Magox

I think what Trump and his task force should do is shut out the press corps with the briefings. They should still conduct updates with about 15 questions that they get via Facebook or twitter from real citizens. This will be a way they can get out their message while bypassing the media. The media deserves nothing, they have proven themselves and continue to prove with each and every passing day that they are a rotten force and are a net negative for our society. They should absolutely do this and I guarantee you that they would still have high viewership.

Not one minute throughout any of the Sunday talk shows was dedicated to this. The media is continuing to do their damndest to white wash Tara Reade out of existence but it won’t work. The Bernie progressive left and the right will demand this to be an issue. Trump should hold another briefer and bring it up loud and proud. He should shame the media about their clear hypocrisy and force millions of viewers to hear it and the media to actually cover it.

I was listening to her today and I Was thinking this exact same thing. Fauci tends to provide comments that makes the rounds and provides fodder to the press where usually he has to clarify himself the following day. Birx doesn’t make those mistakes and she actually in her own way pushes back on the media for their tendency to cover the trivialities as opposed to the substance. That’s the way it should be. Truth be told, Birx needs to take the lead and Fauci should have his public role reduced. He should still be out there but not as much as Dr Birx. she doesn’t fall for the gotcha games.

Who are you arguing with?

Here is a good article. Have a look: —————- Detecting antibodies is the first step. Interpreting what they mean is harder. Typically, a virus that causes an acute infection will prompt the body’s immune system to start churning out specific antibodies. Even after the virus is cleared, these “neutralizing” antibodies float around, ready to rally a response should that virus try to infect again. The virus might infect a few cells, but it can’t really gain a toehold before the immune system banishes it. (This is not the case for viruses that cause chronic infections, like HIV and, in many cases, hepatitis C.) “The infection is basically stopped in its tracks before it can go anywhere,” said Stephen Goldstein, a University of Utah virologist. But, Goldstein added, “the durability of that protection varies depending on the virus.” Scientists who have looked at antibodies to other coronaviruses — both the common-cold causing foursome and SARS and MERS — found they persisted for at least a few years, indicating people were protected from reinfection for at least that long. From then, protection might start to wane, not drop off completely. The experience with other viruses, including the other coronaviruses, has encouraged what Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch summed up as the “educated guess” in a recent column in the New York Times: “After being infected with SARS-CoV-2, most individuals will have an immune response, some better than others. That response, it may be assumed, will offer some protection over the medium term — at least a year — and then its effectiveness might decline.” But many serological tests aren’t like pregnancy tests, with a yes or no result. They will reveal the levels (or titer) of antibodies in a person’s blood. And that’s where things can get a bit trickier. At this point, scientists can’t say for sure what level of antibodies might be required for a person to be protected from a second Covid-19 case. They also can’t say how long people are safeguarded, though it’s thought that a higher initial titer will take longer to wane than low levels. “Further investigation is needed to understand the duration of protective immunity for SARS-CoV-2,” a committee from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine wrote in a reportthis month.

I do think mortality rates is a very important metric but it should categorized in age, Comorbidities, age + comorbidities. I also think the incoming hospital data on who is being hospitalized and who is dying is also another important metric. Also what you suggested in regards to hospital capacity and utilization would make sense. Plus I think you have to consider all of the residual effects of the shutdown, not just economic but overall public health. I mean, if someone dies from the Coronavirus, does that make it more important or takes precedence over people who die of a heart attack or suicide as a result of the shutdown? A death is a death . Did you see that NY times article I posted in the statistical thread? Physicians in the US fear that based off of the dramatic drop offs in reported heart attacks that there may be more deaths that are being caused by heart attacks than the Coronavirus. In Australia they conducted a research paper and they show more people have died of heart attacks in Australia than Coronavirus. Even if this isn’t the case, I do think we can safely say there are many deaths occurring that are heart related due to not getting proper care due to the shutdowns. Especially when you consider each year we have 650k deaths related to heart disease each year in the US. All these things should be considered and I am 99% certain that Covid Public health outcomes is being weighted far more than the overall public health outcomes due to these shut downs.

From what I am reading is that there are different levels of antibodies and that the research that has been conducted indicates that in most cases it would protect you but in others that the antibodies may not. The way I read it is that antibodies don’t appear and turn on like a light switch. There is a process in the development of it and depending where in the process that it lies also helps determine the effectiveness of it. *Disclaimer*. Don’t take what I say as fact. That was my interpretation of it *

This is pretty important. ————— Emergency rooms have about half the normal number of patients, and heart and stroke units are nearly empty, according to doctors at many urban medical centers. Some medical experts fear more people are dying from untreated emergencies than from the coronavirus. A recent paper by cardiologists at nine large medical centers estimated a 38 percent reduction since March 1 in the number patients with serious heart attacks coming in to have urgently needed procedures to open their arteries. —— Researchers in Austria estimated that in March 110 citizens died from untreated heart attacks, compared with 86 who died of Covid-19. They based their calculations on a precipitous decline in patients going to hospitals, the expected number of heart attacks in Austria, and the mortality rates of untreated heart attacks. “I am very very worried that we are creating a problem that will have long-term consequences for the health of the community,” said Dr. Richard A. Chazal, medical director of the Heart and Vascular Institute at Lee Health in Fort Myers, Fla., and a past president of the American College of Cardiology. ——

Oh, I see. I thought you were referring from data in the link I provided. You are talking about from a capacity/utilization aspect so that we can gauge preparedness for outbreaks as one of the metrics that should be considered. To see what areas can begin phasing in the workforce. Correct?

Which hospital data point concerned you?

Im not sure what you are trying to say but what I was speaking to is that they look like geniuses compared to the rest of the world. They didn’t have to restrict their lives and suffer quite as bad of an economic downturn as everyone else. And they did the logical thing, which was try to protect the most at risk while allowing others to go on about life with social distancing measures.

The data that is coming out is overwhelming and it's pointing to the CoronaVirus having a much much lower mortality rate than what everyone feared. I would highly recommend that you guys read that article. It goes into all the antibody tests and hospital data and a few other nuggets. These numbers are just crazy. That data is actually data compiled by the hospitals....That isn't an antibody test or some study, this is actual hard data. If politicians namely Democrats are hell bent on going by the science and data, then they have to begin relaxing their shut downs and going about it in a much more targeted maner. Every single passing day, Sweden's policy appears to have gotten it right. They are beginning to look like geniuses.

I know that Joe Biden, Democrats and the media want this Tara Reade story to go away and they are doing their damndest but it won’t go away. They will have two options, to either at some point cover it in a meaningful way or expose themselves for the hypocrites they are proving that the entire #believeher movement with Kavanaugh was a complete political charade.

Him being a 10 sack guy after 2-3 years not only would it not be a surprise, I expect it to happen. He was the number one DE recruit coming out of high school and all he has ever done is produce sacks and TFL ever since. There are plenty of guys who are 10 sack guys that weren’t workout warriors either. He was one of the leaders in all of college with one on one matchups according to PFF and led the big ten with 58 QB pressures this past year. He abused Miami’s future LT with 2 sacks in his matchup with him. There is nothing that I see from him considering his great size, arm length, hand technique, first step and consistent production throughout his entire FB life that should prevent him continuing to be a good player that gets lots of pressures. I’m not saying that he will be a star and I’m not saying that he won’t either but I do believe it’s likely he will have a few 10+ sack seasons in his career.

The idea that this guys ceiling is a 6-8 sack guy is silly. There is no indication or anything that suggests that this will be the case. The fact that he has always gotten sacks throughout his career, that he was one of the leaders in college at winning his one on one battles and that he led a major conference in the Big Ten with 58 pressures show that this guy gets after it. He’s going to be a great fit for this team and will be the eventual starter within a couple years.

What makes him impressive is his change of direction, balance and power. He will be a really good compliment to Singletary and excellent short yardage back. Definitely an upgrade.

All he has ever done from high school to college is a produce at a high level against major competition. Couple that with his size, length and technique, odds are that he will be a solid to good NFL player for years to come.

Don’t waste your time, arguing is a pastime for WEO.

I think people often mistake that if an end doesn’t have great speed they can’t be a good 10+ sack sort of guy. That’s a fallacy, Epensa may not be fast but he has a good first step, really good technique and hand usage, strength , fantastic size, coaches son and really good production. I think there is a good chance he will be a 10+ sack guy in the NFL.

This is either profoundly disingenuous or stupid...One of the two. Where did Europe get it from? The Magic Coronavirus fairy? And when Trump shut down China, just about everyone from the media and left were adamantly against it. Is he suggesting that Trump should have also closed down Europe at the same time, even though there wasn't enough data to suggest it? Last I checked, they did close down Europe but it was too late. As if any Lefty politician would have done it before Trump.

It went right over his head.

I said years ago that Trump supporters would need to get twisted into a pretzel trying to explain his words. The same holds true today. But it goes back to that Salena Zito article where she discussed his appeal. Foreseeing his 2016 victory when few others in the press did. Yesterday's goofy thing that Trump said is a perfect example of that. Reasonable people know that he wasn't advocating for people to ingest disinfectants, he just was pontificating aloud on something goofy.

The Taskforce including Fauci and Birx have already said that there is enough testing for phase 1 but Fauci doesn't believe there is enough for beyond that. The argument that some medical experts make is that there has to be enough testing for anyone who wants one and to test asymptomatic people. Not sure how you test the asymptomatic people especially if they don't know that they are infected. I would imagine pretty soon the total number of newly infected people will plummet. That's my hunch. And once that number is at a much lower baseline it will be much easier to test everyone who requests one. I would think as long as they have enough to test everyone who requests one and all medical providers and people at highest risk such as nursing homes, that should be enough. Right now they are conducting about 200k a day and my guess is that by the time July rolls around that capacity will be close to 400k tests a day. Another way that they can make a determination of infection rates are the percentage of people testing positive on the tests being conducted. It's not a perfect science but it's a pretty good indicator. Like in NY, over 25% of the tests that are being conducted people are testing positive. Whereas where I live in Brevard county, a county of 600k people residents have had 235 people who have tested positive with 6300 tests conducted. Which is less than 4% of the people who have had a test conducted tested positive. What I'm saying is that the lower the percentage of people who have had tests done are testing positive that strongly implies that there are less people infected per capita. These states that are balking based on not enough testing can also use this as a data point.

It's becoming evidently clear that the battle lines have already been drawn. The States that are ready to begin phasing in the workforce which generally speaking are the red states vs the states that are pumping the brakes on opening up the economy. Let's cut through the B.S and call it for what it is, it's political. Trump is eager to open up and his opponents want to do the opposite under the pretext of "we need more testing". If the red states truly believe in the data, they should lead the way. Which it appears they will be doing. And we'll see which camp ends up being right. But the states leading the way need to be prepared for the onslaught of negative media coverage that they will receive. No matter what happens, the media will highlight every single death and blame it on them. So they need to have their arguments and data ready to counterpunch in a sustained matter to push back against the media's claims. But before they do that, the governors that are leading the way should define success before the media and the left define what failure looks like.

Came across a fact based opinion article today. The data is in, stop the panic - end the total isolation Data set 1 Data set 2 The data is showing that the targeted social distancing measures is the way to move forward.