The all-new "US Politics and coronavirus" thread

[Emily's Cat]

First line - I totally agree.

Second line - I disagree, but it's off topic. Maybe I'll start a thread another time.

May not be a need... To clarify - I don't think there's any *unusual* level of emotional or spiritual pain than has been present throughout the majority of human existence. The substance has just shifted. What used to be self-administered via alcohol and other drugs is now being self-administered via opiods.

 

[Trebuchet]

For me, the number of cases is both a good yardstick and an accurate picture of where we are. How could it not be? Using the number of people who tested positive depends on variables: how many people are being tested and who they are. What criteria they're using for who can get tested. It's been suggested that some of the states that are under pressure to reopen use that statistic to justify reopening, Arizona tripled testing. Not surprisingly, the percentages of positives went down. Yet the number of new cases continued to rise. They ignored the fact more new cases were being reported every day and said the declining percentage of positives showed the virus was 'under control.'

Phantom Wolf posted testing results for Arizona. Arizona cited a declining percentage of positives as justifying loosening restrictions. Yet when you look at the numbers you discover an interesting fact. Between April 12th and May3rd testing was increased three times but positives were up by almost double. It shows the virus is increasing. You can play around with the numbers anyway you want but when new cases go from 1,208 per day to 2,205 that tells me the virus is increasing.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Right, but it is still the case that the percentage of positive tests is going down.

I'm not at all saying that absolute numbers don't matter. I think it's hard to use either or both statistics and really know what's going on because the population of tested folks is not representative of the population as a whole.

Sounds like the apology I heard this morning/last night (I'm losing track) think it was TX claiming the increased cases were because they were testing nursing homes now.

You have to calculate the number of new tests and who is being tested for the % positives changing to be the least bit meaningful.

It's not like the number of people being tested remains steady.

 

[Emily's Cat]

We live in a capitalist society here in America and that's not changing on a timeframe worth discussing.

I don't care how poor people would fair in some alternative timeline. Right now they need jobs to survive.

QFT

 

[phiwum]

For me, the number of cases is both a good yardstick and an accurate picture of where we are. How could it not be? Using the number of people who tested positive depends on variables: how many people are being tested and who they are. What criteria they're using for who can get tested. It's been suggested that some of the states that are under pressure to reopen use that statistic to justify reopening, Arizona tripled testing. Not surprisingly, the percentages of positives went down. Yet the number of new cases continued to rise. They ignored the fact more new cases were being reported every day and said the declining percentage of positives showed the virus was 'under control.'

Phantom Wolf posted testing results for Arizona. Arizona cited a declining percentage of positives as justifying loosening restrictions. Yet when you look at the numbers you discover an interesting fact. Between April 12th and May3rd testing was increased three times but positives were up by almost double. It shows the virus is increasing. You can play around with the numbers anyway you want but when new cases go from 1,208 per day to 2,205 that tells me the virus is increasing.

The CDC guidelines support the use of percentage of positive cases.

I'm skeptical of the utility of that statistic too. If we knew that the number of people tested was loosely representative of the population as a whole, then the percentage of positive cases would be a good measure. In that case, tripling the number of tests and only doubling the number of positive results would suggest a significant decrease.

But, of course, the tested population isn't representative. When the number of tests are low, they are administered only to those likely to have the illness. As it increases, they will be administered to a population in which each member is less likely to have the illness.

How much less likely? That's hard to say. I certainly don't know how much more likely, but the table you cite shows a drop from 11% testing positive to only 6% testing positive. That's a pretty significant drop which could represent a real drop in the number of cases. Or not.

Since I don't understand the statistics well, I'm willing to defer to the CDC guidelines with some concern. I'm hoping that the fact that so many cases are mild means that the drop from 11% to 6% when increasing the pool represents a real drop in cases (that many more positive cases were never discovered in the smaller pool that would have been discovered in the larger).

There's no doubt that the number of discovered cases can be misleading. There's also no doubt that the percentage of positive cases could be misleading too.

 

[Lurch]

I understand carlitos.

Should you ever come to see what those happy voluntarily rallying throngs see, you might consider rallying yourself.

The happy voluntarily rallying throngs to Hitler provide a cautionary tale of the kind of sad end cultists can come to. Ever look at pictures or films of the faces in the throngs of citizens when in the presence of their Leader during his rallies and appearances in the good times? For those still alive by '44/45, a very different expression was to be found.

 

[Minoosh]

There's no doubt that the number of discovered cases can be misleading. There's also no doubt that the percentage of positive cases could be misleading too.

If certain states or federal officials wanted to depress the percentage of positive tests, could they handpick populations less likely to test positive? I don't really know who that would be, but maybe teenagers? The thing is, I don't know what that would show and neither would the wonks who *might* seek to manipulate the stats. On the old folks campus where I live, out of hundreds, there have been only 2 positive tests. But most people haven't been tested. Last week they found out a physical therapist who services several facilities had tested positive, and had been in contact with 15 residents here. So they're doing some contact tracing. But the campus has a much stricter lockdown than the state as a whole, and most people here would almost certainly test negative.

I don't know who the reservoir would be for jacking up the testing numbers while decreasing positive percentages - just wondering if it's possible. Suppressing testing also increases the fatality rate, which is also not ideal for propaganda purposes. And the avenues of testing are pretty diffuse, I gather. I don't know if anyone would be able to effectively manipulate the stats to a desired end.

 

[newyorkguy]

...There's no doubt that the number of discovered cases can be misleading...

This is what I don't understand. It sounds like what my ex-Boss used to call 'overthinking.' How can the number of discovered cases be misleading?

If a state reported 1,281 news cases on a day in mid-April, 1,617 on a day in late April and 2,205 new cases on a day in early May, new cases are obviously on the rise. What is misleading about that? People who think they caught coronavius would have been more likely to get tested in early May as compared to mid-April? It's possible but the percent of positives only declined from 11% to 7% while the number of tests more than tripled and new cases almost doubled.

It's an epidemic, all the public health officials were warning more people were going to get sick. If the number of new cases in Arizona increase 80% in early May over what they were finding in mid-April, how is that misleading? Seriously, at a time when real people are getting sick, real people are dying everyday, why are we debating this? .

Below is a chart from Worldometer (link) showing active cases per day. Maybe this is better --it only shows active case -- but it goes steadily upward. There are more active cases today than there were yesterday. What is 'misleading' about that?

 

[acbytesla]

We live in a capitalist society here in America and that's not changing on a timeframe worth discussing.

I don't care how poor people would fair in some alternative timeline. Right now they need jobs to survive.

No, they need an income. They also shouldn't have to choose dying from the virus and dying from a lack of food and shelter.

 

[newyorkguy]

...I don't know who the reservoir would be for jacking up the testing numbers while decreasing positive percentages - just wondering if it's possible...

When testing was limited, at least in New York, only people who were symptomatic were able to get tested. Once testing availability increased, anyone who wondered if they had been exposed -- but weren't symptomatic yet -- could get tested. As more people got tested -- as the threshold for who could get tested was expanded -- the percentage of positives declined. What is the big mystery?

 

[Meadmaker]

Oh....my....God.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ne-coronavirus-vaccine-medicine-a9521151.html


Trump says he has been taking hydroxychloroquine.

Words fail me.


ETA: I know, nothing should surprise me with Trump, but somehow he manages to find ways to do it.

 

[Dr.Sid]

When testing was limited, at least in New York, only people who were symptomatic were able to get tested. Once testing availability increased, anyone who wondered if they had been exposed -- but weren't symptomatic yet -- could get tested. As more people got tested -- as the threshold for who could get tested was expanded -- the percentage of positives declined. What is the big mystery?

This also explains why deaths drop faster than new cases. It's certainly good sign. But it's far from over, those numbers are still pretty high.

 

[xjx388]

You can make the numbers look anyway you want. But here’s a number that is impossible to spin: the number of deaths. Back in March, when we in the US really started paying attention, 100k deaths was a startling, scary number. It still is. But in my conversations with everyday people, no one wants to talk about that number now. They want to talk about the number of cases being a tiny percentage and deaths even smaller! When I say, “we are over 90k deaths now,” the response is usually along the lines of, “but that’s not even real numbers! The government is just saying everyone who dies has Covid.”

If exceeding 100k deaths can be handwaved away with ******** like that, America is well and truly ******.

 

[alfaniner]

Oh....my....God.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ne-coronavirus-vaccine-medicine-a9521151.html


Trump says he has been taking hydroxychloroquine.

Words fail me.


ETA: I know, nothing should surprise me with Trump, but somehow he manages to find ways to do it.

I saw the briefing. Even though he said it twice, I can't tell if he said "I take it" or "I'd take it". It's either a coincidence that it sounds so similar, or it was done on purpose so the take-back can be that he never said he took the drug, only that he would.

In either case, he's still an idiot for promoting it. There has to be some financial incentive there.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oh....my....God.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ne-coronavirus-vaccine-medicine-a9521151.html


Trump says he has been taking hydroxychloroquine.

Words fail me.


ETA: I know, nothing should surprise me with Trump, but somehow he manages to find ways to do it.

I already thought he was. No doubt he's going to say it has kept him from getting infected and start a whole new run on the drug.

This man needs to have a heart problem from the drug or get the infection to save us all.

 

[acbytesla]

You can make the numbers look anyway you want. But here’s a number that is impossible to spin: the number of deaths. Back in March, when we in the US really started paying attention, 100k deaths was a startling, scary number. It still is. But in my conversations with everyday people, no one wants to talk about that number now. They want to talk about the number of cases being a tiny percentage and deaths even smaller! When I say, “we are over 90k deaths now,” the response is usually along the lines of, “but that’s not even real numbers! The government is just saying everyone who dies has Covid.”

If exceeding 100k deaths can be handwaved away with ******** like that, America is well and truly ******.

Until the get it or someone close to them get it.

Like this guy from Florida.

Florida man who downplayed coronavirus as ‘fake crisis’ gets infected, warns others after ending up in ICU with wife


Brian Lee Hitchens. Facebook
Many people still think that the Coronavirus is a fake crisis which at one time I did too and not that I thought it wasn't a real virus going around but at one time I felt that it was blown out of proportion and it wasn't that serious. We kept on watching the news and kept on hearing about the spreading of the Coronavirus and to be honest I didn't really think nothing of it I still thought it was being blown out of proportion until about 4 and 1/2 weeks ago when I started to feel sick and once I started to feel sick I stopped working and stayed home yes I came down with the Coronavirus and a couple days later after I started to not feel good my wife started to not feel good and we stayed at home quarantined and my wife did go to the hospital to get tested and they told her yeah you probably have the coronavirus so go home and quarantine yourself well a few days went by and we both started feeling worse and worse and worse to the point where we barely had any energy left to do anything and all we want to do is sleep. So three weeks ago Sunday we decided not to play around with this anymore and I had just enough energy to drive us to the hospital Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center and we both got confirmed that we had the Coronavirus. They admitted us right away and we both went to ICU. I started feeling better within a few days but my wife got worse to the point where they sedated her and put her on the ventilator. I was never put ventilator and started feeling better feeling stronger never had terrible aches and pains just weak and exhausted. Even now I am feeling better A lot better then a few weeks ago I still have covid-19 and some pneumonia in my lungs and we've been here 3 weeks as of yesterday. As of today my wife is still sedated and on the ventilator with no signs of improving. There were a couple times were they tried to start weaning her off the ventilator but as soon as they've done that her oxygen level dropped and they had to put her back on the ventilator full time. My wife has been sick before in the past quite a few times and she always fought through to get better but now after 3 weeks I have come to accept that my wife may pass away and the peace I have about it is that I know without a shadow of a doubt that she will be going home to be with the Lord but I also do believe in miracles and I'm holding on to the chance that she may get healed but if not I am thankful for her I know we've been married for 8 years. So think about what I wrote and think about if this thing is a fake crisis. This Coronavirus affects people differently. My wife has suffered from different physical ailments which she has overcome before but she sure is struggling and the doctors have said they have had a tough time on getting her better. This thing is nothing to be messed with please listen to the authorities and heed the advice of the experts. We don't have to fear this and by heeding the advice doesn't mean that you fear it that means you're showing wisdom during this epidemic time. Looking back I should have wore a mask in the beginning but I didn't and perhaps I'm paying the price for it now but I know that if it was me that gave it to my wife I know that she forgives me and I know that God forgives me. Whether man forgives me or not that's out of my control but as long as I have the assurance that God forgives me and my wife forgives me I am good. So just think about what I said and if you have to go out please use wisdom and don't be foolish like I was so the same so the same thing won't happen to you like it happened to me and my wife.

 

[zorro99]

I saw the briefing. Even though he said it twice, I can't tell if he said "I take it" or "I'd take it". It's either a coincidence that it sounds so similar, or it was done on purpose so the take-back can be that he never said he took the drug, only that he would.

In either case, he's still an idiot for promoting it. There has to be some financial incentive there.

Is it possible he tested positive for CV 19 and is lying about it?

 

[zorro99]

I saw the briefing. Even though he said it twice, I can't tell if he said "I take it" or "I'd take it". It's either a coincidence that it sounds so similar, or it was done on purpose so the take-back can be that he never said he took the drug, only that he would.

In either case, he's still an idiot for promoting it. There has to be some financial incentive there.

It was pretty clear to me he said has had been taking it.

 

[newyorkguy]

It was pretty clear to me he said has had been taking it.

He's taking it.

President Donald Trump said for the first time Monday that he has been regularly taking the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine, which is being studied to treat and prevent the coronavirus. During a Q&A with reporters, Trump said he has taken a hydroxychloroquine pill "every day" for a week and a half. Trump countered the evidence against the drug's dangers by touting anecdotal evidence. "Here we go — you ready?" Trump said. "Here's my evidence: I get a lot of positive calls about it. The only negative I've heard was the study where they gave it — was it the VA? — with people that aren't big Trump fans."

The Food and Drug Administration has warned against using hydroxychloroquine "outside of the hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems." Business Insider

 

[Stacyhs]

I am not at all comfortable with having a president who holds “rallies” in the normal course of governing. I don’t even love election rallies but at least they have a purpose. A sitting officeholder holding rallies strikes me as nothing but authoritarianism.

I agree completely. Trump needs his rally fixes like a meth addict needs his pipe.