only and obtained by Yahoo News, offers hope that summertime may offer conditions less hospitable for the virus, though experts caution it will by no means eliminate, or even necessarily decrease, new cases of COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus.
The study found that the risk of “transmission from surfaces outdoors is lower during daylight” and under higher temperature and humidity conditions. “Sunlight destroys the virus quickly,” reads the briefing.
I saw it broken down a few weeks ago that an 85% accuracy rate is typical for flu tests and is the standard, but the WHO tests were about 65%. So early on, every person was being tested twice. That 60% + 60% of 40% brought the reliability up to 80-some%. So anyway. If you got negative twice, it was 85% sure that you were negative.
