The ultimate COVID thread

[Lawpy]

Bud, you gotta start reading what I actually wrote instead of what you imagined I wrote. I didn't say "just" associated with the left wing, as obviously in an academic sense (or in the sense sometimes used by libertarians) its strict definition could apply broadly to members of multiple party affiliations. What I said is that's what the word actually means to *most* people nowadays in 2020 parlance. I'm sure it wouldn't come as a shock to you or others on the forum to discover that I follow various left and far-left leaning political forums and social media. You are correct that "neoliberal" is a pejorative, but today it's almost exclusively and overwhelmingly used as a pejorative by progressives to describe more moderate Clinton/Biden center-left technocrats who have forgotten their FDR roots. In any case, there is still not a person on Earth who would be able to make heads or tails of "very evil neoliberal Kelly Loeffler."

Democrats and neoliberalism
These days, the meaning of “neoliberal” has become fuzzy. But it has a long history of association with the Democratic Party.

Most people just associate neoliberal with liberal and attack it from both sides. Republicans attack liberals for supporting big government in free markets. Progressives attack liberals for essentially surrendering to corporate interests and worsening income inequality. Also not to mention people from all sides attack globalization which neoliberals solidly back.

I'm just using the word loosely to describe any and all corporate sellouts. Why? Because neoliberals were the ones pushing for bank bailouts and corporate friendly measures. You gave an example of Clinton being a well known neoliberal, and he was the one who pushed through financial deregulation that set the stage for the financial crisis. I read neoliberal media like Financial Times and the repeated corporate friendly suggestions come off too strong to ignore

Kelly Loeffler probably said all pro Trump comments purely out of politics because she knows Trump hates her and was pushing very strongly for Doug Collins. But her actions and crime of insider trading comes across as a gross caricature of corrupt corporate politicians. Hence why i viewed her as a corporate sellout and so by association called her as a neoliberal. You're right this wouldn't make sense when referring to a Trump ally.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Lawpy]

Would be wonderful if it works. Storing, distributing and transporting an RNA vaccine could be a challenge though. Our logistics have been shown to be very weak.

Perfect time to sell a few positions and come back in when the inevitable crestfall occurs.

The big question is how will the distribution of vaccines will work

 

[Lawpy]

This Crisis Has Exposed the Absurdities of Neoliberalism. That Doesn’t Mean It’ll Destroy It

The coronavirus shock has shaken the world’s stock markets, imposing the need for massive state bailouts. But the measures to deal with the crisis risk spurring an authoritarian controlled capitalism — one that protects corporate interests while offloading the costs onto the rest of us.

www.jacobinmag.com

 

[vector2]

Because neoliberals were the ones pushing for bank bailouts and corporate friendly measures.

Again, even if this is true from a textbook definition of the word, it doesn't convey useful or accurate knowledge to any of your audience because that is not the current parlance. For example, TARP was spearheaded by Hank Paulson and George W. Bush who are two of the most famous neoconservatives of all time.

 

[Lawpy]

Again, even if this is true from a textbook definition of the word, it doesn't convey useful or accurate knowledge to any of your audience because that is not the current parlance. For example, TARP was spearheaded by Hank Paulson and George W. Bush who are two of the most famous neoconservatives of all time.

Yeah but i'm just illustrating that neoliberals are more supportive of it apparently to correct for market failures and avoid economic collapse. Not that Bush and Paulson are neoliberals since they aren't.

It's the idea why this is so controversial: Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor - Wikipedia

 

[vector2]

In other news

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

(CNN)President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he's long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.

Speaking at a meeting of restaurant executives, Trump said he began taking the antimalarial drug after consulting the White House doctor, though stopped short of saying his physician had actually recommended the drug.

"A couple of weeks ago, I started taking it," Trump said. He later said he'd been taking it every day for a week and a half.

The admission was a dramatic development in Trump's attempts to promote hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for coronavirus, which began earlier in the outbreak and has been met with resistance from medical professionals.

Because the drug is prescribed to treat malaria and other conditions, Trump has cast it as safe and suggested coronavirus patients have little to lose by trying it.

But at least one study has shown the drug does not work against Covid-19 and could cause heart problems.

The study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. It follows a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine that also showed the drug doesn't fight the virus.
....

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he's long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.

www.cnn.com

 

[SXMMD]

In other news

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

(CNN)President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he's long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.

Speaking at a meeting of restaurant executives, Trump said he began taking the antimalarial drug after consulting the White House doctor, though stopped short of saying his physician had actually recommended the drug.

"A couple of weeks ago, I started taking it," Trump said. He later said he'd been taking it every day for a week and a half.

The admission was a dramatic development in Trump's attempts to promote hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for coronavirus, which began earlier in the outbreak and has been met with resistance from medical professionals.

Because the drug is prescribed to treat malaria and other conditions, Trump has cast it as safe and suggested coronavirus patients have little to lose by trying it.

But at least one study has shown the drug does not work against Covid-19 and could cause heart problems.

The study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. It follows a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine that also showed the drug doesn't fight the virus.
....

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he's long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.

www.cnn.com

Which one of his dumb kids still has stocks in it?

 

[Lawpy]

Brazil’s Nurses Are Dying as Covid-19 Overwhelms Hospitals

The new coronavirus is spreading rapidly throughout Brazil, overwhelming a health care system ill prepared to handle a pandemic of this magnitude and proving especially deadly for the medical workers on the front lines.

www.wsj.com

 

[Ronin786]

The big question is how will the distribution of vaccines will work

There is no vaccine. There won't be a vaccine for a while. Companies are going to keep pretending they have the cure, the market will jump for a while and then settle back down to reality. Backing on stupidity of the general public and their sentiment is usually a good investment strategy. Just look at how much money Sorrento Therapeutics made the past few days by saying they'd isolated an antibody as a target. Everybody is just blowing smoke.

In other news

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

To be honest, of all the things to skewer him on, I don't get why him admitting to taking HCQ is the thing. He's a buffoon and his doctor is going to have a much easier time just giving him half a dose of HCQ than convincing him he's an idiot. The newsworthy part about all this is that it once again goes to show that he's just an idiot and an egomaniac that believes the lies he says.

 

[vector2]

To be honest, of all the things to skewer him on, I don't get why him admitting to taking HCQ is the thing.

I don't know if I'd call it 'the' thing. It's 'a' thing, though. And I guess it depends on how much you care about all the idiots who follow him, in as much as they're human beings. They may just cheer him on when he's bloviating about how great HCQ is and then go on about their business, but when he says something like "not only should you take it but I'm literally taking it now, too" then you end up having more incidents like the guy who died drinking chloroquine phosphate fish tank cleaner.

 

[Lawpy]

Speaking of HCQ, Youtube is actively censoring and removing all HCQ videos even when doctors and experts are giving their objective insights on the latest research on it. This led a lot of people to accuse and slam Youtube of being biased against HCQ. The Trump stuff came at a weird time but it worsened the pro-HCQ mania.

 

[nimbus]

From my perspective life in 2009 was not materially different than it is now. Looks like Americans went nuts over the past decade. Balance is being restored to the force.

 

[We'llBeDoneIn15Minutes]

To be honest, of all the things to skewer him on, I don't get why him admitting to taking HCQ is the thing. He's a buffoon and his doctor is going to have a much easier time just giving him half a dose of HCQ than convincing him he's an idiot. The newsworthy part about all this is that it once again goes to show that he's just an idiot and an egomaniac that believes the lies he says.

And the doctor also had his hands tied. Because of the potential Covid exposure Trump demanded "either that Hydroxychloroform malaria drug or the injectable Lysol."

 

[pgg]

That’s a close tie. But Trump isn’t out of the office yet

Can you be more specific about his war crimes? Trump's been pretty disinterested in escalating foreign military activities, especially compared to other recent presidents.

He sure has said a bunch of things, in his offhand way, that would absolutely be war crimes if done (for example, attacking Iranian cultural sites, taking out the families of terrorists). But these things haven't been done, and the military has walked back those statements and clarified that we will comply with international agreements WRT laws of war.

There was a lot of handwringing about his order to kill Soleimani but it's absolutely not a war crime to kill a uniformed member of an enemy military actively engaged in hostilities against us. Reasonable people can argue whether or not that was wise, but anyone who calls that a war crime is just being ridiculous.

 

[pgg]

why cant we get a middle man. someone who isnt about giving a boatload of free money/stuff to everyone and someone who isn't all corporate about money.

Because diverse, chaotic primary fields favor extremist candidates. It's why Trump won the 2016 nomination and why Bernie Sanders put up such strong showings in 2016 and 2020.

 

[deleted59964]

And the doctor also had his hands tied. Because of the potential Covid exposure Trump demanded "either that Hydroxychloroform malaria drug or the injectable Lysol."

I know which I’d give him

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Would be wonderful if it works. Storing, distributing and transporting an RNA vaccine could be a challenge though. Our logistics have been shown to be very weak.

Care to expand on this? Because MMR disagrees with your basic premise.

 

[Mman]

Libertarians don't support bailouts and expanded government state. Unlike neoliberals, libertarians actually know what they're talking about with regards to free markets and economic policy

99% of libertarians don't know what it means to be libertarian.

 

[pgg]

99% of libertarians don't know what it means to be libertarian.

It's about as proscriptive a term as Republican or Democrat as far as "what a person must believe" to be a Libertarian/Republican/Democrat. There's lots of room for subtleties and differences under each of those umbrellas.

The problem with the US Libertarian party is that the anarchist pot smokers get a lot of attention, the sb247s among us come across as heartless despite being consistent and logical, and our presidential candidates don't know what an Aleppo is.

As a basic, tolerant philosophy of minimal government intrusion and extremely broad respect for individual liberties (whether that's freedom to get an abortion, own a rifle in a non-wood color, marry a dude if you're a dude, grow marijuana as decorative landscaping in your front yard, avoid foreign adventurewars) there are an awful lot of Libertarians in this country. Most think the Democrat or Republican parties hit most of the checkboxes they care about and our system is rigged against 3rd parties. We're eternal alsorans who are practical enough to vote for lesser evils. Saying we don't know what we are is glib and inaccurate.

 

[vector2]

It's about as proscriptive a term as Republican or Democrat as far as "what a person must believe" to be a Libertarian/Republican/Democrat. There's lots of room for subtleties and differences under each of those umbrellas.

The problem with the US Libertarian party is that the anarchist pot smokers get a lot of attention, the sb247s among us come across as heartless despite being consistent and logical, and our presidential candidates don't know what an Aleppo is.

As a basic, tolerant philosophy of minimal government intrusion and extremely broad respect for individual liberties (whether that's freedom to get an abortion, own a rifle in a non-wood color, marry a dude if you're a dude, grow marijuana as decorative landscaping in your front yard, avoid foreign adventurewars) there are an awful lot of Libertarians in this country. Most think the Democrat or Republican parties hit most of the checkboxes they care about and our system is rigged against 3rd parties. We're eternal alsorans who are practical enough to vote for lesser evils. Saying we don't know what we are is glib and inaccurate.

Hard to say imo that freedom to get an abortion is part of the "basic, tolerant philosophy" when the best known libertarian politicians in America are anti-abortion (Ron, Rand, Amash).

Also, this is just my observation and not based on any data, but I find the "average" libertarian's views to be much more discordant from another "average" libertarian's views than say comparing my progressive liberal views to another progressive's.

 

[DoctwoB]

It's about as proscriptive a term as Republican or Democrat as far as "what a person must believe" to be a Libertarian/Republican/Democrat. There's lots of room for subtleties and differences under each of those umbrellas.

The problem with the US Libertarian party is that the anarchist pot smokers get a lot of attention, the sb247s among us come across as heartless despite being consistent and logical, and our presidential candidates don't know what an Aleppo is.

As a basic, tolerant philosophy of minimal government intrusion and extremely broad respect for individual liberties (whether that's freedom to get an abortion, own a rifle in a non-wood color, marry a dude if you're a dude, grow marijuana as decorative landscaping in your front yard, avoid foreign adventurewars) there are an awful lot of Libertarians in this country. Most think the Democrat or Republican parties hit most of the checkboxes they care about and our system is rigged against 3rd parties. We're eternal alsorans who are practical enough to vote for lesser evils. Saying we don't know what we are is glib and inaccurate.

I think a lot of people also like libertarianism in theory, but not in practice. For example, I fully respect the power/utility of the free market, but acknowledge that there are market failures that require an arbiter (government) to address, including monopoly/oligopoly, environmental damage, product safety etc. Right now I view Republicans as awful on providing these market corrections, while Democrats can be overly prescriptive to the point of harm. And both parties have been useless in enforcing antitrust.

 

[pgg]

Hard to say imo that freedom to get an abortion is part of the "basic, tolerant philosophy" when the best known libertarian politicians in America are anti-abortion (Ron, Rand, Amash).

Also, this is just my observation and not based on any data, but I find the "average" libertarian's views to be much more discordant from another "average" libertarian's views than say comparing my progressive liberal views to another progressive's.

Abortion was probably the weakest of my examples. Being pro-life is not incompatible with being a Libertarian. Like I said, it's a big umbrella. Gary Johnson was a solidly pro-choice Libertarian presidential candidate, although he argued that R v W was a bad decision and abortion should be up to the states. (I disagree with that ... but hey, big umbrella.) Anyway, there are a lot more pro-choice Libertarians than pro-choice Republicans.

I agree with your observation that "average" libertarians have more different ideas amongst themselves than "average" progressives. It's a worldview that values individual liberty above just about everything else. Most every policy stance flow from the basic assumption that people ought to be able to do what they want, until others are harmed.

Abortion is controversial because many if not most pro-lifers genuinely believe a fetus or even a zygote is a human being deserving of legal protection. So, I'll concede it was a weak example.

 

[pgg]

I think a lot of people also like libertarianism in theory, but not in practice. For example, I fully respect the power/utility of the free market, but acknowledge that there are market failures that require an arbiter (government) to address, including monopoly/oligopoly, environmental damage, product safety etc. Right now I view Republicans as awful on providing these market corrections, while Democrats can be overly prescriptive to the point of harm. And both parties have been useless in enforcing antitrust.

Where Libertarianism tends to fail spectacularly is in the economic realm. Robber barons, coal towns with company stores, pick any antitrust example you like - strict free market Libertarian solutions aren't really solutions. Capitalism run amok in completely unregulated free market is a disaster. Privatizing the public water supply to the lowest bidder is stupid.

Libertarianism would be an excellent basis for a non-interventionist realpolitik foreign policy. Respect for borders, even if some nasty things are going on inside them.

Socially, it shines. It's as pro-freedom as the libbiest of libs could hope, plus guns. Abortion's a little stickier as I conceded to vector2, but it's generally pro-choice.

I'm not saying it has all the answers to usher in a new American Utopia, but it has better answers than the Republican or Democrat parties. Most of us recognize the value of civilization. I'd guess the % of Libertarians who really want an anarchist free-for-all is about the same as the % of Republicans who want a Christian theocracy, or the % of Democrats who want completely open borders.

 

[nimbus]

Care to expand on this? Because MMR disagrees with your basic premise.

Here’s a great review of mRNA vaccines.

“Pharmaceutical formulation of mRNAs is an active area of development. Although most products for early phase studies are stored frozen (−70 °C), efforts to develop formulations that are stable at higher temperatures more suitable for vaccine distribution are continuing. Published reports suggest that stable refrigerated or room temperature formulations can be made. The RNActive platform was reported to be active after lyophilization and storage at 5–25 °C for 3 years and at 40 °C for 6 months91. Another report demonstrated that freeze-dried naked mRNA is stable for at least 10 months under refrigerated conditions160. The stability of mRNA products might also be improved by packaging within nanoparticles or by co-formulation with RNase inhibitors161. For lipid-encapsulated mRNA, at least 6 months of stability has been observed (Arbutus Biopharma, personal communication), but longer-term storage of such mRNA–lipid complexes in an unfrozen form has not yet been reported.”

mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology - Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

mRNA vaccines represent a promising alternative to conventional vaccine approaches, but their application has been hampered by instability and delivery issues. Here, Pardi and colleagues discuss recent advances in mRNA vaccine technology, assess mRNA vaccines currently in development for cancer...

www.nature.com

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Here’s a great review of mRNA vaccines.

“Pharmaceutical formulation of mRNAs is an active area of development. Although most products for early phase studies are stored frozen (−70 °C), efforts to develop formulations that are stable at higher temperatures more suitable for vaccine distribution are continuing. Published reports suggest that stable refrigerated or room temperature formulations can be made. The RNActive platform was reported to be active after lyophilization and storage at 5–25 °C for 3 years and at 40 °C for 6 months91. Another report demonstrated that freeze-dried naked mRNA is stable for at least 10 months under refrigerated conditions160. The stability of mRNA products might also be improved by packaging within nanoparticles or by co-formulation with RNase inhibitors161. For lipid-encapsulated mRNA, at least 6 months of stability has been observed (Arbutus Biopharma, personal communication), but longer-term storage of such mRNA–lipid complexes in an unfrozen form has not yet been reported.”

mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology - Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

mRNA vaccines represent a promising alternative to conventional vaccine approaches, but their application has been hampered by instability and delivery issues. Here, Pardi and colleagues discuss recent advances in mRNA vaccine technology, assess mRNA vaccines currently in development for cancer...

www.nature.com

Ah I misunderstood your point (my bad).

 

[Lawpy]

Some Hospitals Prepared for Coronavirus Cases That Never Came

Medical centers set up triage tents, cleared floors and canceled surgeries as the pandemic hit the U.S. Some that have seen only a few patients say they don’t regret their at-times costly preparations, given a possible second surge.

www.wsj.com

 

[d9sccr]

Politics is about compromise. Gotta energize the base. No different than Trump giving the anti-choice folks what they want. I am sure Donald Trump (before he was interested in running for President) was very pro-choice. Especially for his mistresses.

Perhaps..I don’t recall anyone winning a primary and swinging further away from the middle though. I’m sure it’s going to help win over independents and winnable republicans to point out your AOC, Bernie, and Beto policies. Again, he won the primary—easily—because of perceived moderation. Who’s to say whether moderate Dems come out and vote for a new progressive agenda that they enthusiastically voted down in the primary?

 

[Angus Avagadro]

This thread could lighten up a little. This is what happens when Covid shuts everything down and people have too much time on their hands. Check out the tiger closely.

 

[vector2]

 

[We'llBeDoneIn15Minutes]

Hard to say imo that freedom to get an abortion is part of the "basic, tolerant philosophy" when the best known libertarian politicians in America are anti-abortion (Ron, Rand, Amash).

Also, this is just my observation and not based on any data, but I find the "average" libertarian's views to be much more discordant from another "average" libertarian's views than say comparing my progressive liberal views to another progressive's.

I don't think abortion should even be a qualifier for what party you belong to. That's such a personal decision dependent on your views of science, religion, society, and so much else, it makes little sense to me that this describes your political affiliation.

It's such a complicated issue that reasonable people lean one way but are somewhere in between the 2 extremes. If you are a 0 or a 100 on a 0-100 anti or pro-abortion scale and can't bring yourself to acknowledge any possible point the other side is making, you are such a fanatic I'd hope not to associate with you.

 

[We'llBeDoneIn15Minutes]

I think a lot of people also like libertarianism in theory, but not in practice. For example, I fully respect the power/utility of the free market, but acknowledge that there are market failures that require an arbiter (government) to address, including monopoly/oligopoly, environmental damage, product safety etc. Right now I view Republicans as awful on providing these market corrections, while Democrats can be overly prescriptive to the point of harm. And both parties have been useless in enforcing antitrust.

The competitive free market is such a thing of mathematical beauty. It's not that it has failures as much that the world it functions in has failures. The government's role it quite simply to correct those failures you point out to bring us closer to that economic perfection of a competitive free market where competitive requires antitrust and true cost require the producer responsible for all costs including environmental.

Unfortunately nothing is as politicized as economics and people with agendas and lack of understanding use imperfections in government and the world as reasons to destroy free markets. If you have that type of math logic mind to instantly see the magic of the market place as the ultimate innovator with the best cost efficiency and lowest price you will understand the tremendous fear of going closer to a central government planned economy.

 

[dannyboy1]

The competitive free market is such a thing of mathematical beauty. It's not that it has failures as much that the world it functions in has failures. The government's role it quite simply to correct those failures you point out to bring us closer to that economic perfection of a competitive free market where competitive requires antitrust and true cost require the producer responsible for all costs including environmental.

Unfortunately nothing is as politicized as economics and people with agendas and lack of understanding use imperfections in government and the world as reasons to destroy free markets. If you have that type of math logic mind to instantly see the magic of the market place as the ultimate innovator with the best cost efficiency and lowest price you will understand the tremendous fear of going closer to a central government planned economy.

A true free market would mean CRNA independence. Still sound beautiful?

 

[Southpaw]

A true free market would mean CRNA independence. Still sound beautiful?

It really wouldn't. Look at primary care. Physicians salaries have been on the rise and they have no issue finding jobs.

Edit - it may mean CRNA independence but I don't think it'd have the affect on us that some believe.

 

[dchz]

Where Libertarianism tends to fail spectacularly is in the economic realm. Robber barons, coal towns with company stores, pick any antitrust example you like - strict free market Libertarian solutions aren't really solutions. Capitalism run amok in completely unregulated free market is a disaster. Privatizing the public water supply to the lowest bidder is stupid.

Libertarianism would be an excellent basis for a non-interventionist realpolitik foreign policy. Respect for borders, even if some nasty things are going on inside them.

Socially, it shines. It's as pro-freedom as the libbiest of libs could hope, plus guns. Abortion's a little stickier as I conceded to vector2, but it's generally pro-choice.

I'm not saying it has all the answers to usher in a new American Utopia, but it has better answers than the Republican or Democrat parties. Most of us recognize the value of civilization. I'd guess the % of Libertarians who really want an anarchist free-for-all is about the same as the % of Republicans who want a Christian theocracy, or the % of Democrats who want completely open borders.

Fun fact, Gary Johnson's brother is a Thoracic surgeon. He was fairly conservative. During surgery, he would say "they were apart until they tied the.... " and expect the resident to say "knot" every time they were tying a knot. It was hilarious because the resident he was working with at the time was known to be pretty promiscuous and Gary Johnson's Brother wanted to troll the resident.

 

[deleted171991]

What's the English word for a collection of *****s? Floridians?

Five days after reopening, South Beach park closes as crowds defy face mask order

"In the five days that parks have been reopened in Miami Beach, park rangers have issued 8,880 verbal warnings to parkgoers not wearing facial coverings, according to Miami Beach Police."

More good stuff:

Ousted scientist says she was asked to manipulate Florida COVID-19 data

Jones said she was ordered "to manually change data" to support reopening.

arstechnica.com

Good luck trusting numbers from red states after this. The numbers are probably higher than reported. Welcome to Western China.

More good news:

Maryland reopens—and quickly sees its largest COVID-19 spike

Health officials worry reopening amid continued spread could spark second wave.

arstechnica.com

 

[deleted171991]

'How Can I Be Sick?' Woman Who Took Hydroxychloroquine For 19 Years To Treat Lupus Still Got COVID-19

A Wisconsin woman is warning people that the anti-malarial drug, hydroxychloroquine, wil not protect someone from COVID-19.

minnesota.cbslocal.com

 

[vector2]

Drain the swamp, amirite

 

[d9sccr]

More good stuff:

Ousted scientist says she was asked to manipulate Florida COVID-19 data

Jones said she was ordered "to manually change data" to support reopening.

arstechnica.com

Good luck trusting numbers from red states after this. The numbers are probably higher than reported. Welcome to Western China.

More good news:

Maryland reopens—and quickly sees its largest COVID-19 spike

Health officials worry reopening amid continued spread could spark second wave.

arstechnica.com

The whole Florida numbers thing is a he-said vs. she-said issue. None of us have any clue. Subjectively, I know the Miami hospitals haven’t been hit like NYC, but maybe that changes.

Not that it justifies anybody doing anything, but there’s evidence that several states are “fudging numbers”. It certainly doesn’t help that at surface level the news appears to be driving a narrative.

FWIW, Florida and NY have very similar population numbers. DeSantis and Co. made it a clear priority to protect nursing homes while Cuomo made it law to send COVID+ patients back. Last best guess estimates were that nursing homes accounted for ~50% of NY deaths.

 

[Ronin786]

'How Can I Be Sick?' Woman Who Took Hydroxychloroquine For 19 Years To Treat Lupus Still Got COVID-19

A Wisconsin woman is warning people that the anti-malarial drug, hydroxychloroquine, wil not protect someone from COVID-19.

minnesota.cbslocal.com

 

[MediMike]

Cuomo made it law to send COVID+ patients back. Last best guess estimates were that nursing homes accounted for ~50% of NY deaths.

We're these deaths from patients being sent back to nursing homes and infecting other residents?

 

[nimbus]

The whole Florida numbers thing is a he-said vs. she-said issue. None of us have any clue. Subjectively, I know the Miami hospitals haven’t been hit like NYC, but maybe that changes.

Not that it justifies anybody doing anything, but there’s evidence that several states are “fudging numbers”. It certainly doesn’t help that at surface level the news appears to be driving a narrative.

FWIW, Florida and NY have very similar population numbers. DeSantis and Co. made it a clear priority to protect nursing homes while Cuomo made it law to send COVID+ patients back. Last best guess estimates were that nursing homes accounted for ~50% of NY deaths.

The question is where to send the COVID+ nursing home patients if the hospitals are at capacity with more patients coming in. In hindsight, the Javits center or the USNS Comfort could have served that function.

 

[chocomorsel]

We're these deaths from patients being sent back to nursing homes and infecting other residents?

Yes. Some of them. It was in the papers.

 

[d9sccr]

The question is where to send the COVID+ nursing home patients if the hospitals are at capacity with more patients coming in. In hindsight, the Javits center or the USNS Comfort could have served that function.

Literally anywhere but back to the nursing homes. We’ve known for a while that the single biggest risk factor is age. Sending COVID+ back into a nursing home is a recipe for disaster. There’s nothing about that policy makes any sense. Since Florida doesn’t have those crazy case numbers, they’ve has had the luxury of telling hospitals they have to keep the patients until they recovered.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Literally anywhere but back to the nursing homes. We’ve known for a while that the single biggest risk factor is age. Sending COVID+ back into a nursing home is a recipe for disaster. There’s nothing about that policy makes any sense. Since Florida doesn’t have those crazy case numbers, they’ve has had the luxury of telling hospitals they have to keep the patients until they recovered.

But seriously, where else do you send them?

 

[MediMike]

Yes. Some of them. It was in the papers.

Interesting, I saw one SNF (Gurwitz?) where there was a big outbreak but who knows if that was due to them accepting the patients or not.

They should be able to implement standard isolation precautions and have access to PPE. If not then they shouldn't get paid.

 

[d9sccr]

But seriously, where else do you send them?

Hotels? They’re empty and already setup for housing.

Maybe consolidate nursing homes into COVID+ ones although that seems like a dicey proposition.

Here, we were planning on converting the fairgrounds into temporary housing. I imagine empty warehouses or other buildings that fit similar criteria exist somewhere in NYC.

Even moving them to other hospitals outside NYC is probably a better idea while lockdown measures were in place.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Hotels? They’re empty and already setup for housing.

Maybe consolidate nursing homes into COVID+ ones although that seems like a dicey proposition.

Here, we were planning on converting the fairgrounds into temporary housing. I imagine empty warehouses or other buildings that fit similar criteria exist somewhere in NYC.

Even moving them to other hospitals outside NYC is probably a better idea while lockdown measures were in place.

Could they get the equipment and staff to the empty hotels? Is there enough PPE for all the staff involved?

 

[chocomorsel]

Interesting, I saw one SNF (Gurwitz?) where there was a big outbreak but who knows if that was due to them accepting the patients or not.

They should be able to implement standard isolation precautions and have access to PPE. If not then they shouldn't get paid.

If not, then they shouldn’t take patients back.
Nursing homes are not built like hospitals and don’t have the same equipment as hospitals. It’s not that easy to isolate those patients nor get all this extra PPE that they probably never needed before.
I think people have this big misconception about nursing homes.

 

[d9sccr]

Could they get the equipment and staff to the empty hotels? Is there enough PPE for all the staff involved?

Clearly I can’t answer that. I’m not part of the NY state government. We had alternative plans to deal with this issue here and all hospitals had enough PPE in the metro area without excess federal government surplus. While covered in much less detail than the criticisms, when questioned, governors walked back claims that the federal government was shorting their state supplies.

Presumably, if you’re moving patients out of nursing homes, you can also move staff out of them to the patients.

I don’t pretend to have all the logistical answers. I just find it highly unlikely that the there existed no option to protect the nursing homes in NY and NJ.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Clearly I can’t answer that. I’m not part of the NY state government. We had alternative plans to deal with this issue here and all hospitals had enough PPE in the metro area without excess federal government surplus. While covered in much less detail than the criticisms, when questioned, governors walked back claims that the federal government was shorting their state supplies.

Presumably, if you’re moving patients out of nursing homes, you can also move staff out of them to the patients.

I don’t pretend to have all the logistical answers. I just find it highly unlikely that the there existed no option to protect the nursing homes in NY and NJ.

I think NY really was caught off guard by this and its easier to have a plan in place than try to come up with one when your hospitals are full and you're desperate to make sure you have enough beds for new sick people