slyjoe
Illuminator
I thought I read that the Lindell guy IS taking it.
Cont: The all-new "US Politics and coronavirus" thread pt. 2
- Thread starter newyorkguy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- coronavirus
- Status
I thought I read that the Lindell guy IS taking it.
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 13,208
For places the virus got its foothold after the beginning of April I’d agree with you. Before that I think you are relying on 20-20 hindsight to know when countries “should” take this virus very seriously. In Jan neither IFR nor R0 were know and human-to-human transmission wasn’t even confirmed until late Jan. If Feb these started to be known to some degree, but it was not unreasonable to think that the small number of cases outside China could be handled by contact tracing and there would not be any other major outbreaks.
It was only in early March when the **** hit the fan in Italy and Spain that it was clear just how serious the things were. At that point it became a matter of cultural practices and luck as to whether a full blown lockdown could be enacted quickly enough. It may have been inevitable that New York was already in trouble, but London has nearly as many travellers and could have been hit just as hard and just as early.
In Canada, Quebec had the misfortune of having it’s spring break a weak earlier, so schools were open for a week afterwards while Ontario shut schools down at the same time but students never went back after spring break. This week was just enough time for students infected on vacation to bring the virus back and infect their classmates who in turn spread it to their families. The result was that Quebec was hit just as hard as Sweden even though they locked down pretty much when everyone else did.
This pattern of luck and timing as to how much penetration the virus had made determined most of the early pattern of infection and death rates for the next 2 months. A few places did get lucky and blew it by not responding as strongly (eg Sweden) or just lagged the world a week or two in it’s response (eg the UK)
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
I'd love it if we had a president who didn't involve himself in the FDA approval process. Maybe he could just make sure they were properly resourced and let the scientists do their work.
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 13,208
Scientists don’t typically go searching the internet for woo to debunk. This means typical garden variety woo-woo claims will never be countered with peer reviewed science that addresses them directly. The lack of such refutation, in no way means these claims have validity, just the opposite in fact. It means they are so far off the radar wrt scientific discussion they can be dismissed out of hand pending some extraordinary new evidence.
If you are going to link such claims it's incumbent on you to support them with strong evidence.
Unfortunately, it could very well be another four and a half years of Trump Presidency most or all of which will be with the spectre of Covid-19 looming.
I really doubt that. Nothing to do with the election, but see how much more unwell he is now compared even to the start of the year, let alone 2016.
I just hope his physical decline overtakes his mental decline.
I did
https://ourworldindata.org/search?q=covid+death+ages+in+the+US
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/201...s-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
The current stats only to the 8th it’s supposed to be updated weekly
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
I want to see people start challenging him to ride a bike test. He wants Biden to take his dementia test. I'd like Trump to take the bike ride challenge. There's no electoral purpose other than he gets ridicule and hopefully, falls and hurts himself.
So you're okay with at least 1.4% of everyone over age 15 dying if they contract covid, with odds getting much worse with age? A death rate of at least 3% for everyone over 25? A death rate of at least 5% for everyone over 35? You don't consider that a crisis? You're good with that? And note that those death rates are despite masks, social distancing, improved medical care, etc.
And you stubbornly refuse to accept that death is not the only bad outcome from a covid infection. Severe damage to lungs, heart, brain and circulatory system have been identified, require extensive, expensive treatment, and may ultimately be life-shortening. You seem to be okay with that, too.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...3de170-de6a-11ea-8051-d5f887d73381_story.html
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200622-the-long-term-effects-of-covid-19-infection
https://www.vox.com/2020/7/14/21324201/covid-19-long-term-effects-symptoms-treatment
What is the point that you think you are trying to make?
Last edited:
I don't think that's entirely true. Peter Navarro, one of Trump's right-wing economic advisers, warned Trump directly in January that covid was coming and it would be catastrophic.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/navarro-warning-trump-coronavirus.html
Other officials also weighed in early:
https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-warnings-46ea8006-2e19-4810-82c1-0f10f4f9aa97.html
We could all see what was happening in China, and any President other than Trump from either party would have started sounding the alarms and circling the wagons. "We didn't know" doesn't work.
There has been enough time to determine long term symptoms the ones that do have ongoing issues is often due and underlying illness with covid and are very rare your links don’t give a number are percentage of cases you have to have a subscription to view
The Washington post.
from your second link.
Happy hypoxia” is another mystery. Our blood normally features “oxygen saturation” levels of around 98%. Anything below 85% should lead to a loss of consciousness, coma or even death. But a large number of Covid-19 patients have been found to have oxygen saturation levels below 70%, even below 60%, yet remained fully conscious and cognitively functional.
Then there’s the fact that an enormous percentage of people who carry the virus have no symptoms. Estimates vary, but one mass-testing report from Iceland found that fully 50% of the population who carried the virus expressed no symptoms whatsoever.
Perhaps most unnerving: while about 80% of people who develop Covid-19 shake off the virus easily, a small percentage quickly worsen and within days die from respiratory weakness and multi-system organ failure.
I have searched for this many times most of the major news sites all say there hasn’t been enough time to determine long term illness even those who have been very critical of the virus.
From your second link: Yet it’s currently impossible to predict who will have long-lasting symptoms from Covid-19. “People who are older and frailer with more comorbidities are more likely to have longer physical recovery. However, I’ve seen a lot of young people be really, really sick,” Santhosh says. “They will have a long tail of recovery too.”
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper
My avatar is not a Drumpf hat
"I aced the bike test! Everyone were amazed! The first five metres are easy, cause then they're holding your bike and pushing you, but the last five are relly hard! And if you pedal yourself and don't fall off the bike you get bonus points! No one's ever done that!
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 6,416
These are preventable deaths and lingering chronic conditions.
As alluded to earlier, what are we -assuming "we" remain among the fortunate- "gaining" in exchange for not preventing them?
As alluded to earlier, what are we -assuming "we" remain among the fortunate- "gaining" in exchange for not preventing them?
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 13,208
Keep in mind understanding works. Lots of people say lots of things early on. Any of these things could turn out to be correct but as the facts come in most fall by the wayside. This means you will always be able to find someone that was “right” in very early days, but this should not be mistaken for the truth being clear at the time. There would have been people championing every somewhat reasonable position, so whatever the outcome you can always look back and find people who guessed right. This is distinctly different that having the weight of the evidence being clear and convincing.
You should also consider that maybe they interpreted “serious” as something like SARS or the 2009 H1N1 epidemic. Outcomes like these would have been considered serious even though they fall far short of what COVID-19 on the danger scale.
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 13,208
I’ve no idea what you are trying to say wrt long term symptoms, so I’ll just highlight a few key facts. While COVID-19 spreads as a respiratory disease it there is evidence suggesting that once in the body it can attack many different organs and cell types, including the heart, the brain the liver and even the immune system itself. This means it potentially has long lasting consequences for many different diseases. We won’t know scale of these consequences for years or possibly even decades to come, but it would be irresponsible to ignore them just because someone suffers only mild respiratory symptoms.
If somebody tells you "your house is on fire!," and somebody else says "It can't be. I don't smell any smoke," would you do something, or not? The dangers of global pandemics were so well-known that both G. Bush and B. Obama worried about them and assigned staff to study them. Obama created a White House pandemic office to monitor them and prepare responses. Trump closed that office. A basic function of government is to "Hope for the best, but plan for the worst." Trump stopped at the "hope" part, despite warnings by his own closest advisors.
Last edited:
The image is a welcome improvement, thank you. That would be the first time that I saw the numbers you were referring to. Consider formatting your links, and not including links to things like search results.
Yes but the data from Wuhan and South Korea in February was an IFR of about 1-2% and highly infectious (80% in the South Korean church outbreak)
So it was easy to see that it had (has) the potential to be very bad
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
One aspect of Covid-19 that doctors are just now becoming aware of, the extent to which it may cause heart damage. The American Heart Association is one of the groups that is very concerned. Below is a quote from Stat News, a biotech industry news group. It was published July 27th.
We are barely nine months from the first reported cases. But already doctors say, Covid-19 is an unusually invasive and deadly virus. The medical community warns, we know very little about it. Of course, epidemiologists, as was pointed out, don't consult social media where the 'real' experts are.
This is from a just published article in the journal of the University of California San Francisco. The title is: "We Thought It Was Just a Respiratory Virus. We were wrong.":
We are barely nine months from the first reported cases. But already doctors say, Covid-19 is an unusually invasive and deadly virus. The medical community warns, we know very little about it. Of course, epidemiologists, as was pointed out, don't consult social media where the 'real' experts are.
This is from a just published article in the journal of the University of California San Francisco. The title is: "We Thought It Was Just a Respiratory Virus. We were wrong.":
A twofer...!
1. Trump is touting a dietary supplement as a cure.
2. He learned about it from an investor in the company, the one and only Mike Lindell of MyPillow* fame, Trump donor/cultist.
Laughing dogs, etc.
* a pillow that belongs in Motel 6
1. Trump is touting a dietary supplement as a cure.
2. He learned about it from an investor in the company, the one and only Mike Lindell of MyPillow* fame, Trump donor/cultist.
Laughing dogs, etc.
* a pillow that belongs in Motel 6
Last edited:
- Status