Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, June 29, 2020

Newly published antibody test results from half a dozen parts of the country confirm that COVID-19 infections in the United States far outnumber confirmed cases. The ratio of estimated infections to known cases in these studies, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported on Friday, range from 6 to 1 in Connecticut as of early May to 24 to 1 in Missouri as of late April.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is what failure looks like.

This failure is completely the responsibility of the Federal government, who refused to acquire from the WHO or build for ourselves massive numbers of test kits, when it was evident the pandemic was spreading globally.

#1 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-29 10:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's tragically incompetent, but completely expected. My local grocery store's corporation has better disaster response and puts it on display every hurricane.

#2 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 11:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I still haven't heard a good reason why a statistical analysis in a well planned epidemiological study hasn't been carried out so we can actually have good data.

Randoming selecting blood samples from people having testing done for who know what doesn't seem like a well planned approach. More of a "let's see if it's worth looking at before we actually do something valuable" thing.

#3 | Posted by YAV at 2020-06-29 11:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

BTW, Fauci's put out an IFR amber of 0.4% and most believe the number is between 05-1.

#4 | Posted by YAV at 2020-06-29 11:18 AM | Reply

This does seem to be one of the better written Reason articles. They also got one critical thing completely correct IMHO; Since neither contact tracing nor a vaccine is likely to save high-risk Texans, the ultimate death toll will depend largely on precautions aimed at protecting them.

#5 | Posted by YAV at 2020-06-29 11:20 AM | Reply

Current best CDC IFR estimate is 0.26. I like how it calls it a light grey lining. It's a stark contrast from the 9% CCR average when politicians were busy dropping covid bombs into nursing homes.

#6 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 11:40 AM | Reply

Washington's nursing homes weren't due to any politician's actions or inactions.
Florida's either, though DeSantis shut down the reporting on them.

Please cite the CDC number of 0.26. I am unable to confirm that.
Thanks, Sitz!

#7 | Posted by YAV at 2020-06-29 11:51 AM | Reply

@#6 ... It's a stark contrast from the 9% CCR average when politicians were busy dropping covid bombs into nursing homes. ...

When you are confronted with a new (novel) virus, one in which you do not know how it behaves, you have to react with the data available, usually trying to prevent the worse-case scenario.

Criticizing the very early response to the virus based upon what we know about the virus today, a.k.a. 20/20 hindsight, is not the correct approach.

The correct approach would be more along the lines of --- what have we learned since the early days and how should we apply that knowledge now and in the future.

Unfortunately, states like Texas, Florida, Arizona did not seem to learn all that much from the experience of the states that were hit in the very early stages of the virus, and now those states being hit now seem to be paying the price for their head-in-the-sand approach.

#8 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 12:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Randoming selecting blood samples from people having testing done for who know what doesn't seem like a well planned approach. More of a "let's see if it's worth looking at before we actually do something valuable" thing.

#3 | POSTED BY YAV

It's actually a tried and true method. Same with testing samples obtained from blood donation centers.

The draws need to be as random as possible to avoid confounding factors. For instance, since these are blood draws for other medical screenings there might be higher rates of older, more at risk individuals. Randomly sampling shoppers might have skewed towards younger, more likely to go out people.

Always caveats but for serology randomness is the key.

#9 | Posted by jpw at 2020-06-29 12:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Please cite the CDC number of 0.26. I am unable to confirm that.
Thanks, Sitz!

#7 | POSTED BY YAV AT 2020-06-29 11:51 AM | FLAG:

It's the average stated in the article.

#10 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 12:23 PM | Reply

@#10 ... It's the average stated in the article. ...

It's not a CDC number in the article. It seems to be the authors estimate based upon CDC best estimates..

...Based on the CDC's "best estimates" of the death rate among all Americans who develop COVID-19 symptoms (whether or not they are tested for the virus) and the percentage of infections that are asymptomatic, the nationwide IFR is something like 0.26 percent....

#11 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 12:26 PM | Reply

Criticizing the very early response to the virus based upon what we know about the virus today, a.k.a. 20/20 hindsight, is not the correct approach.

#8 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2020-06-29 12:08 PM | FLAG:

Criticizing poor political decisions that in some states sent infected persons directly into the very most vulnerable populations has to happen. The same with encouraging mass street gatherings and re-openings catering to the dumbest members of society.

#12 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 12:27 PM | Reply

#11 - thanks Lamplighter. You are correct - Reason is citing their own article, which misstated the CDC's value of 0.4 (as I stated), and then goes further dropping it from 0.3 to 0.26. My post is completely accurate, and Reaon's article is false (re: IFR).

It's little s**t like that that Reason does that took them off my reading list. Dammit. I thought they had done a decent job on this story. My mistake.

JPW - thanks for the detail. As I said, it's fine for proving a concept, but given the nature, locations of, etc. these blood draws, I'd be hesitant to draw too many conclusions from them. I'd still like to see a solid empirical random sampling and analysis.

#13 | Posted by YAV at 2020-06-29 12:35 PM | Reply

@#12 ... mass street gatherings ...

While I tend to agree about having mass street gatherings being worse than not having them, there are a couple of points to be made.

First, AG Barr has said that he will uphold the First Amendment rights against lockdowns that suppress them. While he was talking at the time about Church services, it is the same amendment that protects the mass protests. So the states and cities may have difficulty enforcing a ban on mass protests, based upon AG Barr's direction.

Second, outdoor, mostly masked and socially-distanced mass protests are a very different scenario than indoor gatherings that result from most re-openings.

But overall, we could have handled this pandemic better, so much better.

It is sadly a shame that Pres trump chose to politicize it instead of helping to save Americans.


#14 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 12:54 PM | Reply

First, AG Barr

Second, outdoor, mostly masked and socially-distanced mass protests are a very different scenario than indoor gatherings that result from most re-openings.

But overall, we could have handled this pandemic better, so much better.

#14 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2020-06-29 12:54 PM | FLAG:

Barr's a hack. Everybody that had a shred of integrity already quit the administration.

Shell tried to reopen 1 floor of 1 building and ended up with 50+ infections in a week then shut back down. Most dining is now curbside even after the full reopening. Taste of Texas opened for a few days and shut back down after a server tested positive. In Houston it was 60,000 people shoulder to shoulder with maybe 50% masked, and that was just the city hall protest. Bars at the time were at 25% capacity, with most businesses here having made masks mandatory and all of the office space has switched to working at home. The Houston Metro is 124 cities and all of them saw large protests. Gathering up minorities into packed crowds in the middle of a pandemic that disproportionately effects minorities sounds like a plan cooked up by Clayton Bigsby.

Ya think? lol. My local grocery store's logistics and emergency response team routinely outperforms the feds no matter who is in office. Doesn't even matter what kind of disaster at this point.

#15 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 01:24 PM | Reply

H-E-B?
That store or some other Texas store has a storied logistics method and is frankly a work of art. Better than FEMA by far.

#16 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2020-06-29 01:29 PM | Reply

... Most dining is now curbside ...

Here in Connecticut some towns are closing main Street to traffic from 6pm to late evening, and allowing the restaurants (which normally don't have much sidewalk space) to put tables on the street for outdoor dining.

The Governor had to issue an temporary executive order that overrides local zoning to allow for it to occur. But it has been so well received that some towns are talking about changing their local laws to allow it every summer.



#17 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 01:33 PM | Reply

Here's the problem with the Anti-Bodies and Predicted actual infection rate from those tests:

People who have had COVID-19 without symptoms don't keep very many antibodies for very long and appear to be susceptible to re-infection at a later date.

So while they may have been infected, they haven't "really" been infected for the purposes of immunity and could get re-infected at a later date with much worse symptoms.

#18 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-06-29 01:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#17 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2020-06-29 01:33 PM | FLAG:

By curbside I mean it's either contact with only 1, masked, gloved, sanitizer drenched worked and you take it to go. Some places are zero contact and you don't even see the person. Grab & go, pay via mobile app. The business adaptions have been fast paced here. Museums including NASA Space Center have been transformed into no-contact linear tours and/or require pre-booked sessions with nobody but your small party and a curator inside. The archaic liquor laws that stuck around from prohibition because Silver Eagle spends the most on lobbying have been indefinitely suspended. Strange times. I haven't even seen the inside of a grocery store since early March.

#19 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 01:45 PM | Reply

and this ------- governor is going to let 6000 Republicans into the George R Brown for some political gathering. They're all getting Covid.

#20 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-29 01:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#19 ... By curbside I mean ...

Oops, yeah, that's what I mean when I say "curbside" also. Grab & Go, as you say.

I misread that part of your comment originally.

#21 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 01:52 PM | Reply

Infections are little more than a pain in the ass for the vast majority of people. What we should be focusing on is the death rate, and to a lesser extent the hospitalization rate. As of yesterday, there were 41,075 new cases of COVID reported in the US. But there were only 250 COVID deaths. That's the lowest that number has been since March 26th.

It's quite possible that the correct lessons have been learned, and that those who are at risk are being effectively isolated from those who aren't at risk. In which case the number of new cases is not particularly significant.

#22 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-29 02:59 PM | Reply

"Infections are little more than a pain in the ass for the vast majority of people"

So what? It's the minority that must also be considered and protected in this environment.

"It's quite possible that the correct lessons have been learned, and that those who are at risk are being effectively isolated from those who aren't at risk."

That is a possibility. Yet, the risk of taking on that possibility prior to a proven and effective opening plan (haven't seen one yet) or a vaccine is simply not worth it.

Why do you suppose it is?

#23 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-06-29 03:05 PM | Reply

Posted on another thread:

I mean people like GTJR will point to that number(current decreasing fatality rate) and claim some kind of victory and gloss over all those that have died, that we've lost. That the "deaths per 100,000" will be trumpeted as stabilizing because the rate will drop as the age drops. They'll claim it as some sort of vindication, and they'll ignore the loss those that survive but are counted as "recovered" may have to deal with the rest of their lives. They will choose, as the only metric that matters, "death per 100,000" and ignore everything else. The economic damage, what could have been saved with a decent response (like S. Korea, etc.). The mental health of so many, and so much more.

And I'll be accused again of wanting the death toll to increase because of what I just said when I am horrified and angry about that we can't get our s**t together on this.

#24 | Posted by YAV at 2020-06-29 03:16 PM | Reply

@#19

From what I'm seeing on local news, New Jersey has decided to not allow indoor dining (it was due to occur in a week or two), and New York (maybe just New York City? I'll hear more on the 6PM local news) is considering back-tracking on indoor dining as well.

It's not necessarily due to an uptick of cases, but more due to what has been seem in other states that allowed indoor dining and what happened since.

#25 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 03:26 PM | Reply

Here's a reminder of how racism, hate and fearmongering are the reasons we can't have national healthcare.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Jun 28
Corrupt Joe Biden has confirmed that he "would give UNLIMITED Healthcare to Illegal Immigrants". This would break our system and bring millions of people to the USA.
@foxandfriends


#26 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-06-29 03:51 PM | Reply

Infections are little more than a pain in the ass for the vast majority of people"

Actually it is a pain in the lungs.

#27 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-06-29 04:08 PM | Reply

@#27

There is some thought nowadays that COVID-19 may be a blood disease, in addition to a respiratory disease.

#28 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 04:37 PM | Reply


But it has been so well received that some towns are talking about changing their local laws to allow it every summer.
#17 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

As long as the weather is nice, I have always enjoyed these type of events. Tallahassee had "Gallery nights" which blocked off a couple blocks of the town to have food trucks, art and vendor displays, expanded outdoor curbside dining. A really cool walkable experience in the autumn months

#29 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2020-06-29 04:38 PM | Reply

@#25

Based upon what I'm seeing on the 4PM news from New York City, it looks to be just New Jersey and New York City.

#30 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 04:38 PM | Reply

@#29 ... Tallahassee had "Gallery nights" which blocked off a couple blocks of the town to have food trucks, art and vendor displays, expanded outdoor curbside dining. ...

A local town had a popular Food Trunk Evening every other Friday in front of town hall. You set up blankets on the town hall lawn, and picnicked via the food trucks. The other every other Friday night was movie night in the same spot.

Nice weather needed, of course.

Both have been cancelled until post-COVID-19.

#31 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-29 04:42 PM | Reply

That's a lot of asymptomatic carriers.

#32 | Posted by Tor at 2020-06-29 04:45 PM | Reply

I got the antibody test last week, not that I thought I had had corona but with MS and allergies about the only symptoms I don't deal with is the fever. So why not check since I had a doctors appointment anyway.

Negative for antibodies.

#33 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2020-06-29 04:50 PM | Reply

That's a lot of asymptomatic carriers.

#32 | POSTED BY TOR

Not testing everyone is like trying to predict where a hurricane is heading, where it will hit and where it will end up without satellites or radar and only using Trumpy's sharpie.

#34 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-06-29 05:12 PM | Reply

"Yet, the risk of taking on that possibility prior to a proven and effective opening plan (haven't seen one yet) or a vaccine is simply not worth it."

Because it's far easier to segregate people based on different levels of risk. The lock-down plan treated everyone as though they were at the same level of risk. That places an unnecessary burden on those not at risk. And in reality, it wasn't completely effective at shielding those at risk. If I do have a criticism of how this was handled, the government should have established sterile treatment facilities for those at risk. They would have almost certainly needed to be run by the national guard or other government agency conducting local deployments. That would have been the only way to really stem the tide of deaths.

#35 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 06:24 AM | Reply

" the government should have established sterile treatment facilities for those at risk."

And inter those of us who already work from home??? You're joking, right?

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-06-30 09:05 AM | Reply

"And inter those of us who already work from home??? You're joking, right?"

Yes. My plan would have had SEAL team six kicking in your door to drag you off to a facility.

#37 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 11:33 AM | Reply

Because it's far easier to segregate people based on different levels of risk. The lock-down plan treated everyone as though they were at the same level of risk.
#35 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

You really have ZERO clue do you?

The Lock-Down plan was to stop the spread and contain it, not protect the at-risk.

Honestly, we are MONTHS in and you STILL don't grasp this absolute most basic god damn concept?!

#38 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-06-30 12:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#38 no he doesn't. He's also apparently still blissfully ignorant that Sweden tried it and learned it is a bad plan.

#39 | Posted by jpw at 2020-06-30 02:28 PM | Reply

"the government should have established sterile treatment facilities for those at risk."

Treating them for what? Risk?

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 02:34 PM | Reply

MB, Segregationist.

One supposes that gassing at his facilities costs extra.

One also wonders if 100K new cases a day is sufficient to have him work out at home rather than at the gym... you know, as we'd hate to inconvenience him by not dying.

#41 | Posted by Corky at 2020-06-30 02:35 PM | Reply

As of yesterday, there were 41,075 new cases of COVID reported in the US. But there were only 250 COVID deaths.

There were 338 deaths yesterday, not 250, so you were only off by 26%. For you, that's a good day.

#42 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-30 02:36 PM | Reply

Also, as is obvious to anyone with a brain (which never includes you), deaths lag behind new cases because people don't die of Covid the minute they contract it. Our aggregate death rate is around 5%, which means that over 2,000 of the people who contracted it yesterday will die. You don't get to use deaths from people who got the virus when the spread was slower to claim that yesterday's record number of contractions won't result in many deaths.

#43 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-30 02:38 PM | Reply

"Honestly, we are MONTHS in and you STILL don't grasp this absolute most basic god damn concept?!"

I don't think you get it. The vast majority of people have nothing to fear from COVID. You can make the argument early on that we didn't know enough about the disease and a lock down made sense. It's a bad argument, once that was dismissed by prominent medical professionals, but it's an argument.

Now we know who is at risk and who isn't. And it doesn't make sense to isolate those who aren't at risk anymore than it would make sense to isolate them from the common cold. Especially when the collateral effects of that kind of a lockdown have very serious consequences.

And my point stands. Isolate those at risk, let everyone else do their thing. Not sure how you could even argue against this. The people don't want to be locked down. They don't need to be locked down, yet for some arbitrary reason you think they should be.

#44 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 02:38 PM | Reply

"The vast majority of people have nothing to fear from COVID."

So, you don't have any fear that COVID could kill your parents, who are like 80 years old?

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 02:40 PM | Reply

Perhaps MB needs a graphic to show him who is at risk; who he wants to "isolate":

"Almost One in Four Adult Workers is Vulnerable to Severe Illness from COVID-19

We find that over 90 million adults are at greater risk for severe illness from COVID-19 due to underlying health conditions or age. Of these at-risk adults, we estimate that about 37.7 million were employed at a job or business in the prior year, including 10 million people age 65 and older (19.5% of adults age 65 and older, all of whom are considered at greater risk) and 27.7 million non-elderly adults (Figure 1). These at-risk workers comprise 24% of all adult workers."

workers.www.kff.org

So, more non-elderly workers are at risk than elderly workers.

#46 | Posted by Corky at 2020-06-30 02:52 PM | Reply

"One also wonders if 100K new cases a day is sufficient to have him work out at home rather than at the gym... you know, as we'd hate to inconvenience him by not dying."

Sweet Corky.

You should come to Germany. The other day, I bought a woman at a bar a beer. She was 90 if she was a day.

She didn't seem too terrified.

#47 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 02:53 PM | Reply

"There were 338 deaths yesterday, not 250, so you were only off by 26%. For you, that's a good day."

There were 250 on 28 May.

#48 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 02:54 PM | Reply

I assume you mean June. Regardless, see post #43.

#49 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-30 02:56 PM | Reply

"So, you don't have any fear that COVID could kill your parents, who are like 80 years old?"

Nope.

I don't care because they don't care. My dad's really not the type to hunker down. I don't think I would be either. Spending your final years isolating yourself from the rest of the world doesn't seem like much of a life. Maybe you can go tell him how selfish he's being for not locking himself away.

#50 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 02:56 PM | Reply

"We find that over 90 million adults are at greater risk for severe illness from COVID-19 due to underlying health conditions or age."

Worth repeating.

So what about the other 240 million Americans who aren't at risk?

#51 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 02:59 PM | Reply

#47 |

When anecdote is your only evidence, you should put the shovel down.

You could, rather, respond to #46.

Or just continue blithely advocating for making sure that seniors won't "have much of a life"... particular when they are the vast minority in the workforce that are at risk.

#52 | Posted by Corky at 2020-06-30 03:02 PM | Reply

"I assume you mean June. Regardless, see post #43."

I'm not sure if you've seen this or not, but it's an interactive graph of COVID deaths in the US:

www.google.com

You can also index by state. I'm not sure about every state, I spend most of my time in the Vegas area. And since Vegas re-opened on June 3rd, there has not been a spike in deaths. If anything, it's trended down. And that's in a city that's built on entertainment. It's also seen a lot of protest activity in the last month. Even nationwide, the trend in deaths has been downward.

#53 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 03:06 PM | Reply

#51

Selective editing:

"we estimate that about 37.7 million were employed at a job or business in the prior year, including 10 million people age 65 and older (19.5% of adults age 65 and older, all of whom are considered at greater risk) and 27.7 million non-elderly adults (Figure 1). These at-risk workers comprise 24% of all adult workers."

A quarter of all workers are at risk, nearly 2/3'rds of them not elderly.

Rather than having reasonable protections used by all workers, MB wants those 14 percent "isolated" somewhere... maybe at Trump Hotels.

#54 | Posted by Corky at 2020-06-30 03:06 PM | Reply

"Or just continue blithely advocating for making sure that seniors won't "have much of a life"... particular when they are the vast minority in the workforce that are at risk."

So is that your concern? That seniors won't have much of a life?

Are you ----------- me? What about everyone else? They don't matter?

#55 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 03:07 PM | Reply

those 24 percent

#56 | Posted by Corky at 2020-06-30 03:07 PM | Reply

And Cork, you or someone else can tell me if I'm wrong, but the only real justification I can find for locking down everyone is that, if the at-risk population can't do it because of risk, then no one should be able to.

Does that about cover it?

#57 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-06-30 03:08 PM | Reply

- So is that your concern? That seniors won't have much of a life?

I was quoting you... that's what those little marks around the words are.

- ----------- me

What you do in the privacy of your own home is your bidness.

And you don't seem to need any help doing that to yourself here.

#58 | Posted by Corky at 2020-06-30 03:09 PM | Reply

And my point stands. Isolate those at risk, let everyone else do their thing. Not sure how you could even argue against this. The people don't want to be locked down. They don't need to be locked down, yet for some arbitrary reason you think they should be.

#44 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

It's easy to argue against because it's an ignorant, garbage approach.

Why are righties so impervious to critical thought and the integration of new information into their existing opinions?

#59 | Posted by jpw at 2020-06-30 03:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Maybe you can go tell him how selfish he's being for not locking himself away.

#50 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

But according to you he and his generation should be entirely isolated to a much more stringent level than we are simply so you don't have to be inconvenienced.

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2020-06-30 03:15 PM | Reply

So what about the other 240 million Americans who aren't at risk?

#51 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Who are of unknown risk.

It isn't black and white.

#61 | Posted by jpw at 2020-06-30 03:15 PM | Reply

"I don't care because they don't care."

And since you don't care, nobody should care!

#62 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:21 PM | Reply

"So what about the other 240 million Americans who aren't at risk?"

At risk of what, death?

They're at risk of permanent disability, decreased respiratory function, crippling medical bills, lost wages from lost work, and they're certainly at risk of spreading the disease to everyone they come in contact with.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:23 PM | Reply

"Isolate those at risk, let everyone else do their thing."

What's your plan for isolating 100 million Americans?

Lay it on me, big thinker.

#64 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:25 PM | Reply

The people don't want to be locked down. They don't need to be locked down, yet for some arbitrary reason you think they should be.
#44 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

And yet you're fine with locking them down at the arbitrary national level when they want to sell their labor...

#65 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:29 PM | Reply

I'm not sure if you've seen this or not, but it's an interactive graph of COVID deaths in the US:

I have. And it's in no way a response to the fact that we have a 5% death rate meaning 5,000 of the people who got Covid yesterday are going to die, as opposed to the 250 who died two days ago.

So what about the other 240 million Americans who aren't at risk?

Has any nation successfully controlled the virus and its death rate by cordoning off those you deem to be at-risk and letting everyone else roam free? We've seen dozens of nations flatten the curve. We have observable evidence of what works. Why shouldn't we emulate countries who have flattened the curve?

#66 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-30 03:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Why shouldn't we emulate countries who have flattened the curve?

#66 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2020-06-30 03:30 PM | FLAG:

We just did a week or so of the national guard and cops tear gassing people to enforce curfews.

Small price to pay, or too much for Covid? and we're asking Trump to do that to us?

#67 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-30 03:35 PM | Reply

It's unfortunate that cops had to murder someone and create civil unrest during a pandemic, but that isn't really a response to the fact that we know what works and we aren't doing it.

#68 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-30 03:45 PM | Reply

"We just did a week or so of the national guard and cops tear gassing people to enforce curfews."

Nah. Not COVID curfews.

#69 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:45 PM | Reply

"Has any nation successfully controlled the virus and its death rate by cordoning off those you deem to be at-risk and letting everyone else roam free?"

None of MadBomber's "solutions" have ever been spotted in the wild.

He's a Randian dystopian puritopian. His Leviathan is a Loch Ness Monster.

#70 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

So is that your concern? That seniors won't have much of a life?
Are you ----------- me? What about everyone else? They don't matter?
#55 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

If your life is ruined by the fact that you can't go to Applebees, then your life was already ruined before you couldn't go to Applebees.

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-06-30 03:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

we know what works and we aren't doing it.

#68 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2020-06-30 03:45 PM | FLAG:

Can't really do it. I think that's a distinction worth noting. When a few hundred people want to roll up to a Mayor's lawn and protest in a private neighborhood, or 60,000 want to protest Houston City Hall, you need the same police being protested for brutality to drive all these people home to breakup their outdoor gathering.

#72 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-06-30 04:00 PM | Reply

Okay.

And?

#73 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-30 04:55 PM | Reply

"It's easy to argue against because it's an ignorant, garbage approach."

How so? Can you explain why it makes more sense to isolate everyone rather than those who are at risk?

#74 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:12 AM | Reply

"But according to you he and his generation should be entirely isolated to a much more stringent level than we are simply so you don't have to be inconvenienced."

I'm not really saying that.

That's what you would do if you were serious about keeping them alive, but if you try to lock up my old man he's going to go out shooting. And I understand. I would probably be the same way. Why spend your last few years trying to preserve a life that's no longer worth living.

But, for those who value their lives above all else, it would be an option. And it would shut up people like yourself who claim that not enough is being done to protect those who were at risk.

#75 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:16 AM | Reply

"Who are of unknown risk."

But that's true of everything.

Out of 2.1 million uniformed service members, three have died of COVID. Statistically, that number should have been zero based on risk. Yet during this same time, many, many more have died in training accidents, car accidents, combat, whatever.

There is no such thing as zero risk.

#76 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:18 AM | Reply

"Why shouldn't we emulate countries who have flattened the curve?"

What did the US not do that Germany did? From my vantage point, it looked very similar. Non-essential businesses were closed down, people were asked to wear face masks, travel was restricted...what was different.

Germany is 100% open again. Except for some travelers, like the US.

Yesterday Germany reported 498 news cases and 12 new deaths.

#77 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:28 AM | Reply

"What's your plan for isolating 100 million Americans?"

www.mirasafety.com**LP%20Shop%20-%20HAZMAT%20Suit&utm_term=4588193303491777&utm_content=shopify_US_1799433027635_16900592992307%20%7C%20MIRA%20Safety%20HAZ-SUIT%20Protective%20CBRN%20HAZMAT%20Suit%20SM%2FMD%20%7C%20%24119.95

They don't necessarily need to be isolated...they just need to have the right gear.

#78 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:33 AM | Reply

...what was different.

Possibly the reaction time? Just a guess.

#79 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-07-01 01:34 AM | Reply

" Can you explain why it makes more sense to isolate everyone rather than those who are at risk?"

Asymptomatic contagion, and the greater chance at mutation.

At this point you're pretending we know everything about this virus, including it's future limitations, and how it might mutate. You're also defining "risk" very narrowly, where scarring and lifetime complications are just fine, and the ONLY negative outcome is death. Forgive me if I respectfully disagree.

For example, we learned today my 24 yr old great-niece, an EMT on helicopter life flights, has Covid. She's in phenomenal shape, but said it has kicked her ass worse than anything in her life. She also said her coworkers weren't masking or distancing 100% of the time...something she now regrets.

It turns out the view is different from that side of your equation.

#80 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-07-01 01:34 AM | Reply

" they just need to have the right gear."

If that were true, no medical professionals would be getting sick.

#81 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-07-01 01:36 AM | Reply

" What did the US not do that Germany did?"

Germany made mask-wearing apolitical. Trump chose the other end of the spectrum.

#82 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-07-01 01:39 AM | Reply

" What did the US not do that Germany did?"

Germany made mask-wearing apolitical. Trump chose the other end of the spectrum.

#83 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-07-01 01:42 AM | Reply

"What did the US not do that Germany did?"

Far more testing and contact tracing three months ago.

#84 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-01 02:06 AM | Reply

It's funny that your plan is to put 100,000,000 obese, disabled, and otherwise compromised Americans in 100,000,000 nonexistent HAZMAT suits.
And expect them to wear them right.
For the next 18+ months.

I'm giving you 8/10. Not perfect, but pretty good troll nonetheless.

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-01 02:10 AM | Reply

"Can you explain why it makes more sense to isolate everyone rather than those who are at risk?"

Everyone is at risk to be a carrier.
That's why.

#86 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-01 02:12 AM | Reply

And expect them to wear them right.

No chance. Dey gots Freedom!

#87 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-07-01 02:34 AM | Reply

What did the US not do that Germany did?
#77 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Such a great question.

Germany made mask-wearing apolitical. Trump chose the other end of the spectrum.
#82 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Far more testing and contact tracing three months ago.
#84 | POSTED BY SNOOFY


Reasonable, understandable, and convincing answers.

#88 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-07-01 02:38 AM | Reply

Now we know who is at risk and who isn't.

#44 | Posted by madbomber

Everyone is. Your constant focus is on 'deaths,' but this virus causes damage in the bodies of even the youngest and healthiest.

There was a significant study of asymptomatic patients. They x-rayed their lungs. 50-100% were described as 'having a fog over the film' of their lungs. Kidney damage, damaged immune systems, liver, heart, and as mentioned, lungs.

Masks and social distancing are the ONLY mitigation methods that will prevent spreading COVID and keeping ourselves safer at the same time.

#89 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-07-01 04:42 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If that were true, no medical professionals would be getting sick."

It looks to me like it can be bought directly from DuPont.

#90 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 06:08 AM | Reply

"Everyone is at risk to be a carrier."

We know that. What we don't know is why it matters for those who feel they have little to risk would care?

The onus is on those at risk to isolate themselves.

Or maybe it's on the state. Maybe the National Guard should be in breaking up protests and enforcing isolation? Maybe they should be kicking in doors and spiriting those at higher risk to areas where they could be contained.

#91 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 06:12 AM | Reply

"Everyone is. Your constant focus is on 'deaths,' but this virus causes damage in the bodies of even the youngest and healthiest."

It can. Yes. There is no one at zero risk. But the stats don't like, and for the vast majority of people, especially those who are young and don't have any underlying conditions, are going to manifest this as a standard case of the flu, if that. And you wouldn't expect them to isolate themselves for the flu, or for a cold, or anything...so why this? And if your concern is about them, why not let them make the decision as to whether or not the risk is worth it.

As I posted before, the odds of dying of COVID for those age 15-34 was far, far less than dying of COVID...yet using your logic they shouldn't drive or be driven. They should be (and should have been) hunkering at home in order to avoid that far more significant threat.

#92 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 06:18 AM | Reply

In the words of the Anne Schuchat, the Principal Deputy Director at the CDC:

The coronavirus is spreading too rapidly and too broadly for the U.S. to get it under control as some other countries have.

The U.S. stands in stark contrast to countries like South Korea, New Zealand and Singapore as it continues to report over 30,000 new infections per day.
BTW, we had 45,000 cases yesterday)

and, regarding the U.S.'s recent surge in new cases, "This is really the beginning,"

We can't do what Germany or other countries have done. We're past that point. The virus is out of control and the only real option at this point is everyone, everyone must mask up/cover their faces when in public. Some businesses must be shut down, like bars and nightclubs.

Either that or we just ride it out, reaching 100,000 cases a day as Fauci said he expects. All because American's can't be bothered to do the right thing.

And MadBomber whistles by, making light of the casualties, putting all the responsibility on those that are the most susceptible. He and those like him can't be inconvenienced just because she people may die or be affected for decades to come.

#93 | Posted by YAV at 2020-07-01 07:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

YAV

MadBomber vs Dr. Fauci?

Anonymous blogger vs the most highly respected virus expert in the world?

Hmmmmmmm.

What to do, what to do? ~~ LOL

#94 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-07-01 07:59 AM | Reply

It's harder for elderly high risk individuals to isolate if they live in multi-generational family homes, nursing homes or assisted living centers.

#95 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2020-07-01 08:32 AM | Reply

It's harder for elderly high risk individuals to isolate if they live in multi-generational family homes, nursing homes or assisted living centers.

#96 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2020-07-01 08:32 AM | Reply

"We can't do what Germany or other countries have done. We're past that point. The virus is out of control and the only real option at this point is everyone, everyone must mask up/cover their faces when in public. Some businesses must be shut down, like bars and nightclubs."

And some protests must be shut down as well?

#97 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 08:41 AM | Reply

Okay.
And?

#73 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2020-06-30 04:55 PM | FLAG:

You're advocating for a federal lockdown, which means Trump using a mix of military and police force to lock everybody into their homes, during a time of continual police brutality protests. Your inner Trumper is showing again. He's really the man for authoritarians like you. 4 more years right? #MAGA

#98 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-07-01 08:46 AM | Reply

And some protests must be shut down as well?

Damn, you're uninformed Mad. Have you heard of any superspreading linked back to protests? There aren't any. There have been multiple stories posted about the fact researchers specifically tested protesters in multiple cities and their incidence of infection is LOWER than found in the general populous.

Because up to 60-70% of protesters used masks and many did practice some social distancing combined with being OUTSIDE where virus particles are readily dispersed, no where on the planet has seen major upticks in virus infections linked directly to the millions upon millions globally that took to the streets in protest. The masking alone assisted in providing a type of incidental herd protection evidently.

BTW, it's been 4 weeks of non-stop protesting, so if you doubt the above, where is your data showing otherwise?

#99 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-07-01 08:51 AM | Reply

"Either that or we just ride it out, reaching 100,000 cases a day as Fauci said he expects. All because American's can't be bothered to do the right thing."

Like avoid protests?

#100 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 08:52 AM | Reply

"It's harder for elderly high risk individuals to isolate if they live in multi-generational family homes, nursing homes or assisted living centers."

Yep. True.

Which is why the US government would have done well to set up isolation centers where those at risk could be sheltered under controlled conditions. There are lots of old military bases out there where Entry Contol Points could have been established. Additionally, such places could have been manned by locally deployed national guard members, who would be placed on orders for a set duration of time; during which they wouldn't leave the facility.

That is how you protect those who are at risk. You could also provide them with relatively cheap protective gear and let them do what they want.

#101 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 08:56 AM | Reply

"Damn, you're uninformed Mad. Have you heard of any superspreading linked back to protests?"

Really?

So people jammed close together are only an issue if it's a bar, restaurant, or beach?

#102 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 08:57 AM | Reply

Tony's completely correct In specific locales those involved in the protest were tracked, traced, and tested to determine what the effect might be. The measures they implemented when protesting were successful in preventing the spread. That's reality.

You trying to equate people wearing masks, outdoors, social distancing as much as was possible, to drinking in bars and restaurants for hours in the same place shows what an abysmal understating of the dynamics of spreading. Beaches are another story. I don't believe beaches are much of an issue, but going to bars and restaurants at the beach, socializing with others at the beach all without masks (who wants to wear a mask at the beach?), IS a problem.

#103 | Posted by YAV at 2020-07-01 09:09 AM | Reply

"Which is why the US government would have done well to set up isolation centers where those at risk could be sheltered under controlled conditions. There are lots of old military bases out there where Entry Contol Points could have been established. "

That sounds good in theory, but in reality it would be both medically risky and a logistical nightmare to move thousands of nursing home and assistant living center residents to old army bases where they could be isolated/quarantined.

"Additionally, such places could have been manned by locally deployed national guard members, who would be placed on orders for a set duration of time; during which they wouldn't leave the facility."

How many National Guard members are trained to tend to the elderly, who are often physically and/or mentally frail? The Guards could clean the facilities, prepare and deliver meals, but I don't see most of them being able to wash and dress such residents, change their diapers, hand feed them or give them their meds.

#104 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2020-07-01 09:17 AM | Reply

That's called an orderly. It's an entry level job.

"To become a hospital orderly, you will first need a high school diploma or GED certificate. Additionally, you will need to earn a CPR certificate to give you the life-saving skills necessary to work in a medical setting."

#105 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-07-01 10:22 AM | Reply

#89 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

Don't bother.

Madbomber is a member of the death cult.

#106 | Posted by jpw at 2020-07-01 10:39 AM | Reply

#101 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

LOL God damn you're trying way too hard.

Herd all the elderly and sick onto abandoned military bases "for their protection". You know how loud and strident the shrieks of horror would be from the GOP if a Dem POTUS had even suggested such a plan? Yet, here you are advocating for it because somehow that's easier and more palatable for you than selfish -------- simply wearing a mask and only going out for essentials.

SMFH

When your proposed solution is far more complicated and less certain of success than existing methods you're wrong. Pure and simple.

Also, most people don't know how to properly use PPE. You're average person has ZERO understanding of sterile technique and how to properly don, use and discard PPE.

#107 | Posted by jpw at 2020-07-01 10:42 AM | Reply

"That sounds good in theory, but in reality it would be both medically risky and a logistical nightmare to move thousands of nursing home and assistant living center residents to old army bases where they could be isolated/quarantined."

You're adding those things as if the alternative was normality. It's not. And the US Military is used to this sort of work, bringing back wounded troops from overseas.

Had it come in March, they could have activated the CRAF, which would have put pilots back to work, and transported those at risk to areas where they could be easily quarantined.

"How many National Guard members are trained to tend to the elderly"

There are entire medical battalions in the guard who do this stuff. The most important factor is that you could isolate them alongside those they were caring for by placing them under orders. You can't do that with civilians. if you tell a civilian that they're no longer allowed to go home out of fear for the health of their patients, they just quit. Not much you can do about it. But military members are different. They're obligated to follow whatever lawful orders they're issued.

#108 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:08 PM | Reply

"Herd all the elderly and sick onto abandoned military bases "for their protection". You know how loud and strident the shrieks of horror would be from the GOP if a Dem POTUS had even suggested such a plan? Yet, here you are advocating for it because somehow that's easier and more palatable for you than selfish -------- simply wearing a mask and only going out for essentials."

What you're suggesting is nothing more than a placebo. It may make you feel better, but it does nothing to minimize the vulnerability of those at risk. All it takes is one cough from one carrier, and that's that. The only way is to isolate those at risk. Why does this confuse you so much?

"When your proposed solution is far more complicated and less certain of success than existing methods you're wrong. Pure and simple."

Really?

Success becomes less certain when you minimize risk?

I don't know what you do for a living, but I hope it doesn't involve making decisions.

#109 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:13 PM | Reply

"Also, most people don't know how to properly use PPE. You're average person has ZERO understanding of sterile technique and how to properly don, use and discard PPE."

Cool.

In the military, you're taught how to use it between 0800 and 1200 once every eighteen months. If you can put on pajamas and a motorcycle helmet, you'll get how to don even the more complex CBRNE rated equipment.

#110 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-01 01:15 PM | Reply

What you're suggesting is nothing more than a placebo. It may make you feel better, but it does nothing to minimize the vulnerability of those at risk. All it takes is one cough from one carrier, and that's that. The only way is to isolate those at risk. Why does this confuse you so much?

This doesn't even make sense. Do you even know what a placebo is?

Success becomes less certain when you minimize risk?
I don't know what you do for a living, but I hope it doesn't involve making decisions.

#109 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

I study infectious diseases. Which is why I know what you're proposing is absurd.

In any case, since you clearly lack significant analytical thinking skills, lets go through the two scenarios.

First, the one we've tried and was working. Everybody takes part, limits public exposure by both staying home as much as possible and wearing a mask when in public. Many essential stores (grocery and drug stores for example) limit hours to give staff time to clean more and also set aside hours for the vulnerable populations to shop by themselves so that they can get their essential supplies. As many businesses as possible allowed to remain open with limited exposure of staff to customers. Again, this was working. Working so well field hospitals that were set up to soak up overflow were taken down because they were under utilized.

Now here's your proposal. A government that has been massively unresponsive to the pandemic is supposed to set up quarantine space on old military bases, complete with controlled access points, decontamination procedures and properly equipping them such that those who are moved in (voluntarily? Forced?) aren't simply living in a sterile prison. The government is now responsible for feeding, clothing and entertaining the residents as they are largely cut off from the rest of the world. Right. Because that proposal will pass the GOP Senate. The alternative is the susceptible are forced to completely self-isolate in their own homes while somehow managing to get food and supplies from somebody in a fashion that isn't going to expose them. With everybody else running around like everything is normal on the outside, there's a very high risk that the contact who's providing supplies is infectious at some point during the interactions.

God please tell me you're not making decisions either. ----.

If you can put on pajamas and a motorcycle helmet, you'll get how to don even the more complex CBRNE rated equipment.

#110 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Putting it on is only part of the process. That you think once it's on it's magic suggests you don't understand how to use it either.

#111 | Posted by jpw at 2020-07-01 01:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What you're suggesting is nothing more than a placebo.

That is beyond idiotic. Incredible.

#112 | Posted by YAV at 2020-07-01 01:40 PM | Reply

"There are entire medical battalions in the guard who do this stuff. "

Enough to staff all the elderly and assistant living center residents who are relocated to abandoned military bases? Do you have a list of such units and how many guards are in each one?

#113 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2020-07-01 02:48 PM | Reply

"Everyone is at risk to be a carrier."
We know that. What we don't know is why it matters for those who feel they have little to risk would care?
#91 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Only you and your fellow Deplorables don't know that.
It's real simple, goes back at least as far as the Old Testament:
"Am I my brother's keeper?"

Apparently your answer is "no."
And that is what makes you a sociopath.
And being a sociopath is what makes it a priori impossible to understand that All Lives Matter.

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-01 02:49 PM | Reply

"There are entire medical battalions in the guard who do this stuff. "

And repurposing them means robbing healthy young Paul to pay sickly old Peter.
Which is exactly the thing that makes you bristle at lockdown, social distancing, and other inconveniences that mostly protect sickly old Peter.

So, even if we did what you suggest, you'd still say it's a misallocation of resources.

Your trolling is down to about a 5 now.

#115 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-01 02:54 PM | Reply

"Which is why the US government would have done well to set up isolation centers where those at risk could be sheltered under controlled conditions. There are lots of old military bases out there where Entry Contol Points could have been established. "

It's not too late for Trump and GOP governors in states like FL, AR and TX, where case of the virus are increasing, to these steps. Perhaps they will do so.

#116 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2020-07-01 02:54 PM | Reply

"Which is why the US government would have done well to set up isolation centers where those at risk could be sheltered under controlled conditions."

We have thousands of those already. They're called nursing homes.
But they don't run themselves, they need young and likely asymptomatic carriers to function.
And with no capacity to test the young potentially asymptomatic carriers, there's no way to keep the patients isolated from the coronavirus.

This isn't hard to figure out.
Why are you so intent on not figuring it out?

#117 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-01 03:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"This doesn't even make sense. Do you even know what a placebo is?"

Yep. I meant panacea. Used the wrong word.

#118 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 02:09 AM | Reply

"Enough to staff all the elderly and assistant living center residents who are relocated to abandoned military bases? Do you have a list of such units and how many guards are in each one?"

This is what you're stuck with. The military.

The virus spread through nursing homes through the caregivers who came and went wherever when not at work. And you can't stop them from doing that. You can't keep them from going home, or going to the grocery store, or gas station, or riding the bus, or whatever. If the demands on the job become too much, they simply quit or get fired.

With the military, you can order them not to leave work. Keep them quarantined with whomever they've been charged to care for.

Another option would be full body protection, to ensure that a caregiver didn't touch or breathe on a patient and pass the virus on to them.

#119 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 02:19 AM | Reply

#111

You're a medical researcher. Not an economist. And while you're street cred on the medical side is probably solid, your lack of understanding or concern for economics means that you're argument is narrowly scoped. That seems to be true of many medical professionals, who care only about savings lives...regardless of the cost.

But that doesn't resonate with young people, or people who have lost their jobs. People the government has put out of work in an effort to preserve the sick and the elderly. So I'll pitch the question back your way. Objectively, how do you maximize the number of lives saved while at the same time limiting the impact on the economy. Maybe you have an answer. I don't think you do, because I don't think you care about the economic impact.

#120 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 02:25 AM | Reply

"And with no capacity to test the young potentially asymptomatic carriers, there's no way to keep the patients isolated from the coronavirus."

There is. Through the military.

Or maybe through some full body PPE.

But the military are the only ones you can make do it. The young potentially asymptomatic carriers can quit any time they want. And then you'd have no other choice but the military.

#121 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 02:27 AM | Reply

2/3 of people on unemployment are making more than when they worked.
Think that resonates?

Also, that should answer your dumb min/max question.

#122 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 02:28 AM | Reply

"There is. Through the military."

The military has 100,000,000 coronavirus test kits?

#123 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 02:28 AM | Reply

"Limiting the impact on the economy"

Same way as after 2009:
Printer go Brrr

Are you really this dumb?

#124 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 02:30 AM | Reply

Speaking of economies, the military is 3.5% of GDP and health care is 18%. The military can't pick up that much slack.

Number of nurses in USA is 2.86 million; and that's just nurses.
Number of all active duty military is about half that, 1.3 million.
Do you invade COVID-19 anyway, knowing it will be a quagmire like Iraq was with half the people needed?

Your idea could stand a chance of working at least in terms of sheer manpower, if only Dick Cheney hadn't gutted the military as SecDef...

#125 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 02:45 AM | Reply

"Objectively, how do you maximize the number of lives saved while at the same time limiting the impact on the economy."

Now?
It's too late.
It's gonna kill more people than in say Germany, and it's gonna ---- our economy more than in say Germany.

It's like asking how are you gonna save the Zeppelin business while the Hindenburg is engulfed in flames.

#126 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 02:51 AM | Reply

#123

What does that have to do with anything? They have more than they need. They have enough that I could go in and get tested right now if I wanted to. But there's no reason to. And even if I did test positive, I'd just spend the next 14 days at my house playing video games or something.

"Same way as after 2009:"

Impacts in 2009 were due to irresponsible loans. 2020 It's due to the government telling people they can't work.

#127 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 04:36 AM | Reply

"Number of all active duty military is about half that, 1.3 million."

The number of all uniformed service members is 2.1 million. Including guard and reserve. In all likelihood, they would be better suited for something like this anyway. It's more in line with what they train for.

#128 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 04:41 AM | Reply

"It's gonna kill more people than in say Germany, and it's gonna ---- our economy more than in say Germany."

It's only going to ---- the economy if you keep it closed. Or let me re-phrase, the economy will only be severely ------ if you keep it closed.

Just like people will only die if they continue to be unnecessarily exposed to risk.

#129 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 04:43 AM | Reply

MADBOMBER

Serious question, not offered as a snark:

Why are you so invested in what's going on HERE? You are not in the private sector, and you're in another country that's doing worlds better than we are in the U.S.

Your economy isn't affected. Military pay is good, you're in Germany, not the U.S.

You certainly are sure of your opinions, but with little skin in the game. Opinions are easy. Beating this COVID without everyone taking mitigation efforts seriously, we'll still look like a Falcon Heavy on its way to orbit.

More cases NOW in the U.S. than at any point so far. All AFTER 'opening everything up' but with half the population not taking this seriously. Thus skyrocketing rates of infection. Which you don't have to worry about. And a job and free health care if you DO get COVID, unlike most of us in the U.S.

Carry on

#130 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-07-02 04:52 AM | Reply

There were fewer cases in all of Europe yesterday than just in the state of Arizona.

#131 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-07-02 05:04 AM | Reply

AU

It's not the kill . . . it's the hunt. You know the type.

#132 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-07-02 05:13 AM | Reply

But the military are the only ones you can make do it. The young potentially asymptomatic carriers can quit any time they want. And then you'd have no other choice but the military.

#121 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Wouldn't surprise me if Thanksgiving/Christmas block leave is suspended later in the year unless the US acquires a vaccine.

#133 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2020-07-02 06:55 AM | Reply

MB's in a country that doesn't have to deal with a weak central leader, leaving it up to each province to figure things out on their own, each putting out conflicting information. In fact, not only is he in a country with a sane, rational response where they TESTED early, he's in the Military, a hierarchical chain of command with structure.

And he wants to hard to apply all his experience and idealism (and selfishness) from the above to all of us in the U.S.

That's never going to happen under Trump.

#134 | Posted by YAV at 2020-07-02 09:13 AM | Reply

"Why are you so invested in what's going on HERE? You are not in the private sector, and you're in another country that's doing worlds better than we are in the U.S."

Several reasons. First, millions of people have been put out of jobs. Not low skilled workers or new entries to the workforce, but people who spent a lot of time and money on a career. And it wasn't necessary. Even back in March, prominent physicians were stating that the best course of action would be to isolate those at risk while allowing those not at risk to continue on. How many tens of millions of young lives are going to be ruined because no one wanted to acknowledge that risk was not universal? It's much easier politically to pretend that the 26 year old in good health is as likely to die as the 85 year old with diabetes. Everyone is focusing on saving the physical lives of those at risk-a relatively small group-without considering what those impacts are having on everyone else.

That's the objective answer.

But, several weeks ago I was part of an effort to recover a very young fighter pilot who had crashed. He didn't survive. Yet, had he wanted to go to the gym prior to his final flight, he would not have been able to do so. Too risky. Nor would he have been able to get in a swim. Had he needed any HR support, he would have needed to make an appointment, which would have been filled as time permitted, because you can't do COVID mitigation and meet all your mission requirements. And this just enrages me. And probably every other ops guy in the military.

So that's why. Frequenting this site has been very illuminating. I never thought there was much of a different between the mentality of those who are civilians and those who are in the military. COVID, to me, has shown that there are huge differences. I'll chalk it up to the fact that people in the military face risks every day, and risk mitigation is part of any military framework. I don't think that's the case for civilians.

Hope that helps.

#135 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 10:53 AM | Reply

"had he wanted to go to the gym prior to his final flight"

You're moralizing over a real dead guy's fictional wish?
Well I can do that too!

Had he wanted his grandparents to live through the next 18 months, they would have been much more likely to do so if they lived in Germany, not the United States.

Which do you think he would have wanted more, one last workout, or his loved ones not to die in the hospital hooked up to ventilators?
It's pretty clear which one you want more. The gym.

"And this just enrages me"
Whereas the coming deaths of 1.1 - 2.2 million Americans does not enrage you, because you think most of those who die are next to worthless, and it's not fair for higher value people's lives to suffer for the safety of old washed up low value people.
What enrages you is valuing poor people's lives over poor people's labor.

#136 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 12:18 PM | Reply

"Had he wanted his grandparents to live through the next 18 months, they would have been much more likely to do so if they lived in Germany, not the United States."

Which has absolutely ------- to do with his access to a gym on a military base, no?

"Which do you think he would have wanted more, one last workout, or his loved ones not to die in the hospital hooked up to ventilators?"

Your question is based on a false binary choice. Because whether he chose to work out or not work out would have had no impact on anyone other than those that chose to attend a gym.

"Whereas the coming deaths of 1.1 - 2.2 million Americans does not enrage you, because you think most of those who die are next to worthless, and it's not fair for higher value people's lives to suffer for the safety of old washed up low value people."

When 1.1 million people die who weren't already dying of something else...let's re-attack this question.

#137 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 12:36 PM | Reply

Screw it. Let's re-attack when 1.1 million die as a result of COVID complications. Assuming you're hiding in a place with internet access.

#138 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 12:37 PM | Reply

When 1.1 million people die who weren't already dying of something else...let's re-attack this question.
#137 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

The guy you tried to save was eventually going to die of something else too.

#139 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 12:39 PM | Reply

"Your question is based on a false binary choice."

Your presime is based on putting false wishes into a real dead man's head.

Did you try this line of reasoning on your co-workers who tried to save him?

Better yet, you should be the one to notify his parents. Tell them what really outrages you about his death is that he couldn't have gone to the gym before he crashed because of COVID.

#140 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 12:42 PM | Reply

Let's re-attack when 1.1 million die as a result of COVID complications.
#138 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Will we get there sooner or later, if the gyms open?

#141 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 12:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The guy you tried to save was eventually going to die of something else too."

Fair enough.

Then let's get rid of all this COVID -------- once and for all.

If we're dying, we're dying. Let's not burden others by pretending otherwise.

#142 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 01:06 PM | Reply

"Your presime is based on putting false wishes into a real dead man's head."

Not it's not.

I have no idea whether he would have ever stepped foot in a gym. What I do know is that he would not have been allowed to, even though doing so was far, far, far, far less risky than the activities he engaged in on a daily basis.

"Did you try this line of reasoning on your co-workers who tried to save him?"

It's not "my" line of reasoning...it's "our" line. People who do risky stuff who now find themselves from doing less risky stuff out of the notion that it's risky.

"Will we get there sooner or later, if the gyms open?"

It won't matter. Old people don't go to gyms.

Nevada re-opened on 04 June. Deaths have continued to decline.

#143 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 01:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

- Old people don't go to gyms.

More absurd nonsense, same source.

www.independent.co.uk

www.wyso.org

#144 | Posted by Corky at 2020-07-02 01:23 PM | Reply

"I have no idea whether he would have ever stepped foot in a gym. What I do know is that he would not have been allowed to, even though doing so was far, far, far, far less risky than the activities he engaged in on a daily basis."

First of all, that's just sampling bias.
He was far more healthy than your average person, and thus at much less risk of most anything compared to me or even you.
Sort of like how a high BMI means you're obese... for like the 99% of the population who aren't body builders.

Second, I'm not sure you quantified risk correctly.
Numbers for USAF were not readily available, but the Army had just 20 training fatalities last year.
Because we take extraordinary measures to ensure these very dangerous things they train to do are trained safely.

This takes me back to my Naval base days when all hands including civilian contracts like me had to attend the Captain's annual safety briefing. I was shocked to learn that in the Korean War era, the Navy had something like 500 fatalities a year, excluding combat losses.
Over the next four decades they improved protocols and got that down to about 50 a year.

That's what closing the gym does for COVID-19.
It reduces the risk of spreading COVID-19, for everyone that goes to the gym, not just the one guy later who died some other way.

I'll raise your dead guy one Arthur "Bud" Holland.

#145 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 01:34 PM | Reply

Nevada reports single largest day increase of coronavirus cases
by The Associated PressTuesday, June 16th 2020

mynews4.com

"632 new cases, 13 additional deaths statewide
9:16 a.m. TODAY

The known number of Nevadans who have tested positive for COVID-19 reached 19,733 on Thursday morning, according to the Nevada Health Alliance dashboard. That's an increase of 632 new cases over what was previously reported on Wednesday.

Thirteen additional deaths were reported, bringing the total number of coronavirus-related deaths in Nevada to 524.

Hospitalizations for COVID-19 rose for the 10th straight day. The number of confirmed COVID-19 cases currently in Nevada hospitals has reached 502 cases " an increase of 48 hospitalizations and a new high since the outbreak began."

www.rgj.com

Glad I could help.

#146 | Posted by Corky at 2020-07-02 01:38 PM | Reply

"People who do risky stuff who now find themselves from doing less risky stuff out of the notion that it's risky."

Oh, I see what you're missing.
You don't think you're in the same herd as the old and the sick.
Being an "American" doesn't mean those old sick Americans are in your tribe.

But the fact is, the herd can only stampede as fast as the slowest member.
Sure, if someone gets too slow we do leave them behind. Send them off to long term care facilities aka nursing homes.
But most people want to try to keep up as best they can, and taking steps to protect and accomodate the most vulnerable among us, well, that comes from valuing them just for themselves, which you clearly can't do.

Would you just kill yourself if you became disabled, then? Life isn't worth living if you can't lu e it to.its fullest?
That's your choice to make, but only for yourself.
And I'll point out, thanks to the pandemic, you are not allowed to live life to its fullest right now.

The roots of your rage is your privilege being curbed, for the safety of others. Nothing more.
You aren't being philosophical, you are being egotistical.
And you underscore your egotism by being unable to philosophize other points of view.

#147 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 01:45 PM | Reply

"He was far more healthy than your average person, and thus at much less risk of most anything compared to me or even you."

Yup.

Yet he couldn't step foot into a gym.

carrying that logic forward, he would have never been allowed to get into an aircraft in the first place, because statistically, the odds of him dying in a training accident would have been far higher than dying of COVID. In fact, he wouldn't be working at all most likely, because even his morning commute would have presented a greater danger than COVID.

"Numbers for USAF were not readily available, but the Army had just 20 training fatalities last year."

The AF has had two aviators die in the last two weeks.

"It reduces the risk of spreading COVID-19, for everyone that goes to the gym, not just the one guy later who died some other way."

The point is that the gym exists to support people who engage in dangerous activities. Activities that are far more dangerous than getting your cross-fit in. And for those who are scared of it...stay home.

#148 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 01:52 PM | Reply

Damn, what is going on in the AF aviation community:
taskandpurpose.com

#149 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2020-07-02 01:55 PM | Reply

"Would you just kill yourself if you became disabled, then? Life isn't worth living if you can't lu e it to.its fullest?"

Uhhh...yeah.

My dad is at high risk. He'd rather die than hunker down.

And if it were me-if I were old and sick, I'd be livid that the US was prioritizing the lives of the elderly and sick over those of the young and vibrant.

I think you think you speak for the sick and the elderly, but I don't know that you do. I think many would agree with me. Life itself isn't worth much if you can't do anything with it. And if me dying meant than my family would prosper, or yours, or anyone's, then ---- yeah. I've never been so important as to justify the wasting of unmet potential. I would hope you feel the same. I wish we all did.

#150 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 01:58 PM | Reply

#149

It's dangerous work.

You don't fly planes without having a few friends who have died.

#151 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 01:59 PM | Reply

My dad is at high risk. He'd rather die than hunker down.

Your dad's desperation to go find meaning in his life at Bennigan's should not give him the right to potentially infect first responders, doctors and nurses with Covid-19.

#152 | Posted by JOE at 2020-07-02 02:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It sounds more like you're the one desperate to find meaning in life. Suddenly you're starting to make sense, Joe.

#153 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-02 02:58 PM | Reply

"I know you are but what am i"
Posted by MADBOMBER

*Yawn*

#154 | Posted by JOE at 2020-07-02 04:26 PM | Reply

"Yet he couldn't step foot into a gym.
carrying that logic forward, he would have never been allowed to get into an aircraft in the first place, because statistically, the odds of him dying in a training accident"

No, that's not the logic, dummy.
Closing the gym protects everyone who would have gone to the gym.
Not just him.
Everyone.

Why are you so emotionally invested in pretending you don't understand?

#155 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-02 04:35 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort