Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#40,826
#40,826
McDad said:
SOP for medical personnel to give worst case scenarios. I think it is intentional.

May not have been political. Possible to simply be default programming.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not ascribing bad intentions - lot's of uncertainty and erred on the side of caution. Also, Fauci, Birx are not economists or concerned with the economic impact of their recommendations. Not part of their job description. I'm working on a good faith assumption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad, NashVol11 and NCFisher
#40,828
#40,828
Electric Orange said:
The vaccine is a bluff. They're trying to draw this out as long as possible.
Click to expand...

It is a pipe dream I believe. I have a serious condition and have played the internet game of watching medical research on a condition for years. It moves at a snail's pace.

Of course this one gets the luxury of breaking all the rules, but I still wouldnt get my hope up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Electric Orange and Ten_Titans
#40,829
#40,829
volinbham said:
Not soon enough based on?

Birx and Fauci say as soon as they recommended it was implemented.

No hospital system was overwhelmed to the point that any patient was denied access to beds, intensive care or ventilators. (the entire point of flattening the curve).

What is the criteria for saying it obviously wasn't soon enough?
Click to expand...

If it had been soon enough we would have fewer cases and fewer dead. That's not debatable. Of course If you do want to debate it feel free to state your case.
 
#40,831
#40,831
NCFisher said:
Excellent point!

If it were for the fact that the "experts" were advising Trump. And what were they saying on MARCH 19?
March 19, Birx states:

White House coronavirus response coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx told "Special Report" Thursday night that she believed reports out of China that there had been no new cases of coronavirus in Wuhan, the city where the pandemic originated, in recent days.​
​
"If you watched the trend lines over time, they're similar to South Korea," Birx told host Bret Baier during a wide-ranging interview. "At this time, we believe that data."​
​
However, Birx added, "Everyone is concerned about why we weren't alerted earlier." Dr. Birx says she believes coronavirus reports from China 'at this time,' won't rule out air travel shutdown ​
​
What cat are you talking about? You seem to be placing a lot of stock in Don Trump Jr; do you contend the president should listen to his son and not Birx/Fauci et al? No? Then what are you yammering about?

It has been just over the last three weeks that the dream team has progressively migrated from their "trust China data" position. Trump has consistently listened to the experts and his message following their advice, their message. The WHO has never retreated from their over the top complimenting of China's efforts.

You might crawl back under the porch and resume the navel-gazing licking of your own nuts.
​
Click to expand...

You quoted a post with a direct quote from POTUS on 03/19, acknowledging China suppressed information with a link to the source (whitehouse_dot_gov). This was a week before he tweeted all his love to Xi. Who gives a **** what Birx told Fox news?
 
#40,833
#40,833
Hunerwadel said:
If it had been soon enough we would have fewer cases and fewer dead. That's not debatable. Of course If you do want to debate it feel free to state your case.
Click to expand...

It is entirely debatable. The mitigation was to spread the number of cases over a longer period of time to avoid overloading the HC system.

If you look at deaths per capita the US is doing better than almost all of Europe (Germany being the notable exception). People either have to get infected or become immune some other way (vaccination).

So starting sooner may have stretched the number of cases over a slightly longer time but it wouldn't reduce the death rate given we slowed it enough to not have deaths from lack of HC resources.

Starting even a month earlier wouldn't make the virus go away - unless we stay in permanent lock down it will spread; the only difference is timing. Given it will spread, it will kill the same number of people and again the only difference is timing. The intervening factor would be a real effective treatment or vaccine but I'm doubtful that one month of timing makes any appreciable difference there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave, McDad, NCFisher and 1 other person
#40,834
#40,834
volinbham said:
It is entirely debatable. The mitigation was to spread the number of cases over a longer period of time to avoid overloading the HC system.

If you look at deaths per capita the US is doing better than almost all of Europe (Germany being the notable exception). People either have to get infected or become immune some other way (vaccination).

So starting sooner may have stretched the number of cases over a slightly longer time but it wouldn't reduce the death rate given we slowed it enough to not have deaths from lack of HC resources.

Starting even a month earlier wouldn't make the virus go away - unless we stay in permanent lock down it will spread; the only difference is timing. Given it will spread, it will kill the same number of people and again the only difference is timing. The intervening factor would be a real effective treatment or vaccine but I'm doubtful that one month of timing makes any appreciable difference there.
Click to expand...
Opinion noted.
 
#40,836
#40,836
volinbham said:
So starting sooner may have stretched the number of cases over a slightly longer time but it wouldn't reduce the death rate given we slowed it enough to not have deaths from lack of HC resources.

Starting even a month earlier wouldn't make the virus go away - unless we stay in permanent lock down it will spread; the only difference is timing. Given it will spread, it will kill the same number of people and again the only difference is timing. The intervening factor would be a real effective treatment or vaccine but I'm doubtful that one month of timing makes any appreciable difference there.
Click to expand...

Such a solid point. Probably obvious, but I never considered it.

You're right, deaths are essentially going to be same here no matter what. Only difference maker would be a treatment/vaccine or extra deaths due to health system being over burdened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave, McDad and TennTradition
#40,838
#40,838
allvol123 said:
Such a solid point. Probably obvious, but I never considered it.

You're right, deaths are essentially going to be same here no matter what. Only difference maker would be a treatment/vaccine or extra deaths due to health system being over burdened.
Click to expand...

Italy, Spain and possibly UK (not sure but I know they are low per capita on ICU) have higher mortality rates at least in part because the system was overwhelmed and people that were savable could not get treatment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TennTradition and allvol123
#40,844
#40,844
Hunerwadel said:
Like I said I don't know the time frame. It is clearly obvious that it wasn't soon enough though. The man at the top is charged with getting it right. No ifs ands or buts. I wonder what would have happened if FDR had said this Japanese thing will go away. We have It totally under control.
Click to expand...

wow! - awesome conflations and half-truths.

Of course you don't know the time frame. It's only "clearly obvious" in hindsight, Retroactive Nostradamus. The man at the top is charged with having competent people who advise him on things presidents are not - can not - be experts at, like.... viral outbreaks, for example. Those experts that people like you said he should listen to? He did. And they told him and the public right into March there was no great danger to us, go about our business, worry about the seasonal flu instead. Trump's comments regarding "under control" parallel the experts' comments throughout.

No if, ands, or buts.
Further, when Trump spoke of the virus perhaps dissipating towards April, contrary to leftist meme he isn't pulling anti-science out of his azz, he's deferring to the science:

Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease physician and a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security
"I do think seasonality will play a role. As this outbreak unfolds and we approach spring and summer, I do think we will see some tapering off of cases."

So as China and the rest of the Northern Hemisphere head into spring, the virus could begin to peter out or plateau. But the southern half of the globe is headed into fall and winter "so we may see this [virus] have increased transmission" in parts of the southern hemisphere, says Adalja — for example, in Australia. That's similar to what happens with the flu each year.

"It's not unreasonable to make the assumption" that cases will die down come spring, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told NPR. "We hope when the weather gets warmer it will diminish a bit," he says.

But he sounds a cautionary note: "However, we don't know that about this [new] coronavirus. We don't have [a] backlog of history."

Dr. Nancy Messionnier of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sounds a similar note when it comes to predicting a slowdown of cases with warmer weather. "I think it's premature to assume that," she said during a call with reporters on Wednesday. "We haven't been through even a single year with this pathogen."

For a guy that doesn't know time frames, you assert an awful lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
#40,846
#40,846
Ten_Titans said:
You mean the guy who believed some economic sanctions would fix the whole Japan thing right before they attacked Pearl Harbor? Great example.
Click to expand...

Well, hell, he couldn't get Germany to attack us and let him off the hook on that promise to stay out of European wars.

Japan!...next man up!
 
#40,847
#40,847
lawgator1 said:
True. But its Oxford University so I think it's is entitled to a bit more credence at this point.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with credibility.

I spent years of my life, over a decade ago, where I studied my issue for hours a day online. Obsessed with it. Much like billions are obsessed with Covid. I've seen this game. Headline after headline. Article after article of just hopeful headlines from top research institutes around the world. That is how they are all written.

I will give the caveat that this has the advantage of breaking so many rules that are roadblocks for researchers pursuing treatments to diseases that arent followed by billions.
 
#40,850
#40,850
NCFisher said:
wow! - awesome conflations and half-truths.

Of course you don't know the time frame. It's only "clearly obvious" in hindsight, Retroactive Nostradamus. The man at the top is charged with having competent people who advise him on things presidents are not - can not - be experts at, like.... viral outbreaks, for example. Those experts that people like you said he should listen to? He did. And they told him and the public right into March there was no great danger to us, go about our business, worry about the seasonal flu instead. Trump's comments regarding "under control" parallel the experts' comments throughout.

No if, ands, or buts.
Further, when Trump spoke of the virus perhaps dissipating towards April, contrary to leftist meme he isn't pulling anti-science out of his azz, he's deferring to the science:

Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease physician and a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security
"I do think seasonality will play a role. As this outbreak unfolds and we approach spring and summer, I do think we will see some tapering off of cases."

So as China and the rest of the Northern Hemisphere head into spring, the virus could begin to peter out or plateau. But the southern half of the globe is headed into fall and winter "so we may see this [virus] have increased transmission" in parts of the southern hemisphere, says Adalja — for example, in Australia. That's similar to what happens with the flu each year.

"It's not unreasonable to make the assumption" that cases will die down come spring, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told NPR. "We hope when the weather gets warmer it will diminish a bit," he says.

But he sounds a cautionary note: "However, we don't know that about this [new] coronavirus. We don't have [a] backlog of history."

Dr. Nancy Messionnier of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sounds a similar note when it comes to predicting a slowdown of cases with warmer weather. "I think it's premature to assume that," she said during a call with reporters on Wednesday. "We haven't been through even a single year with this pathogen."

For a guy that doesn't know time frames, you assert an awful lot.
Click to expand...


My assertion is that the man at the top didn't know what to do and when to do it. That's his job not mine. He has failed any way you look at it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top