Past the peak, now what?

[Ricky C]

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 11:14:11 AM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

I have to correct myself -- Europe didn't get it first. Our first case
was Jan. 20th. Italy's was Jan. 29th, the U.K. on Jan. 30th. We had it
first. And nine weeks later, we still haven't had their same spread.

As of 4/8/2020, worldometers.info
.---------.--------.-------.-------.---------.
| | | cases | deaths| tests |
| cases | deaths | (ppm) | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|-------|-------|---------|
EU | 610,989 | 52,252 | 1,799 | 154 | 10,162 |
USA | 435,167 | 14,797 | 1,315 | 45 | 6,725 |
'--------------------------------------------'

It's hard to conclude America's early response was ineffective, or
that testing provided any firewall.

Depends on what you mean by "early" and "response". In this case "response" mostly refers to denial and less to any substantive action.

One point I'm unclear about is why the White House was not on top of the various resource shortage situations and only responded once they were queried by the news media. Other than possibly restricting air travel with China, I can't think of a single instance where the White House was proactive in dealing with this disease.

It was always either denial, empty claims of taking strong action, taking ineffective actions or a combination of all three.

--

Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 2:24:06 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 09:33:34 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

Absolutely amazing. No one responded to my post. Lots of posts about when one should start the economy going , but not one post about the details on exactly how the economy should be started. No discussion on when sports events should be allowed to have fans come to matches. No discussion on when schools should reopen. No discussion of when foreign travel should be permitted. When should restaurants be allowed to have unlimited numbers of customers in attendance? When should cruise ships be allowed to resume cruises. Should they get tested for infection before being allowed to book a cruise?

I expect there will be lots of posts after the fa Act about the mistakes made in starting .the economy. I do hope some thought is being done by the various government agency on loosing the restrictions.

Dan

The short answer is that no one knows -- there are too many unknowns.

But ISTM, with the information currently available, that
o most of the country isn't affected(1)
o those areas could open now, with social-distancing (and possibly
face masks)
o infected individuals and communities should be quarantined until safe
o Fever-spotting imagers might usefully exclude sick people from stores.
(I have surveillance-society concerns with that, but those concerns
aside, thermal imaging could spot and stop some super-spreaders.)

(1) see the map -- https://www.sylacauganews.com/

Thoughts?


I wonder how useful skin temp measurements are. I see cheap IR
thermomometers being used in airports. Looks like drama to me.

The hotties are easy to spot on thermal video. But Mom points
out it's a gross privacy violation -- people can run hot for
all sorts of non-contagious reasons they might not want to have
to rationalize publicly at every office, store, and byway.

Hey, everybody grab their ebay IR thermometer now and measure their
forehead. Mine shows 88F.

34.3C / 93.7F, in a warm room.

Cheers,
James

 

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:37:22 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 11:14:11 AM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

I have to correct myself -- Europe didn't get it first. Our first case
was Jan. 20th. Italy's was Jan. 29th, the U.K. on Jan. 30th. We had it
first. And nine weeks later, we still haven't had their same spread.

As of 4/8/2020, worldometers.info
.---------.--------.-------.-------.---------.
| | | cases | deaths| tests |
| cases | deaths | (ppm) | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|-------|-------|---------|
EU | 610,989 | 52,252 | 1,799 | 154 | 10,162 |
USA | 435,167 | 14,797 | 1,315 | 45 | 6,725 |
'--------------------------------------------'

It's hard to conclude America's early response was ineffective, or
that testing provided any firewall.

Depends on what you mean by "early" and "response". In this case "response" mostly refers to denial and less to any substantive action.

One point I'm unclear about is why the White House was not on top of the various resource shortage situations and only responded once they were queried by the news media. Other than possibly restricting air travel with China, I can't think of a single instance where the White House was proactive in dealing with this disease.

It was always either denial, empty claims of taking strong action, taking ineffective actions or a combination of all three.

I don't think it really matters how you define "early" or "response,"
whatever your definitions might be, we're objectively better off.

If your definitions value something other than actually being better
off, then perhaps it's worth reviewing your definitions.

When I review the historical chronology, I'm surprised we acted as
aggressively as we actually did. But if you wanted the president to
spread hysteria and panic at a time we only had a handful of cases,
in isolation, no, he didn't urge panic.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Ricky C]

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 4:55:41 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:27:08 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 9:23:49 AM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:

So there are quite a few people dying due to Wu 'flu who haven't
actually caught it.

What is with your punctuation of the name of this disease? You make up a silly name and then seem to go to great lengths to use a space and apostrophe to spell it.

WTF???

Why not just call it by it's name, COVID-19 or the shorter form commonly used here CV-19 or just "the disease"?

Your posts won't turn up in searches for this disease, but I suppose that's not really a concern.

'Wu' or 'Kung' Flu are good.

Or we could all compromise and just call it the 'Wuhan Red Death'...

In this country it is more of a Trump epidemic. The many mistakes made as the virus spread throughout the country made this disease much worse than it needed to be.

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ricky C]

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 5:05:22 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:37:22 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 11:14:11 AM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

I have to correct myself -- Europe didn't get it first. Our first case
was Jan. 20th. Italy's was Jan. 29th, the U.K. on Jan. 30th. We had it
first. And nine weeks later, we still haven't had their same spread.

As of 4/8/2020, worldometers.info
.---------.--------.-------.-------.---------.
| | | cases | deaths| tests |
| cases | deaths | (ppm) | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|-------|-------|---------|
EU | 610,989 | 52,252 | 1,799 | 154 | 10,162 |
USA | 435,167 | 14,797 | 1,315 | 45 | 6,725 |
'--------------------------------------------'

It's hard to conclude America's early response was ineffective, or
that testing provided any firewall.

Depends on what you mean by "early" and "response". In this case "response" mostly refers to denial and less to any substantive action.

One point I'm unclear about is why the White House was not on top of the various resource shortage situations and only responded once they were queried by the news media. Other than possibly restricting air travel with China, I can't think of a single instance where the White House was proactive in dealing with this disease.

It was always either denial, empty claims of taking strong action, taking ineffective actions or a combination of all three.

I don't think it really matters how you define "early" or "response,"
whatever your definitions might be, we're objectively better off.

If your definitions value something other than actually being better
off, then perhaps it's worth reviewing your definitions.

When I review the historical chronology, I'm surprised we acted as
aggressively as we actually did. But if you wanted the president to
spread hysteria and panic at a time we only had a handful of cases,
in isolation, no, he didn't urge panic.

We didn't act aggressively at all. First the federal government spread disinformation minimizing the level of concern people should have had (concern does not equal "panic"). Again, at the federal level we were told it was under control. Meanwhile it was forecast that we would run short of PPE and ventilators, if for no other reason because the country hit first was experiencing these problems, but nothing was done at the federal level to manage or mitigate the problems.

It wasn't until the end of March when the numbers were mounting that at the federal level the seriousness of the situation was actually recognized. At that point most opportunities to reduce the ill effects were long past.

Now the federal government is trying to get in front of this, but the directions from the top are so chaotic no one knows what to do, like shipping ventilators.

This country has led the world in screwing up the response to this disease. In particular if you factor in the many, many opportunities to prepare for such an event which were brushed aside.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:27:08 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 9:23:49 AM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:

So there are quite a few people dying due to Wu 'flu who haven't
actually caught it.

What is with your punctuation of the name of this disease? You make up a silly name and then seem to go to great lengths to use a space and apostrophe to spell it.

WTF???

Why not just call it by it's name, COVID-19 or the shorter form commonly used here CV-19 or just "the disease"?

Your posts won't turn up in searches for this disease, but I suppose that's not really a concern.

'Wu' or 'Kung' Flu are good.

Or we could all compromise and just call it the 'Wuhan Red Death'...

Cheers,
James Arthur

~~~
All countries got Coronavirus eventually, but China got it right
off the bat.

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:39:53 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 2:24:06 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 09:33:34 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

Absolutely amazing. No one responded to my post. Lots of posts about when one should start the economy going , but not one post about the details on exactly how the economy should be started. No discussion on when sports events should be allowed to have fans come to matches. No discussion on when schools should reopen. No discussion of when foreign travel should be permitted. When should restaurants be allowed to have unlimited numbers of customers in attendance? When should cruise ships be allowed to resume cruises. Should they get tested for infection before being allowed to book a cruise?

I expect there will be lots of posts after the fa Act about the mistakes made in starting .the economy. I do hope some thought is being done by the various government agency on loosing the restrictions.

Dan

The short answer is that no one knows -- there are too many unknowns.

But ISTM, with the information currently available, that
o most of the country isn't affected(1)
o those areas could open now, with social-distancing (and possibly
face masks)
o infected individuals and communities should be quarantined until safe
o Fever-spotting imagers might usefully exclude sick people from stores.
(I have surveillance-society concerns with that, but those concerns
aside, thermal imaging could spot and stop some super-spreaders.)

(1) see the map -- https://www.sylacauganews.com/

Thoughts?


I wonder how useful skin temp measurements are. I see cheap IR
thermomometers being used in airports. Looks like drama to me.

The hotties are easy to spot on thermal video. But Mom points
out it's a gross privacy violation -- people can run hot for
all sorts of non-contagious reasons they might not want to have
to rationalize publicly at every office, store, and byway.

Hey, everybody grab their ebay IR thermometer now and measure their
forehead. Mine shows 88F.

34.3C / 93.7F, in a warm room.

Cheers,
James

I think we should quarantine you for two weeks.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:55:35 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:27:08 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 9:23:49 AM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:

So there are quite a few people dying due to Wu 'flu who haven't
actually caught it.

What is with your punctuation of the name of this disease? You make up a silly name and then seem to go to great lengths to use a space and apostrophe to spell it.

WTF???

Why not just call it by it's name, COVID-19 or the shorter form commonly used here CV-19 or just "the disease"?

Your posts won't turn up in searches for this disease, but I suppose that's not really a concern.

'Wu' or 'Kung' Flu are good.

Or we could all compromise and just call it the 'Wuhan Red Death'...

Cheers,
James Arthur

PRC, Peoples' Republic Coronavirus.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

Ace (ace.mu.nu) calls it "Flu Manchu", which is funny but calls out the wrong part of the country. Maybe "Xi flu"?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

 

pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote in
news:2a478a08-de2a-4e41-b5b5-327194d8279d@googlegroups.com:

Ace (ace.mu.nu) calls it "Flu Manchu", which is funny but calls
out the wrong part of the country. Maybe "Xi flu"?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

The New York outbreak came over from Europe.

At this point, I'd say that we do not know where it actually
originated. It could have been fucking Putin dropping it off in a
few places. Hell, as stupid as the bastard is, I would not put it
past Trump to have been the one that did it, thinking he would cause
a problem for *them*. Ooops.

The motherfucker lies about others so much, he would deserve to
have this be the rumor of the year. That is exactly what the
murderous bastard deserves.

 

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 5:46:19 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:39:53 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 2:24:06 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 09:33:34 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

Absolutely amazing. No one responded to my post. Lots of posts about when one should start the economy going , but not one post about the details on exactly how the economy should be started. No discussion on when sports events should be allowed to have fans come to matches. No discussion on when schools should reopen. No discussion of when foreign travel should be permitted. When should restaurants be allowed to have unlimited numbers of customers in attendance? When should cruise ships be allowed to resume cruises. Should they get tested for infection before being allowed to book a cruise?

I expect there will be lots of posts after the fa Act about the mistakes made in starting .the economy. I do hope some thought is being done by the various government agency on loosing the restrictions.

Dan

The short answer is that no one knows -- there are too many unknowns.

But ISTM, with the information currently available, that
o most of the country isn't affected(1)
o those areas could open now, with social-distancing (and possibly
face masks)
o infected individuals and communities should be quarantined until safe
o Fever-spotting imagers might usefully exclude sick people from stores.
(I have surveillance-society concerns with that, but those concerns
aside, thermal imaging could spot and stop some super-spreaders.)

(1) see the map -- https://www.sylacauganews.com/

Thoughts?


I wonder how useful skin temp measurements are. I see cheap IR
thermomometers being used in airports. Looks like drama to me.

The hotties are easy to spot on thermal video. But Mom points
out it's a gross privacy violation -- people can run hot for
all sorts of non-contagious reasons they might not want to have
to rationalize publicly at every office, store, and byway.

Hey, everybody grab their ebay IR thermometer now and measure their
forehead. Mine shows 88F.

34.3C / 93.7F, in a warm room.

Cheers,
James

I think we should quarantine you for two weeks.

Too late! I've been holed up since some weepy-eyed zombie hacked a
load in my direction a couple weeks ago. But no hint of anything,
feel great, temps are low.

Grins,
James

 

[Ricky C]

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 9:09:48 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 5:40:06 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 5:05:22 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:37:22 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 11:14:11 AM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

I have to correct myself -- Europe didn't get it first. Our first case
was Jan. 20th. Italy's was Jan. 29th, the U.K. on Jan. 30th. We had it
first. And nine weeks later, we still haven't had their same spread.

As of 4/8/2020, worldometers.info
.---------.--------.-------.-------.---------.
| | | cases | deaths| tests |
| cases | deaths | (ppm) | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|-------|-------|---------|
EU | 610,989 | 52,252 | 1,799 | 154 | 10,162 |
USA | 435,167 | 14,797 | 1,315 | 45 | 6,725 |
'--------------------------------------------'

It's hard to conclude America's early response was ineffective, or
that testing provided any firewall.

Depends on what you mean by "early" and "response". In this case "response" mostly refers to denial and less to any substantive action.

One point I'm unclear about is why the White House was not on top of the various resource shortage situations and only responded once they were queried by the news media. Other than possibly restricting air travel with China, I can't think of a single instance where the White House was proactive in dealing with this disease.

It was always either denial, empty claims of taking strong action, taking ineffective actions or a combination of all three.

I don't think it really matters how you define "early" or "response,"
whatever your definitions might be, we're objectively better off.

If your definitions value something other than actually being better
off, then perhaps it's worth reviewing your definitions.

When I review the historical chronology, I'm surprised we acted as
aggressively as we actually did. But if you wanted the president to
spread hysteria and panic at a time we only had a handful of cases,
in isolation, no, he didn't urge panic.

We didn't act aggressively at all. First the federal government spread disinformation minimizing the level of concern people should have had (concern does not equal "panic"). Again, at the federal level we were told it was under control. Meanwhile it was forecast that we would run short of PPE and ventilators, if for no other reason because the country hit first was experiencing these problems, but nothing was done at the federal level to manage or mitigate the problems.

It wasn't until the end of March when the numbers were mounting that at the federal level the seriousness of the situation was actually recognized.. At that point most opportunities to reduce the ill effects were long past.

Now the federal government is trying to get in front of this, but the directions from the top are so chaotic no one knows what to do, like shipping ventilators.

This country has led the world in screwing up the response to this disease. In particular if you factor in the many, many opportunities to prepare for such an event which were brushed aside.

Oh baloney. If you look at the archives, the feds were all over it.
Fauci announced the NIH's vaccine effort Jan. 21st, etc., etc.

Vaccine effort??? Fauci also says that will be a year or more. WTF are you talking about?


> And besides, who died and made the feds boss?

So are you going to have that attitude when this is better and Trump brags about the "fantastic", "super" and "great" job he did?

Does our whole country
of supposedly-free people sit passively waiting for instructions from
one man? Isn't the whole famous "American experiment" the idea that
people can run their own lives without being told what to do? Don't
we have fifty states and a couple of governors and mayors here and
there? Who are supposed to be looking out for their states and cities?

Just remember these words. If the President of the US doesn't need to be a leader in the time of crisis, why would we give a damn if the person has leadership abilities. You won't be able to criticize anyone else who wants this job for lacking leadership abilities.

What preposterous nonsense do you imagine the feds should have done?
Made a magic vaccine? Had 30,000 free ventilators handy for NYC's
solar-panel-instead-of-ventilator-buying DeBlasio? Ventilators DeBlasio,
it turns out, won't come close to needing, but wanted to withhold
from other states?

I expected a President to not say, "this is under control" or that it would fade away in the spring as the weather warms. I expected the President to be honest with us and get us in the right frame of mind so thousands of people weren't traveling to Mardi Gras and spring break spreading infection around.

The governor of Florida said that he changed his mind about imposing restrictions on the state when Trump FINALLY listened to advisors who had been telling him the facts for WEEKS and MONTHS and publicly announced there would be many thousands of deaths.

Or are you upset about the delay in futile testing for a virus
that was already loose(*) all over the country? A strategy that hasn't
spared a single country from clutches of the dastardly Red Death?

Testing is never futile. Every person we find who is infected can be quarantined and further infections prevented. I don't know why you can't see the benefit of that. But it is good to know that you appreciate the fact that this disease was running through the population when Trump was still talking about it being "under control".

(*)(My pal was almost already recovered from it, back when today's
critics were still monomaniacally obsessed with some odd new
Ben&Jerry's flavor, impeachmint(tm)).

They're are all faux controversies.

The feds have been excellent. In fact, I wish they'd do less --
whenever you hear a knock at the door and open it to "I'm from
the government and I'm here to help," RUN!

Yes, so why elect someone you think is competent? An incompetent President will ultimately do less.

How do you post here so much when your head is buried so deeply in the sand?

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 5:40:06 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 5:05:22 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:37:22 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 11:14:11 AM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

I have to correct myself -- Europe didn't get it first. Our first case
was Jan. 20th. Italy's was Jan. 29th, the U.K. on Jan. 30th. We had it
first. And nine weeks later, we still haven't had their same spread..

As of 4/8/2020, worldometers.info
.---------.--------.-------.-------.---------.
| | | cases | deaths| tests |
| cases | deaths | (ppm) | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|-------|-------|---------|
EU | 610,989 | 52,252 | 1,799 | 154 | 10,162 |
USA | 435,167 | 14,797 | 1,315 | 45 | 6,725 |
'--------------------------------------------'

It's hard to conclude America's early response was ineffective, or
that testing provided any firewall.

Depends on what you mean by "early" and "response". In this case "response" mostly refers to denial and less to any substantive action.

One point I'm unclear about is why the White House was not on top of the various resource shortage situations and only responded once they were queried by the news media. Other than possibly restricting air travel with China, I can't think of a single instance where the White House was proactive in dealing with this disease.

It was always either denial, empty claims of taking strong action, taking ineffective actions or a combination of all three.

I don't think it really matters how you define "early" or "response,"
whatever your definitions might be, we're objectively better off.

If your definitions value something other than actually being better
off, then perhaps it's worth reviewing your definitions.

When I review the historical chronology, I'm surprised we acted as
aggressively as we actually did. But if you wanted the president to
spread hysteria and panic at a time we only had a handful of cases,
in isolation, no, he didn't urge panic.

We didn't act aggressively at all. First the federal government spread disinformation minimizing the level of concern people should have had (concern does not equal "panic"). Again, at the federal level we were told it was under control. Meanwhile it was forecast that we would run short of PPE and ventilators, if for no other reason because the country hit first was experiencing these problems, but nothing was done at the federal level to manage or mitigate the problems.

It wasn't until the end of March when the numbers were mounting that at the federal level the seriousness of the situation was actually recognized. At that point most opportunities to reduce the ill effects were long past.

Now the federal government is trying to get in front of this, but the directions from the top are so chaotic no one knows what to do, like shipping ventilators.

This country has led the world in screwing up the response to this disease. In particular if you factor in the many, many opportunities to prepare for such an event which were brushed aside.

Oh baloney. If you look at the archives, the feds were all over it.
Fauci announced the NIH's vaccine effort Jan. 21st, etc., etc.

And besides, who died and made the feds boss? Does our whole country
of supposedly-free people sit passively waiting for instructions from
one man? Isn't the whole famous "American experiment" the idea that
people can run their own lives without being told what to do? Don't
we have fifty states and a couple of governors and mayors here and
there? Who are supposed to be looking out for their states and cities?

What preposterous nonsense do you imagine the feds should have done?
Made a magic vaccine? Had 30,000 free ventilators handy for NYC's
solar-panel-instead-of-ventilator-buying DeBlasio? Ventilators DeBlasio,
it turns out, won't come close to needing, but wanted to withhold
from other states?

Or are you upset about the delay in futile testing for a virus
that was already loose(*) all over the country? A strategy that hasn't
spared a single country from clutches of the dastardly Red Death?

(*)(My pal was almost already recovered from it, back when today's
critics were still monomaniacally obsessed with some odd new
Ben&Jerry's flavor, impeachmint(tm)).

They're are all faux controversies.

The feds have been excellent. In fact, I wish they'd do less --
whenever you hear a knock at the door and open it to "I'm from
the government and I'm here to help," RUN!

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[ehsjr]

On 4/9/2020 12:53 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 8:48:56 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 4:13:07 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 2:31:25 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 1:02:49 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 08/04/2020 18:23, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

It's interesting that Sweden achieved control without shutting down.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/swedens-numbers-vs-americas.php


Sweden does not have control at all - not remotely. It has exponential
increases in the cases and deaths, it is losing control in the hospitals
in Stockholm, several key epidemiologists are now publicly warning of a
looming disaster, and they don't even know how many deaths they have had
(they've changed the way they count several times).

Thanks for that info. However, the point remains that, starting from
the same growth rate, Swedes have lowered their exponent to comparable
or less than the U.S.', without shutting down.

You seem to entirely miss the point that the US response is not the gold standard of fighting this disease. If the Swedes have matched the US that means they still have a LONG way to go.

Really?

As of 4/7/2020, worldometers.info

(view in Courier)
.------------------+----------------+-------+-------.
| cases | deaths | | |
|------------------+----------------+ cases | deaths|
| total | new | total | new | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|--------|-------|-------|-------|
Europe | 695,486 | 34,778 | 57,162 | 4,733 | 1,227 | 101 |
EU | 578,938 | 27,795 | 48,694 | 3,682 | 1,705 | 143 |
USA | 400,335 | 33,331 | 12,841 | 1,970 | 1,209 | 39 |
'---------------------------------------------------'

Seems decent to me.

James Arthur's special blinkers always let him see the US in favourable light.

More objective observers are less optimistic

Do you have data that contradicts what he posted?

Ed

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, April 10, 2020 at 4:17:42 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 09:53:18 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 11:09:29 PM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 10:18:06 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 3:07:44 AM UTC+10, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 11:51:09 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
"dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in
news:4d0e5efd-cb5e-4473-8d64-320703c9e838@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20

<snip>

It only takes a single infectious person to restart the epidemic.


That s true, but the US will have lots of testing capability available and with only a few cases contact tracing should be effective.

You make a good point that by waiting, we can collapse the number
of cases to a more manageable number. But there will still be
reservoirs in people scattered all over the country (who are no
longer in New York .

How do you contact-trace someone who was never sick, walking through
a public area planting viral seeds?

If all the people that they infected walked through that public area at much the same time, anybody else who walked through that area at that time is going to get told to isolate themselves.

In Australia, mobile phones are starting to produce messages to that effect, though the one example I could point to was sent to somebody who was on the same plane as someone who turned out to be infected.

Carrying a mobile phone tells the mobile phone network where you are at any given time. The police have long since taken to telling the networks to keep that data on file for a couple of weeks in case the police find themselves needing it.

It's way too late for isolation to help much. There are too many
re-seeds in the wild. It has to burn itself out.

Nonsense.

> The Chinese might have confined it.

China (which is now starting to relax it's lockdowns) and South Korea (which never felt the need to impose one) currnetly support a rather different conclusion.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Ricky C]

On Friday, April 10, 2020 at 1:49:35 AM UTC-4, ehsjr wrote:

On 4/9/2020 12:53 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 8:48:56 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 4:13:07 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 2:31:25 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 1:02:49 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 08/04/2020 18:23, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

It's interesting that Sweden achieved control without shutting down.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/swedens-numbers-vs-americas.php


Sweden does not have control at all - not remotely. It has exponential
increases in the cases and deaths, it is losing control in the hospitals
in Stockholm, several key epidemiologists are now publicly warning of a
looming disaster, and they don't even know how many deaths they have had
(they've changed the way they count several times).

Thanks for that info. However, the point remains that, starting from
the same growth rate, Swedes have lowered their exponent to comparable
or less than the U.S.', without shutting down.

You seem to entirely miss the point that the US response is not the gold standard of fighting this disease. If the Swedes have matched the US that means they still have a LONG way to go.

Really?

As of 4/7/2020, worldometers.info

(view in Courier)
.------------------+----------------+-------+-------.
| cases | deaths | | |
|------------------+----------------+ cases | deaths|
| total | new | total | new | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|--------|-------|-------|-------|
Europe | 695,486 | 34,778 | 57,162 | 4,733 | 1,227 | 101 |
EU | 578,938 | 27,795 | 48,694 | 3,682 | 1,705 | 143 |
USA | 400,335 | 33,331 | 12,841 | 1,970 | 1,209 | 39 |
'---------------------------------------------------'

Seems decent to me.

James Arthur's special blinkers always let him see the US in favourable light.

More objective observers are less optimistic


Do you have data that contradicts what he posted?

What exactly did he post that requires contradicting???

He posted some numbers and said they seem "decent" to him. Ok, he likes those numbers. What about it?

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, April 10, 2020 at 4:31:29 PM UTC+10, Ricky C wrote:

On Friday, April 10, 2020 at 1:49:35 AM UTC-4, ehsjr wrote:
On 4/9/2020 12:53 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 8:48:56 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 4:13:07 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 2:31:25 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 1:02:49 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 08/04/2020 18:23, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

It's interesting that Sweden achieved control without shutting down.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/swedens-numbers-vs-americas.php


Sweden does not have control at all - not remotely. It has exponential
increases in the cases and deaths, it is losing control in the hospitals
in Stockholm, several key epidemiologists are now publicly warning of a
looming disaster, and they don't even know how many deaths they have had
(they've changed the way they count several times).

Thanks for that info. However, the point remains that, starting from
the same growth rate, Swedes have lowered their exponent to comparable
or less than the U.S.', without shutting down.

You seem to entirely miss the point that the US response is not the gold standard of fighting this disease. If the Swedes have matched the US that means they still have a LONG way to go.

Really?

As of 4/7/2020, worldometers.info

(view in Courier)
.------------------+----------------+-------+-------.
| cases | deaths | | |
|------------------+----------------+ cases | deaths|
| total | new | total | new | (ppm) | (ppm) |
|---------|--------|--------|-------|-------|-------|
Europe | 695,486 | 34,778 | 57,162 | 4,733 | 1,227 | 101 |
EU | 578,938 | 27,795 | 48,694 | 3,682 | 1,705 | 143 |
USA | 400,335 | 33,331 | 12,841 | 1,970 | 1,209 | 39 |
'---------------------------------------------------'

Seems decent to me.

James Arthur's special blinkers always let him see the US in favourable light.

More objective observers are less optimistic


Do you have data that contradicts what he posted?

What exactly did he post that requires contradicting???

He posted some numbers and said they seem "decent" to him. Ok, he likes those numbers. What about it?

The US numbers aren't remotely decent.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

has a new case per day plot, which shows that the US has moved from an increasing number of cases per day to a more or less constant number.

That's where Italy was on the 19th March. They weren't doing well then and they aren't doing well now.

James Arthur might be burying his head in the sand, but he's not actually that stupid, so he's more probably lying for political effect.

If you compare the US performance with South Korea, you can why the Tea Party Faction has all it's liars working flat out.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[mpm]

On Friday, April 10, 2020 at 2:17:15 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

> Carrying a mobile phone tells the mobile phone network where you are at any given time. The police have long since taken to telling the networks to keep that data on file for a couple of weeks in case the police find themselves needing it.

Really?
Because in the United States, the mobile phone networks routinely retain that data (and more) for at least TEN YEARS.

 

[David Brown]

On 08/04/2020 23:35, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 4:44:30 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 08/04/2020 20:31, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 1:02:49 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 08/04/2020 18:23, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 3:56:31 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

All true, but I'm more interested in what actions cause those
numbers to move in the right direction.

It's interesting that Sweden achieved control without shutting down.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/swedens-numbers-vs-americas.php


Sweden does not have control at all - not remotely. It has exponential
increases in the cases and deaths, it is losing control in the hospitals
in Stockholm, several key epidemiologists are now publicly warning of a
looming disaster, and they don't even know how many deaths they have had
(they've changed the way they count several times).

Thanks for that info. However, the point remains that, starting from
the same growth rate, Swedes have lowered their exponent to comparable
or less than the U.S.', without shutting down.

There is always a delay between shutting down, and the shutdown having
an effect on the numbers. There are also many other factors involved -
some inevitable (such as the denser population in cities in the USA),
some cultural (such as the vastly different health systems), and some
dynamic (such as the very poor early testing in the USA - a certain part
of your growth of known cases is due to more testing).

You're over complicating the issues. Our excellent healthcare -- the
care people get once infected -- has little bearing on people getting
infected in the first place. Health care beyond basic supportive care
might not even change outcomes, much.

I agree that healthcare of infected people in hospital does not affect
infection rates (unless it is so bad that significant numbers of people
get infected in hospitals).

Healthcare systems affect who goes to the doctor, and who goes to
hospital - and there the US system is worse than any other western
democracy.

Your inferior welfare system is also a significant factor.

Testing is another faux controversy -- Europe had far more cases
and initially a 2-4x higher infection rate than the U.S., despite
whatever testing. Europe was COVID-swarmed weeks before the U.S.,
because Europe failed to cut off their inflow of infected individuals.
Testing, testing, testing while new vectors keep flowing in is
a losing proposition.

Good testing lets you know the state of the disease, and lets you
isolate carriers faster. But it is only part of the solution.

In Asia, testing regimens seem uncorrelated with control outcomes --
some intensively-testing countries are worst off, while certain
sparsely-testing countries have succeeded.

So, gross test-count is a poor proxy metric for overall pandemic
control. It's shallow & silly.

You need to look at the big picture - it /is/ complicated. Using any
one metric will not give you much information.

I'm sure you'll disagree but you don't need tests at all to stop a
pandemic. In fact that's exactly what we've done for all of human
history up until now: If you're sick, stay home. If you've been
exposed, quarantine. If someone's sick, stay clear. No testing
needed. COVID's no different, it's just the first one we've seen
spreading on Twitter in real-time.

I can agree that you don't /need/ testing to stop a pandemic. But it
certainly helps!

It is very difficult to compare countries in general, and the USA is
significantly different here from Sweden.


The idea behind the "herd immunity" strategy is to get about 60% of the
population infected and either recovered or dead. (The figure "60%" is
mostly a guess, but commonly quoted.) Sweden is heading for disaster
with a confirmed case rate of 0.1%. Even if we assume that the real
infection rate is several times higher due to non-symptomatic or
untested infections, they are getting overwhelmed when they are less
than 1% of the way towards their goal.

In contrast, Norway has had quite a solid lockdown for a month or so,
and the spreading factor is down to 0.7 new infections per infected
person. That means the disease is dying out here - while before the
lockdowns, we had one of the highest cases per head of population in the
world. Hospitals here are not overwhelmed - there are empty beds,
routine operations are being scheduled again, and we are sending a
medical team to Italy to help.

The first U.S. cases in Washington state were immediately contained
and quarantined. And the president cut off travel almost immediately,
on Jan. 31, when we had just that handful in a Washington state nursing
home.


No, travel (to China, then Europe) was not cut off - it was limited in a
way that was of little real effect. Chinese people couldn't travel into
the USA, but Americans could travel to and from China. It was more of a
symbolic "blame China" move.

American citizens were still permitted to repatriate, but after
two-week quarantine. Foreign nationals were banned.

"The action means that U.S. citizens who have been in China's Hubei
Province in the past 14 days will be subject to 14 days of mandatory
quarantine if they travel back to the United States."
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/01/31/801686524/trump-declares-coronavirus-a-public-health-emergency-and-restricts-travel-from-c

The numbers are pretty clear -- it made a whale of a difference. It
took several weeks for our infection rate to catch up to Europe's,
which is a big deal when something is growing 34% per day.

At best, it helped delay things a little and buy your country some time.
This time was then mostly wasted by Trump patting himself on the back
and claiming he scored 11 out of 10 for how well he was handling things.

Quarantine is always a good idea, however.

New York seems to be our epicenter, and fleeing New Yorkers the source
of our secondary spread.

Yes.

It is very difficult to limit spread within a free country.

Indeed. But we're getting there. People are pitching in, sharing
information, helping each other, and making strides. Web pages have
sprouted. Advice is being shared. Ideas traded. Treatments tried.

Yes, I believe that in some ways things are looking a little better -
but it will be a long time before you have control throughout the
country, and there will be many, many more deaths first.

Freedom works in wonderful ways that greatly outweigh its modest
limitations.

Oh, sure - I am a big fan of freedom as a general principle.

New York is, essentially, America's Italy.

Other than that, the U.S. was doing quite well. As you can see on this
map,

https://www.sylacauganews.com/

even now, most of the countryside still isn't affected.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Martin Brown]

On 10/04/2020 12:55, mpm wrote:

On Friday, April 10, 2020 at 2:17:15 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

Carrying a mobile phone tells the mobile phone network where you
are at any given time. The police have long since taken to telling
the networks to keep that data on file for a couple of weeks in
case the police find themselves needing it.

That is actually not precise enough for the contact tracing though and
GPS isn't always accurate or even present on some phones. The main
Covid-19 contact tracing apps rely on bluetooth to talk to nearby phones
using the same app and exchange tags. If someone later tests positive
then the app push notifies all recent contacts going back N days.

Really? Because in the United States, the mobile phone networks
routinely retain that data (and more) for at least TEN YEARS.

Not sure how long they keep such data in the UK.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown