OT Coronavirus: America in chaos, News and Updates. One million Americans dead and counting (3 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

1y45a44hcrv41.jpg
Yes, and Trump ordered meat packing plants to open where already hundreds of cases and numerous deaths. CDC guidelines are purely voluntary. Governors of Iowa and Nebraska said any worker who doesn't report to work out of fear of infection is not only fired but will not receive unemployment compensation. Law enforcement, medical, and public health officers pleaded not to reopen without protection and were ignored. Die for Trump.
 
Happy Birthday COLONEL Tom! Queen promotes Captain Tom Moore in heartwarming honour as the £29m NHS fundraising hero turns 100 today
  • Captain Tom Moore will celebrate his 100th birthday today with a letter from the Queen and a promotion
  • The World War II veteran will be made the first Honorary Colonel of the Army Foundation College, Harrogate
  • There'll also be two flypasts to mark the day - by Army Air Corps helicopters and a Spitfire and a Hurricane
  • Hundreds of thousands of cards have been sent to Bedford School, near the World War II veteran's home
  • War hero became international star after raising more than £29 million for the NHS in battle against Covid-19
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...romotes-Captain-Tom-Moore-100th-birthday.html
 
Financial Times: the Covid death toll could be as much as 60% higher than reported....

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c

apparently, the NY Times has done a similar comparison and reached the same conclusion. Obviously, different countries have different levels of exceeded death rates, but it's hard to imagine it's just coincidence
whats crazy though is it could be 100% higher and it would still be dramatically less than their models showed in march and February (from what I understand the models included social distancing)... I am glad its less then their models. Yet a lot of the numbers at this point just feel like people taking stabs in the dark, I swear it feels like everyday I read articles saying its way worse and articles saying its way better.

Very interesting real life class in statistics and data science going on right now.

Think its safe to say we can definitely question the formula’s the experts, are using and hopefully all of this experience helps them to better map out and formulate data going forward.
 
whats crazy though is it could be 100% higher and it would still be dramatically less than their models showed in march and February (from what I understand the models included social distancing)... I am glad its less then their models. Yet a lot of the numbers at this point just feel like people taking stabs in the dark, I swear it feels like everyday I read articles saying its way worse and articles saying its way better.

Very interesting real life class in statistics and data science going on right now.

Think its safe to say we can definitely question the formula’s the experts, are using and hopefully all of this experience helps them to better map out and formulate data going forward.

Listen to the doctors the nursees and all the hospital workers for the real story. Majority are saying there is still a shortage of supplies and we have no coordinated effort on testing from the government.
 
Last edited:
Listen to the doctors the nursees and all the hospital workers for the real story. Majority are saying there u12is still a shortage supplies and we have no coordinated effort on testing from the government.
How do we judge a majority are saying that? Is their a statistic for that? Im not being facetious I am simply asking.
Seems like much of its probably based on geography. Some places seem to be hit much harder than others.
 
How do we judge a majority are saying that? Is their a statistic for that? Im not being facetious I am simply asking.
Seems like much of its probably based on geography. Some places seem to be hit much harder than others.

Yes, some areas are hit harder than others, but listening to the healthcare workers no matter where they are at pretty much say the same story. We are all part of the United States and a coordinated effort for PPE, testing equipment, facilities etc should have been done long ago but all this administration is interested in is getting people back to work with very little concern for safety. Severasl states have been opening their states and none have met the CDC guidelines and then we have this idiot as vice president that arrogantly shows up at the Mayo clinic and was the only one not wearing a mask even after he was requested to wear a mask.

By the way, this is not a success story because we have less deaths than projected. All that tells me is the projections were way off.
 
whats crazy though is it could be 100% higher and it would still be dramatically less than their models showed in march and February (from what I understand the models included social distancing)... I am glad its less then their models. Yet a lot of the numbers at this point just feel like people taking stabs in the dark, I swear it feels like everyday I read articles saying its way worse and articles saying its way better.

Very interesting real life class in statistics and data science going on right now.

Think its safe to say we can definitely question the formula’s the experts, are using and hopefully all of this experience helps them to better map out and formulate data going forward.

I disagree...are you assuming the worst is over? One month ago there was about 3000 total deaths. In the month of April, alone, there have been nearly 57,000 deaths, and there are still 2 days left in the month. And that number is almost certainly underestimating the totals.

the estimates from March that I remember are 100,000 to 200,000 dead; I can't remember how many restrictions were used in those calculations. At this rate, we might hit the 80,000 dead mark by mid-May. What will be the number by the solstice? What will be the number if Dr. Fauci is right and we have a spike next fall and winter? What will be the number if a vaccine is not widely available till sometime in summer of 2021?

I'm not seeing a disconnect between those 100,000-200,000 estimates and the trajectory we are on.
 
Last edited:
Not going to derail this thread with a back and forth on why the President will won this November. We can debate it on the old man thread. :)
I wanna bet dinner and wine with you and your wife and mother. I don't mind losing because we owe you, anyhow. Either way, it's a win win for me.
 
Why does the Trump admin have Fauci and Birx addressing the media on couches lately?
 
View attachment 31173

Donald Trump reveals plans to bring back his '25,000 people rallies' as he says he will travel to Arizona and Ohio, saying 'I'd like to get out' - and says of the virus 'it's going to leave'
  • President Trump said he'd be visiting Arizona next week and Ohio soon
  • 'I'd like to get out,' he said of being shut up in the White House
  • He also said he'd like to get back to his massive 25,000 campaign rallies
  • 'We have a tremendous pent up demand,' he said
  • He dismissed worries that a rapid reopening of the country could lead to a second wave of the coronavirus, which health officials have warned about
  • 'It's going to go, it's gonna leave,' Trump said of the virus
  • 'I see the new normal going back to what it was three months ago,' Trump noted. 'I think we want to go back to where it was'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rizona-Ohio-wants-bring-campaign-rallies.html

Trump wants to kill off his base by gathering into a packed arena for him to spout off his bullshit.
 
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ong-time-before-we-get-a-coronavirus-vaccine/

Why it’ll still be a long time before we get a coronavirus vaccine

Trials of experimental coronavirus vaccines are already under way, but it’s still likely to be years before one is ready and vaccination may not even be possible



Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...e-we-get-a-coronavirus-vaccine/#ixzz6L4YZrjzE


MANY UK newspapers recently celebrated the first volunteer to receive an injection as part of a safety trial of an experimental coronavirus vaccine. But while there are claims that it could be possible for a vaccine to be ready within a year, the chances of this happening remain slim.

The UK trial, led by the University of Oxford, will ultimately involve 1100 adults, half of whom will receive the experimental vaccine. The other half will get a meningitis vaccine as a control. The team behind the trial hopes to move on to tests to gauge how effective the vaccine is against the coronavirus as early as August, raising hopes that a vaccine could be ready before the end of the year, and that this could be the answer to the difficult question of how the country gets out of strict social distancing measures.

Unfortunately, these hopes are probably misplaced. Vaccine design expert Maria Bottazzi of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, calls the schedule “unrealistic”. Even if everything goes according to plan in the first phase of trials, Bottazzi points out that researchers will still need time to determine how well the vaccine protects people from covid-19 and whether it provokes any side effects when a vaccinated person is subsequently exposed to the virus.





It is far from guaranteed that the vaccine will be safe and effective. 2013 study calculated that, before entering clinical trials, the average experimental vaccine has a 6 per cent chance of ultimately reaching the market. Of those that make it into trials, a 2019 analysis suggests the probability of success is 33.4 per cent.

But even if the Oxford vaccine succeeds, there will then be the issue of scaling up manufacturing to make hundreds of millions of doses. According to Bottazzi, this is the real bottleneck. Under the best of circumstances, the world is still looking at 12 to 18 months before a vaccine could be widely available, she says.

That in itself would be a remarkable achievement. The 2013 study found that between 1998 and 2009, the average time taken to develop a vaccine was 10.7 years. It is possible to speed this up to some extent – since then, an Ebola vaccine has become the fastest-developed vaccine ever, being produced in just five years.

But to lower this to just 18 months would require the next steps of the development process to be begun before the previous ones were completed, Bottazzi says. This increases the risk of significant loss of investment should the vaccine fail to pan out, as well as raising questions about safety. An expedited path from early trials to scaled-up manufacturing would mean that researchers won’t have as much time to study the long-term effects of a vaccine in trial participants before it is given to the public, for example.

“Between 1998 and 2009, the average time taken to develop a vaccine was 10.7 years”


To try to speed things up, on 21 April, UK health minister Matt Hancock said that the government will put money into manufacturing capability, in the hope that either the Oxford vaccine, or another vaccine being tested by Imperial College London, will prove successful. Similar measures are being taken elsewhere. US philanthropist Bill Gates has announced he is helping to build manufacturing capability for seven candidate vaccines – a strategy he said will lose billions of dollars but save time.

More than 100 vaccines for the coronavirus are currently in various early stages of development. The more that are tested, the higher the chances of finding something that is both safe and effective.

Yet there is no guarantee that it is even possible to vaccinate against the coronavirus. There is a lot we don’t know yet about how our immune systems respond to the virus, and whether it is possible to induce long-lasting immunity to it.

Hancock also said that the government is “throwing everything” at developing a coronavirus vaccine. But given the time it will take to get one – if it even proves possible to do so – it is clear that countries can’t wait for a vaccine to get them out of their current crises. As epidemiologist Mark Woolhouse at the University of Edinburgh, UK, told New Scientist in early April: “I do not think waiting for a vaccine should be dignified with the word ‘strategy’. It’s not a strategy, it’s a hope.”

We need to be realistic about the hopes of a vaccine, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth trying. Like annual flu vaccines, an effective coronavirus vaccine could help us protect those most at risk from the virus. As with childhood vaccines for measles and other diseases, it may also enable us to protect future generations from covid-19.

But it could be years before we have a vaccine. Until then, we will need to deal with multiple waves of infection with measures such as extensive testing, contact tracing and quarantining.



Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...e-we-get-a-coronavirus-vaccine/#ixzz6L4hxqX7N
 
Jared Kushner took time off from bringing about peace in the Middle East to proclaim federal government response to Corona virus a great success. More than a million infected, double that of any other country. More than 60,000 dead. Economy in shambles. $500 billion to big corporations while small businesses get crashed web sites and individuals at most $1200.

So much winning! Are you tired of winning yet?
 
I disagree...are you assuming the worst is over? One month ago there was about 3000 total deaths. In the month of April, alone, there have been nearly 57,000 deaths, and there are still 2 days left in the month. And that number is almost certainly underestimating the totals.

the estimates from March that I remember are 100,000 to 200,000 dead; I can't remember how many restrictions were used in those calculations. At this rate, we might hit the 80,000 dead mark by mid-May. What will be the number by the solstice? What will be the number if Dr. Fauci is right and we have a spike next fall and winter? What will be the number if a vaccine is not widely available till sometime in summer of 2021?

I'm not seeing a disconnect between those 100,000-200,000 estimates and the trajectory we are on.
Well, it started out as 2.2M, then it became 100-240k, then Fauci said 60k, then they've kinda meandered back up to 100-240k. Still, though the experts have been wrong a lot in this, which is bound to happen because predicting the future is hard.
At the very high end of there current predictions, it's .07% of the population could die from this. That's a lot of people, and it's definitely bad, but I believe there is a lot of media and politics going into this making it sound like the apocalypse or it's nothing (depends on who you want to listen too) when it's neither, and also if we had any chance of herd immunity to it we've definitely squandered that and made the likelihood it'll come back greater because we did a half baked stay-at-home thing. Which is really where I think this has been handled incorrectly. The way we've handled it has made sure it's going to be something to deal with for longer than it needed to be.
 
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin
 
I’m all for a fast track for vaccines, but it has to be safe. There was a time I remembered reading when the vaccine had a major side effect that hurt a lot of Americans. I can’t remember where I read it though, but I want to say it was around the 70s.
 
Well, it started out as 2.2M, then it became 100-240k, then Fauci said 60k, then they've kinda meandered back up to 100-240k. Still, though the experts have been wrong a lot in this, which is bound to happen because predicting the future is hard.
At the very high end of there current predictions, it's .07% of the population could die from this. That's a lot of people, and it's definitely bad, but I believe there is a lot of media and politics going into this making it sound like the apocalypse or it's nothing (depends on who you want to listen too) when it's neither, and also if we had any chance of herd immunity to it we've definitely squandered that and made the likelihood it'll come back greater because we did a half baked stay-at-home thing. Which is really where I think this has been handled incorrectly. The way we've handled it has made sure it's going to be something to deal with for longer than it needed to be.

seems you're advocating for the path of 'herd immunity'. Basically, let the virus run wild, do nothing, allow the health care system & hospitals everywhere to crash & burn, and hopefully develop herd immunity. But to have effective herd immunity, the standard is a minimum of around 75-80% of the population infected. 4 out of 5 people with the antibodies that make them immune. That's how that 2.2M number came about, and it was with an assumption of anywhere from 0.7-1.0% mortality

in other words, you're ridiculing the 2.2M dead as some kind of political overreaction or panic, then immediately turning around and advocating for the policy that could make that number of dead a reality

and the foundation of that plan is cleared patients developing an immunity; and there is mounting evidence that individual immunity might be either weak or non-existent in a significant number of the people who have had the virus. Basically, it's possible that we will never develop herd immunity to Covid without a vaccine. Which could mean that implementing a policy of developing herd immunity would be chasing a mirage
 
seems you're advocating for the path of 'herd immunity'. Basically, let the virus run wild, do nothing, allow the health care system & hospitals everywhere to crash & burn, and hopefully develop herd immunity. But to have effective herd immunity, the standard is a minimum of around 75-80% of the population infected. 4 out of 5 people with the antibodies that make them immune. That's how that 2.2M number came about, and it was with an assumption of anywhere from 0.7-1.0% mortality

in other words, you're ridiculing the 2.2M dead as some kind of political overreaction or panic, then immediately turning around and advocating for the policy that could make that number of dead a reality

and the foundation of that plan is cleared patients developing an immunity; and there is mounting evidence that individual immunity might be either weak or non-existent in a significant number of the people who have had the virus. Basically, it's possible that we will never develop herd immunity to Covid without a vaccine. Which could mean that implementing a policy of developing herd immunity would be chasing a mirage
The "herd immunity" development plans I've seen are nowhere near as reckless and careless as you suggest. Generally the idea is to isolate the high-risk population, and let the low-risk population develop herd immunity, thus mitigating hospitalizations and avoiding "crashing" the health care system.
 
seems you're advocating for the path of 'herd immunity'. Basically, let the virus run wild, do nothing, allow the health care system & hospitals everywhere to crash & burn, and hopefully develop herd immunity. But to have effective herd immunity, the standard is a minimum of around 75-80% of the population infected. 4 out of 5 people with the antibodies that make them immune. That's how that 2.2M number came about, and it was with an assumption of anywhere from 0.7-1.0% mortality

in other words, you're ridiculing the 2.2M dead as some kind of political overreaction or panic, then immediately turning around and advocating for the policy that could make that number of dead a reality

and the foundation of that plan is cleared patients developing an immunity; and there is mounting evidence that individual immunity might be either weak or non-existent in a significant number of the people who have had the virus. Basically, it's possible that we will never develop herd immunity to Covid without a vaccine. Which could mean that implementing a policy of developing herd immunity would be chasing a mirage
Mitigation is absolutely necessary to slow the spread enough to get in front of over burden of the healthcare system. And yes, it’s required to have at least 70% of the population to be infected and survive for heard immunity.

but, you can create herd immunity with mitigation techniques with good monitoring and have resources ready to combat the spike areas.
 
The "herd immunity" development plans I've seen are nowhere near as reckless and careless as you suggest. Generally the idea is to isolate the high-risk population, and let the low-risk population develop herd immunity, thus mitigating hospitalizations and avoiding "crashing" the health care system.
Jinx!
 
Do you know the actual context of that quote? It actually meant almost the opposite of what most people think it meant.



thanks for that....I didn't know the context, and It's kind of important; and a little LOL at such noble words originating in a tax debate. (and reading up on William Penn & his family is interesting)

anyway, Franklin may have been fully in favor of stay-at-home orders
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top