mannc

The guidelines Trump extended involve relatively low-cost measures like social distancing, not draconian "Shelter in Place" rules that have been imposed by various state and local governments and which effectively shut down the entire economy. Lunacy.

I agree that using "first to 100 deaths" is a more meaningful measurement, but there are such a massive number of variables involved that even that number doesn't mean much. You would need to know where the deaths occurred, the ages of the victims, the existence of pre-existing medical conditions, etc. And the US is such a huge place that I think it's impossible to make any valid generalizations about how far "behind" or ahead we are as a country. I'm not saying you are doing this, but this sort of metric is being used to cause alarm and panic and to seed the ground for largely unnecessary "emergency measures". I'll make a future prediction, but it doesn't have much to do with the virus itself: By Easter, the real costs of shutting down the world economy are going to start to become clearer and harder to ignore, and there is going to be a reckoning. As one of the few politicians to even recognize this side of the equation, Trump will be one of the few who come out of this in better shape than when this started.

Yeah, the idea that anyone can pinpoint the date at which Italy or the US reached 100 total cases is simply laughable. And for people to use those alleged dates to forecast doom for millions of Americans is pretty reprehensible.

How irresponsible to suggest that it might not be necessary to quarantine 330 million people indefinitely.

Given how little is known about CV19, as opposed to the flu, those “total case” numbers really are guesswork at this point. That’s why there is so little agreement on the “mortality rate”, as well; it’s impossible to say what the mortality rate is when we don’t have a handle on the actual number of infections.

As discussed previously in this thread, the “number of cases” metric is essentially worthless. On a national basis, it is really nothing more than a function of how extensive testing is at any given time. You can’t seriously contend that there is any point in time where we knew how many infections there were in the entire US, or in Italy, for that matter.

How do you know this? I see this repeated as a truism in the media, but I’m not aware of any actual evidence to support it. It’s more of a perception, really. The US is a huge a diverse country and it’s impossible to accurately generalize about whether the country as a whole is behind some European countries or not. In many states the rates of death and hospitalization are stable or even declining, and it is unlikely that their health care systems will ever be overwhelmed, an outcome you seem to assume is inevitable.

There is no metric that accurately tracks new cases. There is no way to really know the number of new cases unless you test 100 percent of the population, which of course we aren’t even close to doing. Sorry to be so simple-minded.

It would if it accurately reflected the number of infections, but it doesn’t.

Thank you. Hospitalizations and deaths are the only numbers worth tracking...the “new cases” metric is basically meaningless and is probably just a reflection of wider testing. It is being used to scare-monger. Please stop with this logic. I thought the goal was to terrify as many people as possible, and shout down anyone who suggests that It might not be worthwhile to shut down every part of our country indefinitely.

Offered without comment: According to state of Oregon: Number of CV19 patients on ventilators: 31 Number of Ventilators available: 715 In Oregon, all nonessential businesses are closed by government fiat.

Good question. That’s why it can be highly misleading to count the deaths of those with “underlying medical conditions” as CV19 deaths, even if they test positive. Every single death attributed to CV19 here (Oregon) has been of a person with underlying medical conditions.

As I understand it, viruses mutate almost constantly. I wonder if the strain that is present in Italy is different in some important way from what's over here...

No idea. But my understanding is that even if everyone got vaccinated every year, the flu would still be around because the virus mutates and the vaccine is not perfect.

More than many recognize. There isn’t going to be a neat end to this, when everyone can just resume normal life, risk-free. It is possible that, even after this pandemic ends—and we will eventually have a vaccine for it—coronavirus may now be a permanent part of the human health landscape, waxing and waning on a seasonal basis around the world. Like the flu vaccine, the CV vaccine will help but probably not eliminate sickness from the virus. Hundreds of thousands still die every year from the flu, despite our vaccines against it. The extent to which we might just have to grin and bear it with regard to CV19 remains to be seen.

Gates is a very smart guy and he’s spent a lot of time (and money) on public health issues, so he is to be taken seriously on this topic. But you make some good points here.

And this sort of childishness is why I’ve largely remained over at the Stadium Wall. Although I must say, I have been pleased to find there are some very thoughtful contributors over here, on both sides of the aisle. You’re just not one of them.

The fact that Trump has been extensively investigated does not make him “transparent.” He has stonewalled every investigation (largely successfully) and is going all the way to the Supreme Court to prevent us from seeing his tax returns. What is he hiding? And yes, he seems unhealthy.

Very well said. I focused on number of hospitalizations because the shelter at home rules are designed to prevent too many patients at one time from overwhelming the hospitals. But it’s a nasty disease and many who aren’t hospitalized are suffering. (My sister, who lives on the east Coast, has it and says she had never been sicker.) I understand the reason for shelter at home rules, but they should be done in a common sense way and the need for continuing them has to be carefully considered on a week-to-week basis.

This thing is going to behave differently in different parts of the country, which is why criticism of Trump for not enacting a one-size fits all, federally mandated national shutdown is so off base.

I'd be surprised, but after what I've seen the past week or so, I won't say it's impossible.

As I write this, the entire state of Oregon has been shut down with the governor's "shelter in place" order, issued on Monday. Among other things, doctors and dentists statewide have been ordered to perform no non-emergency procedures. The public health emergency that made all this necessary: Through today, a grand total of 90 people in the state have been hospitalized for the coronavirus--it's not even clear how many of them were already in hospital when they were infected--and 11 deaths, all of people over 63-years old, with pre-existing medical conditions.

The fact that I don't agree with you on these things does not mean I'm not willing to listen. And I'm not sure what the bolded part means in the context of this discussion.

I will respectfully decline to go down this rabbit-hole since it's not what I came here to talk about. But I will say that I disagree with a number of your statements above. Trump did not give deadly weapons to Ukraine; the US Congress did, and Trump (infamously) tried to stop it. He has not strengthened NATO; he has essentially said he would not come to the aid of certain NATO members if they were attacked. And I can never forget nor forgive his despicable performance in Helsinki, where all but fellated Putin on the world stage. (I guess I did go down that rabbit-hole after all.) I will also add that you make a valid point with regard to your comments about Trump discouraging Europe from relying on Russian oil and gas. It's not all one way or the other.

Sorry, I can't agree with you on this. Trump was/is knee-deep with Russia/Putin, and the fact that he was not charged with a crime in no way exonerates him.