|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 20, 2020 20:51:50 GMT -5
Looks like you and the rest of the bureaucrats can only hope this happens It will happen...it‘s nature...it is a pandemie... until vaccination no other chance than slowing down.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Apr 20, 2020 21:09:41 GMT -5
Looks like you and the rest of the bureaucrats can only hope this happens It will happen...it‘s nature...it is a pandemie... until vaccination no other chance than slowing down. Well then just shelter in place until there's a vaccine and hope that it's effective. Maybe you can find a sucker that will take care of you and bring your food if there's any food available to buy. There probably won't be if the people who make the food and transport it to the stores and work in the stores are also sheltering in place. And if they're not sheltering in place they're probably dead because they ran out of money. Even Germany isn't going to support the entire population forever. They were close to recession before the Wuhan virus existed.
|
|
|
Post by Guest 5 on Apr 20, 2020 21:17:34 GMT -5
Looks like you and the rest of the bureaucrats can only hope this happens It will happen...it‘s nature...it is a pandemie... until vaccination no other chance than slowing down. You and Bill Gates will be extremely happy...enjoy the experience
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 21, 2020 8:08:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Apr 21, 2020 13:50:52 GMT -5
Did Singapore, HK, Taiwan and Korea have as much international travel coming in as NYC did? NYC has 2 major airports very close to each other? When did they stop travel from China and Europe? Did Singapore, HK, Taiwan and Korea have as much international travel coming in as NYC did?Singapore, HK and Seoul Airports have twice the number of international passengers as JFK (the top US airport for intl passengers). Which means that even if you add Newark airport, those 3 still have more intl passengers than JFK+Newark (LaGuardia is domestic only). Taipei has 50% more intl passengers than JFK so is probably comparable to JFK+Newark. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_airports_by_international_passenger_trafficWhen did they stop travel from China and Europe?Whenever it was, it was early enough to contain Covid-19. ___________________________________________________________________ Bottom Line: It is the responsibility of each country to protect its own citizens. Singapore, HK, Korea and Taiwan did. US and Europe did not. As far as climate change is concerned, those countries and China are the countries that cause the pollution, not the US. The US has 2+ times the per capita CO2 emissions compared with China and 1/3 more than Korea. Source: worldpopulationreview.com/countries/co2-emissions-by-country/
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Apr 21, 2020 17:48:37 GMT -5
Did Singapore, HK, Taiwan and Korea have as much international travel coming in as NYC did? NYC has 2 major airports very close to each other? When did they stop travel from China and Europe? Did Singapore, HK, Taiwan and Korea have as much international travel coming in as NYC did?Singapore, HK and Seoul Airports have twice the number of international passengers as JFK (the top US airport for intl passengers). Which means that even if you add Newark airport, those 3 still have more intl passengers than JFK+Newark (LaGuardia is domestic only). Taipei has 50% more intl passengers than JFK so is probably comparable to JFK+Newark. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_airports_by_international_passenger_trafficWhen did they stop travel from China and Europe?Whenever it was, it was early enough to contain Covid-19. ___________________________________________________________________ Bottom Line: It is the responsibility of each country to protect its own citizens. Singapore, HK, Korea and Taiwan did. US and Europe did not. As far as climate change is concerned, those countries and China are the countries that cause the pollution, not the US. The US has 2+ times the per capita CO2 emissions compared with China and 1/3 more than Korea. Source: worldpopulationreview.com/countries/co2-emissions-by-country/As has been mentioned before, a lot of countries were affected by Sars, another Chinese virus, so those countries would have had more experience dealing with Chinese crap and started to move at the first hint of what could very well be coming. And maybe they got better information early on. Maybe they weren't listening to the WHO and Dr. Fauci. As far as pollution is concerned, China is still the biggest emitter overall, they emit more pollution than the US and EU combined. Per capita they emit less pollution, they just knowingly spread deadly viruses around the world that kill tens of thousands and tank global economies.
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Apr 21, 2020 19:45:36 GMT -5
Per capita they emit less pollution Exactly. Per capita is the only metric that counts. If China were to split into 10 countries, each new country would emit only 1/10th of the old country but that wouldn't change anything. The only solution is to reduce per capita emission. And maybe they got better information early on. Maybe they weren't listening to the WHO and Dr. Fauci. And maybe they didn't have anti-science leaders.
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Apr 21, 2020 20:35:16 GMT -5
Did Singapore, HK, Taiwan and Korea have as much international travel coming in as NYC did? NYC has 2 major airports very close to each other? When did they stop travel from China and Europe? Did Singapore, HK, Taiwan and Korea have as much international travel coming in as NYC did?Singapore, HK and Seoul Airports have twice the number of international passengers as JFK (the top US airport for intl passengers). Which means that even if you add Newark airport, those 3 still have more intl passengers than JFK+Newark (LaGuardia is domestic only). Taipei has 50% more intl passengers than JFK so is probably comparable to JFK+Newark. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_airports_by_international_passenger_trafficWhen did they stop travel from China and Europe?Whenever it was, it was early enough to contain Covid-19. ___________________________________________________________________ Bottom Line: It is the responsibility of each country to protect its own citizens. Singapore, HK, Korea and Taiwan did. US and Europe did not. As far as climate change is concerned, those countries and China are the countries that cause the pollution, not the US. The US has 2+ times the per capita CO2 emissions compared with China and 1/3 more than Korea. Source: worldpopulationreview.com/countries/co2-emissions-by-country/Did airport security in Singapore, Hong Kong, etc sanitize the bins between uses? TSA didn't. Climate change, although doubtless real (climate changes, people have a nonzero effect on that) doesn't matter; we'll all die eventually. Live eco-friendly or live as extravagantly as you can afford, or anywhere in between. Collectivism is worse than extinction. Besides, (a) it's probably not as bad as the alarmists (the same ones that want to keep things shut down until there's a vaccine, which is really to say until they've destroyed the west and forced worldwide collectivism) say; and (b) technology (which I follow, including the silly greenie stuff) will get cleaner than many think faster than many think without significant government interference, at least in the west; and we can always stop buying from the rest and stop selling them food, too.
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 21, 2020 21:21:09 GMT -5
Washington Post „Over the past two months, President Trump has denied saying things he previously said about the coronavirus at least six times.“ www.instagram.com/tv/B_QOA4nnA_F/
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Apr 22, 2020 0:13:00 GMT -5
I don't care WHAT he says or said, I like his policies. He says stupid things all the time, and it doesn't bother me a bit. Both Bushes had speech/coherency issues too; even Teflon Reagan may have lost a few marbles in his 2nd term. But almost any non-leftist is better than almost any leftist. Everything a leftist would say would be either stupid (not practical) or evil, even if they consistency-check it 100% and it's as slick as a lying leftist reporter. Everything most insider politicians of either party would say would be corrupt and deceptive to the point of being meaningless. Political speech is usually BS. Even competent and honest political speech omits what is not constructive to speak of at the time (that balance is an art! the 1st Bush was good at it during the 1st Gulf War, only obviously so if one happened to know what he wasn't saying). Not that I wouldn't like better, but actions count more than words, and all the alternatives were horrible. And now? Sleepy Joe? Hillary? Fools and traitors, corrupt to the core. NY governor Cuomo would be the least worst that the Demon^HcRats have if it comes down to who talks best, but he's still a leftist big-government anti-liberty creep, even if not nearly as bad as AOC or Bernie. And Sleepy Joe pretty much has his party's candidacy, unless there's a brokered convention due to primary disruption. Trump wasn't actually behind compared to what Europe or Canada were doing (closed some travel earlier, testing delayed a bit over a week due to technical problems (CDC normally makes their own tests rather than using those from WHO or some other country) but scaled up fast, now testing larger numbers (not necessarily percentages) than anywhere else*. There had actually been a ventilator replenishment contract in mid 2019, for delivery mid-2020. There was some reluctance to accelerate that, but that wasn't a major delay either. Other stockpiles were low and had been neglected for a decade or more by the prior administration as well. Germany closed schools 13 March, the US federal government issued initial guidelines recommending (no authority to compel them!) distancing and school closings 16 March. Not a huge difference! socalfan's list of successful countries/areas (Singapore, Hong Kong, etc) had prior experience with the far more fatal SARS that we didn't, and were thus highly motivated and prepared for a repeat; and unlike them (and unlike a more recent stupid thing Trump said), we don't have the central power for the federal government to force everyone to make massive changes.** We haven't dealt with anything like this before in modern times with modern medical practice and technology (and most of our supply chains outsourced overseas). A reasonable assumption is that China withheld critical information (high transmission rate, and probably fatality rate perhaps only twice as high as the flu without vaccine, since there are likely a LOT of undetected asymptomatic cases), that would particularly harm most of their economic and geopolitical adversaries. Certainly they didn't ban foreign travel of their citizens, although they locked down domestic travel for affected areas. If it turns out we over-reacted, they inflicted massive economic damage AND discontent; if we didn't, they still inflicted those, if for different reasons regarding the discontent. And they've been behind a lot of the unproductive (in both senses - the economy and results) spin of the media. Trump is IMO also right that the US government should put its own citizens interests ahead of the rest of the planet, and that losers should not be subsidized on a long-term basis. As long as it's not expansionist, every government should do the same for theirs, although who they subsidize is their choice. Beyond that, I don't care if he says the moon is made of green cheese, the world was created in six days (it was, but the first five were from our point-of-view millions or billions of years each, equivalent to a 13.8 billion year total (the current estimate); the fundamentalist in the Scopes trial effectively conceded that), and sings Little Green Apples, although that last would be a bit scary. * the demand by those who like demanding the impossible for political advantage remains test everyone, repeatedly as necessary; that could take as long as a vaccine to scale up to...and we ALSO don't have the central authority or manpower for massive contact tracing; that's another reason why the CDC etc will provide advisors to states, but not most of the manpower. Testing everyone also isn't necessary without VERY intrusive levels of contact tracing. And given the likely levels of asymptomatic spread, testing everyone would support the very destructive notion of closing most things until a vaccine is available, which would do unrecoverable damage to the economy and to almost everyone; it would NOT usefully support a more feasible approach, like identifying and isolating (or requiring extreme precautions by/with) the vulnerable rather than everyone. Most Americans would NOT tolerate a government database of contract tracing info (Apple & Google's standard would keep individual data on individual devices, but some European governments want a database they control), and would NOT tolerate immunity ID cards either. Even having a national ID card is not welcome here, although the federal government did manage to force states to upgrade the standards and documentation required for their ID to be acceptable for airline travel or admission to some federal facilities. Americans are mostly sane, and sane people SHOULD NEVER trust their government because the best that power can be is a necessary evil, and that only with constant vigilance. (another reason I don't care much what politicians _say_, as long as they don't incite pogrom) What is necessary is a statistically sufficient and sufficiently broad (various types of communities, regions, etc) sample to improve strategies that are feasible; and with antibody tests (not very useful for diagnosis, but very useful for determining prior exposure, and somewhat useful for determining whether the virus is still active) and home SARS-CoV-2 RNA collection kits approved and to be available within a few weeks (teleconference with a doctor, self-collect under their instruction, mail it in with supplied safe packaging; $119 including test processing, not including teleconference), that should probably be feasible within a few weeks, and without putting healthcare workers so much at risk. ** while the President doesn't have the power to force the states much, he can make things difficult for them if they don't cooperate. He can in one direction federalize the National Guard to control them directly if a state isn't doing enough, and if he thinks the state is doing too much, he can probably cancel his support of their disaster declaration. I'd have been interested if it had come to seeing what the lawyers would have said. But that's just about his trademark approach to negotiating, start by claiming he has all the good cards, and wait to see if the other guys decide to be the ones to be reasonable first. It has been known to work , even if it's not pretty.
|
|
|
Post by House on Apr 22, 2020 1:15:43 GMT -5
What We Should ALL Be Doing Right Now!
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Apr 22, 2020 4:56:21 GMT -5
Per capita they emit less pollution Exactly. Per capita is the only metric that counts. If China were to split into 10 countries, each new country would emit only 1/10th of the old country but that wouldn't change anything. The only solution is to reduce per capita emission. And maybe they got better information early on. Maybe they weren't listening to the WHO and Dr. Fauci. And maybe they didn't have anti-science leaders. Consider how the Chinese live. They live in tiny spaces crowded together and ride bicycles rather than drive cars. Their emissions have been increasing and will probably continue to increase as the standard of living improves. And the Chinese have plants outside their boarders that produce very high emissions. The atmosphere doesn't care where the pollution is coming from, it ends up the same place whether it comes from within their boarders or not. My godson, a health nut, lived in Bejing for 3 years and the horrible air quality was the reason that he left. He said it was the equivalent to smoking a couple packs of cigarettes every day. As far as those countries doing better concerning the Wuhan Virus, WTF does not having anti-science leaders have to do with it?
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 22, 2020 6:43:32 GMT -5
www.stripes.com/news/veterans/study-of-malaria-drug-on-va-virus-patients-shows-no-benefit-more-deaths-1.626877„Researchers analyzed the treatment of 368 male patients at VA hospitals nationwide who had died or been discharged as of April 11. About 28% of patients who received hydroxychloroquine died, compared with 11% of patients who received standard care. About 22% of patients died when they received hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin, which is used to treat bacterial infections. Hydroxychloroquine had no effect on whether patients needed a ventilator, researchers found. “In this study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19,” the researchers wrote. “An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone.” The information they collected represents the largest data set in the world regarding coronavirus patients who’ve been treated with hydroxychloroquine. The drug is used for rheumatoid arthritis and lupus but is an unproven treatment for the coronavirus.“
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 22, 2020 9:03:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Guest 5 on Apr 22, 2020 9:51:08 GMT -5
The jury is still out on this medication. How demented do you have to be to cheer against a low-cost drug that might help people recover from a serious illness?
|
|