"That's something that I don't think we could possibly do in the United States, I can't
imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese
health authorities is that given the fact that it's spreading throughout the provinces it's
their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it.
Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you
shut things down it doesn't have a major effect."
By mid-summer, all had reversed course and encouraged mask-wearing in the general public as
an essential tool for halting the pandemic. Fauci
essentially conceded that he lied to the public in order to prevent a shortage on masks,
whereas other health officials did an about-face on the scientific claims around masking.
Anthony Fauci 's
decimal error in estimating Covid's fatality rates (March 11)
Fauci testified before Congress in early March where he was asked to estimate the severity
of the disease in comparison to influenza. His testimony that Covid was "10 times more lethal
than the seasonal flu" stoked widespread alarm and provided a major impetus for the decision to
go into lockdown.
The problem, as Ronald Brown documented in an
epidemiology journal article , is that Fauci based his estimates on a conflation of the
Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) and Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for influenza, leading him to
exaggerate the comparative danger of Covid by an order of magnitude. Fauci's error –
which he further compounded in a late February article for the New England Journal of
Medicine – helped to convince Congress of the need for drastic lockdown measures,
while also spreading panic in the media and general public. As of this writing Fauci has not
acknowledged the magnitude of his error, nor has the journal corrected his article.
Anthony Fauci credits lockdowns for beating the virus in Europe (July 31)
In late July
Anthony Fauci offered additional testimony to Congress. His message credited Europe's heavy
lockdowns with defeating the virus, whereas he blamed the United States for reopening too early
and for insufficient aggressiveness in the initial lockdowns. As Fauci stated at the time, "If
you look at what happened in Europe, when they shut down or locked down or went to shelter in
place -- however you want to describe it -- they really did it to the tune of about 95% plus of
the country did that."
The message was clear: the United States should have followed Europe, but failed to do so
and got a summer wave of Covid instead. Fauci's entire argument however was based on a string of falsehoods
and errors.
Anthony Fauci touts New York as a model for Covid containment (June-December)
By all indicators, New York state has suffered one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in the
world. Its year-end mortality rate of almost 1,900 deaths per million residents
exceeds
every single country in the world. The state famously bungled its nursing home response
when Governor Andrew Cuomo forced these facilities to readmit Covid-positive patients as a way
to relieve strains on hospitals. The policy backfired as most hospitals never reached capacity,
but the readmissions introduced the virus into vulnerable nursing home populations resulting in
widespread fatalities (to this day
New York intentionally undercounts nursing home fatalities by excluding residents who are
moved to a hospital from its reported numbers, further obscuring the true toll of Cuomo's
order).
New York has also fared poorly during the fall "second wave" despite reimposing harsh
restrictions and regional lockdown measures. By mid-December, its death rate shot far above the
mostly-open state of Florida, which has the closest comparable population size to New York. All
things considered, New York's weathering of the pandemic is an exemplar of what not to do.
Cuomo's policies not only failed to contain the virus – they likely made it far more
deadly to vulnerable populations. Enter Anthony Fauci, who has been asked multiple times in the
press what a model Covid response policy would look like. He gave his
first answer on July 20th : "We know that, when you do it properly, you bring down those
cases. We have done it. We have done it in New York."
Fauci was operating under the assumption that New York, despite its bad run in the spring,
had successfully brought the pandemic under control through its aggressive lockdowns and slow
reopening. One might think that the fall rebound in New York, despite locking down again, would
call this conclusion into question. Not so much for Dr. Fauci, who told the
Wall Street Journal on December 8 : "New York got hit really badly in the beginning" but
they did "a really good job of keeping things down, and still, their level is low compared to
the rest of the country."
This has been a year of astonishing policy failure. We are surrounded by devastation
conceived and cheered by intellectuals and their political handmaidens...
The errors number in the thousands, so please consider the following little more than a
first draft, a mere guide to what will surely be unearthed in the coming months and years. We
trusted these people with our lives and liberties and here is what they did with that
trust.
Anthony Fauci says lockdowns are not possible in the United States (January
24):
"That's something that I don't think we could possibly do in the United States, I can't
imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese
health authorities is that given the fact that it's spreading throughout the provinces it's
their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it.
Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you
shut things down it doesn't have a major effect."
US government and WHO officials advise against mask use (February and March)
When mask sales spiked due to widespread individual adoption in the early weeks of the
pandemic, numerous US government and WHO officials took to the airwaves to describe masks as
ineffective and discourage their use.
By mid-summer, all had reversed course and encouraged mask-wearing in the general public as
an essential tool for halting the pandemic. Fauci
essentially conceded that he lied to the public in order to prevent a shortage on masks,
whereas other health officials did an about-face on the scientific claims around masking.
While mainstream epidemiology literature stressed the ambiguous nature of evidence
surrounding masks
as recently as 2019 , these scientists were suddenly certain that masks were something of a
magic bullet for Covid. It turns out that both positions are likely wrong. Masks appear to have
marginal effects at diminishing spread, especially in highly infectious settings and around the
vulnerable. But their effectiveness at combating Covid has also been grossly exaggerated, as
illustrated by the fact that mask adoption reached
near-universal levels in the US by the summer with little discernible effect on the course
of the pandemic.
Anthony Fauci 's
decimal error in estimating Covid's fatality rates (March 11)
Fauci testified before Congress in early March where he was asked to estimate the severity
of the disease in comparison to influenza. His testimony that Covid was "10 times more lethal
than the seasonal flu" stoked widespread alarm and provided a major impetus for the decision to
go into lockdown.
The problem, as Ronald Brown documented in an
epidemiology journal article , is that Fauci based his estimates on a conflation of the
Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) and Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for influenza, leading him to
exaggerate the comparative danger of Covid by an order of magnitude. Fauci's error –
which he further compounded in a late February article for the New England Journal of
Medicine – helped to convince Congress of the need for drastic lockdown measures,
while also spreading panic in the media and general public. As of this writing Fauci has not
acknowledged the magnitude of his error, nor has the journal corrected his article.
"Two weeks to flatten the curve" (March 16)
The lockdowners settled on a catchy slogan in mid-March to justify their unprecedented
shuttering of economic and social life around the globe: two weeks to flatten the curve. The
White House
Covid task force aggressively promoted this line , as did the news media and much of the
epidemiology profession. The logic behind the slogan came from the
ubiquitous graph showing (1) a steep caseload that would overwhelm our hospital system, or
(2) a mitigated alternative that would spread the caseload out over several weeks, making it
manageable.
To get to graph #2, society would need to buckle up for two weeks of shelter-in-place orders
until the capacity issue could be managed. Indeed, we were told that if we did not accept this
solution the hospital system would enter into catastrophic failure in only 10 days, as former
DHS pandemic adviser Tom Bossert claimed in a widely-circulated interview and Washington
Post column on March 11.
Two weeks came and went, then the rationale on which they were sold to the public shifted.
Hospitals were no longer on the verge of being overwhelmed – indeed most hospitals
nationwide remained well under capacity, with only a tiny number of exceptions in the worst-hit
neighborhoods of New York City.
A US Navy hospital ship sent to relieve New York departed
a month later after serving only 182 patients , and a pop-up hospital in the city's Javits
Convention Center
sat mostly empty . But the lockdowns remained in place, as did the emergency orders
justifying them. Two weeks became a month, which became two months, which became almost a year.
We were no longer "flattening the curve" – a strategy premised on saving the hospital
system from a threat than never manifested – but instead refocused on using lockdowns as
a general suppression strategy against the disease itself. In short, the epidemiology
profession sold us a bill of goods.
Neil Ferguson predicts a "best case" US scenario of 1.1 million deaths (March
20)
The name Neil Ferguson, the lead modeler and chief spokesman for Imperial College London's
pandemic response team, has become synonymous with lockdown alarmism for good reason. Ferguson
has a long track record of making grossly exaggerated predictions of
catastrophic death tolls for almost every single disease that comes along, and urging
aggressive policy responses to the same including lockdowns.
Covid was no different, and Ferguson assumed center stage when he released a highly influential model
of the virus's death forecasts for the US and UK. Ferguson appeared with UK Prime Minister
Boris Johnson on March 16 to announce the shift toward lockdowns (with no small irony, he was
coming down with Covid himself at the time and may have been the
patient zero of a super-spreader event that ran through Downing Street and infected Johnson
himself).
Across the Atlantic, Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx cited Ferguson's model as a direct
justification for locking down the US. There was a problem though: Ferguson had a bad habit of
dramatically hyping his own predictions to political leaders and the press. The Imperial
College paper modeled a broad range of scenarios including death tolls that ranged from tens of
thousands to over 2 million, but Ferguson's public statements only stressed the latter –
even though the paper itself conceded that such an extreme "worst case" scenario was highly
unrealistic. A telling example came on March 20th when
the New York Times's Nicholas Kristof contacted the Imperial College modeler to ask about
the most likely scenario for the United States. As Kristof related to his readers, "I asked
Ferguson for his best case. "About 1.1 million deaths," he said."
Researchers in Sweden use the Imperial College model to predict 95,000 deaths (April
10)
After Neil Ferguson's shocking death toll predictions for the US and UK captivated
policymaker attention and drove both governments into lockdown, researchers in other countries
began adapting the Imperial College model to their own circumstances. Usually, these models
sought to reaffirm the decisions of each country to lock down. The government of Sweden,
however, had decided to buck the trend, setting the stage for a natural experiment to test the
Imperial model's performance.
In early April a team of researchers at Uppsala University adapted the Imperial model to
Sweden's population and demographics and ran its projections. Their result? If Sweden stayed
the course and did not lock down, it could expect a catastrophic 96,000 deaths by early summer.
The authors of the study recommended going into immediate lockdown, but since Sweden lagged
behind Europe in adopting such measures they also predicted that this "best case" option would
reduce deaths to "only" 30,000.
By early June when the 96,000 prediction was supposed to come true, Sweden had recorded
4,600 deaths. Six months later, Sweden has about 8,000 deaths – a severe pandemic to be
sure, but
an order of magnitude smaller than what the modelers predicted . Facing embarrassment from
these results, Ferguson and Imperial College attempted to distance
themselves from the Swedish adaptation of their model in early May. Yet the Uppsala team's
projections closely matched Imperial's own UK and US predictions when scaled to reflect their
population sizes. In short, the Imperial model catastrophically failed one of the few clear
natural experiment tests of its predictive ability.
Scientists suggest that ocean spray spreads Covid (April 2)
In the second week of the lockdowns several newspapers in California promoted a bizarre
theory: Covid could spread by ocean spray (although the paper later walked back the
headline-grabbing claim, it is outlined
here in the Los Angeles Times ). According to this theory – initially promoted by a
group of biologists who study bacterial infection connected to storm runoff – the Covid
virus washed down storm gutters and into the ocean, where the ocean breeze would kick it up
into the air and infect people on the nearby beaches. As silly as this theory now sounds, it
helped to inform California's initially draconian enforcement of lockdowns on its public
beaches.
The same week that this modern-day miasmic drift theory appeared, police in Malibu
even arrested a lone paddleboarder for going into the ocean during the lockdown – all
while citing the possibility that the ocean breeze carried Covid with it.
Neil Ferguson predicts catastrophic death tolls in US states that reopen (May
24)
Fresh off of their exaggerated predictions from March, the Imperial College team led by Neil
Ferguson doubled down on alarmist modeling. As several US states started to reopen in late
April and May, Ferguson and his colleagues published a new model predicting another
catastrophic wave of deaths by the mid-summer. Their model focused on 5 states with both
moderate and severe outbreaks during the first wave. If they reopened, according to the
Imperial team's model, New York could face up to 3,000 deaths per day by July.
Florida could hit as high as 4,000, and California could hit 5,000 daily deaths. Keeping in
mind that these projections were for each state alone, they exceed the daily death toll peaks
for the entire country in both the fall and spring. Showing just how bad the Imperial model
was, the actual death toll by mid-July in several of the examined states even fell below the
lower confidence boundary of its projected count . While Covid remains a threat in all 5
states, the post-reopening explosion of deaths predicted by Imperial College and used to argue
for keeping the lockdowns in place never happened.
Anthony Fauci credits lockdowns for beating the virus in Europe (July 31)
In late July
Anthony Fauci offered additional testimony to Congress. His message credited Europe's heavy
lockdowns with defeating the virus, whereas he blamed the United States for reopening too early
and for insufficient aggressiveness in the initial lockdowns. As Fauci stated at the time, "If
you look at what happened in Europe, when they shut down or locked down or went to shelter in
place -- however you want to describe it -- they really did it to the tune of about 95% plus of
the country did that."
The message was clear: the United States should have followed Europe, but failed to do so
and got a summer wave of Covid instead. Fauci's entire argument however was based on a string of falsehoods
and errors.
Mobility data from the US clearly showed that most Americans were staying home during the
spring outbreak, with a recorded decline that matched Germany, the Netherlands, and several
other European countries. Contrary to Fauci's claim, the US was actually slower than most of
Europe to reopen. Furthermore, his praise of Europe collapsed in the early fall when almost all
of the lockdown countries in Europe experienced severe second waves – just like the
locked down regions of the United States.
New Zealand and Australia declare themselves Covid-free (August-present)
New Zealand and Australia have thus far weathered the pandemic with extremely low case
counts, leading many epidemiologists and journalists to conflate these results with evidence of
their successful and replicable mitigation policies. In reality, New Zealand and Australia
opted for the medieval ' Prince Prospero' strategy of
attempting to wall themselves from the world until the pandemic passes – an approach that
is highly dependent on their unique geographies.
As island nations with comparatively lower international travel than North America and
Europe, both countries shut down their borders before the as-of-yet undetected virus became
widespread and have remained closed ever since. It's a costly strategy in terms of its economic
impact and personal displacement, but it kept the virus out – mostly.
The problem with New Zealand and Australia's Prince Prospero strategy is that it's
inherently fragile. All it takes to throw it into chaos is for the virus to slip past the
border – including by accident or human error. Then heavy-handed lockdowns ensue, imposed
with maximum disruption at the spur of the moment in a frantic attempt to contain the
breach.
The most famous example happened on August 9 when New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda
Ardern declared that New Zealand had reached
100 days of being Covid-free . Then just two days later a
breach happened , sending Auckland into heavy lockdown. It's a pattern that has repeated
itself every few weeks in both countries.
In early December, we saw a similar flurry of stories from Australia announcing that the
country had beaten Covid .
Two weeks later, another breach occurred in the suburbs around Sydney,
prompting a regional lockdown . There have been embarrassing missteps as well. In November
the entire state of South Australia went into heavy lockdown over a single misreported case of
Covid that was mistakenly
attributed to a pizza purchase that did not exist. While both countries continue to
celebrate their low fatality rates, they've also incurred some of the harshest and most
disruptive restrictions in the world – all the result of premature declarations of being
"Covid-free" followed by an unexpected breach and another frantic lockdown.
"Renewed lockdowns are just a strawman" (October)
In early October a group of scientists met at AIER where they drafted and signed the
Great Barrington Declaration , a
statement calling attention to the severe social and economic harms of lockdowns and urging the
world to adopt alternative strategies for ensuring the protection of the most vulnerable.
Although the statement quickly gathered tens of thousands of co-signers from health science and
medical professionals, it also left the lockdown supporters incensed. They responded not by
scientific debate over the merits of their policies, but with a
vilification campaign .
They answered by
flooding the petition with hoax signatures and juvenile
name-calling, and by peddling wildly false conspiracy theories about AIER's funding (the primary
instigator of both tactics, ironically, was a UK blogger known for promoting
9/11 Truther conspiracies ). But the lockdowners also adopted another narrative: they began
to deny that lockdowns were even on the table.
Nobody was considering bringing back the lockdowns from the spring, they insisted. Arguing
against the politically unpopular shelter-in-place orders in the fall only served the purpose
of undermining public support for narrower and more temperate restrictions. The Great
Barrington authors, we were told, were arguing with a "strawman" from the past.
Over the next several weeks in October a dozen or more prominent epidemiologists, public
health experts, and journalists peddled the "lockdowns are a
strawman" line . The "strawman" claim saw promotion in top outlets including the New
York Times , and in an op-ed by two
principle co-signers of the John Snow Memorandum, a competing petition that lockdown
supporters drafted as a response to the Great Barrington Declaration.
The message was clear: the GBD was sounding a false alarm against policies from the past
that the lockdowners "reluctantly" supported in the spring as an emergency measure but had no
intention of reviving. By early November, the "strawman" of renewed lockdowns became a reality
in dozens of countries across the globe – often cheered on by the very same people who
used the "strawman" canard in October.
Several US states followed suit including California, which imposed severe restrictions on
private gatherings up to and including meeting your own family for Thanksgiving and Christmas.
And a few weeks after that, some of the very same epidemiologists who used the "strawman" line
in October revised their own positions after the fact. They started claiming they had supported a
second lockdown all along, and began blaming the GBD for
impeding their efforts to impose them at an earlier date. In short, the entire "lockdowns are a
strawman" narrative was false. And it now appears that more than a few of the scientists who
used it were actively lying about their own intentions in October.
Anthony Fauci touts New York as a model for Covid containment (June-December)
By all indicators, New York state has suffered one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in the
world. Its year-end mortality rate of almost 1,900 deaths per million residents
exceeds
every single country in the world. The state famously bungled its nursing home response
when Governor Andrew Cuomo forced these facilities to readmit Covid-positive patients as a way
to relieve strains on hospitals. The policy backfired as most hospitals never reached capacity,
but the readmissions introduced the virus into vulnerable nursing home populations resulting in
widespread fatalities (to this day
New York intentionally undercounts nursing home fatalities by excluding residents who are
moved to a hospital from its reported numbers, further obscuring the true toll of Cuomo's
order).
New York has also fared poorly during the fall "second wave" despite reimposing harsh
restrictions and regional lockdown measures. By mid-December, its death rate shot far above the
mostly-open state of Florida, which has the closest comparable population size to New York. All
things considered, New York's weathering of the pandemic is an exemplar of what not to do.
Cuomo's policies not only failed to contain the virus – they likely made it far more
deadly to vulnerable populations. Enter Anthony Fauci, who has been asked multiple times in the
press what a model Covid response policy would look like. He gave his
first answer on July 20th : "We know that, when you do it properly, you bring down those
cases. We have done it. We have done it in New York."
Fauci was operating under the assumption that New York, despite its bad run in the spring,
had successfully brought the pandemic under control through its aggressive lockdowns and slow
reopening. One might think that the fall rebound in New York, despite locking down again, would
call this conclusion into question. Not so much for Dr. Fauci, who told the
Wall Street Journal on December 8 : "New York got hit really badly in the beginning" but
they did "a really good job of keeping things down, and still, their level is low compared to
the rest of the country."
Dr. Anthony Fauci,
the epidemiologist revered almost religiously as a hero by mainstream media outlets and
Democrat politicians, has admitted that he lied to Americans to manipulate their acceptance of
a new Covid-19 vaccine.
The intentional deception involved estimates for what percentage of the population will need
to be immunized to achieve herd immunity against Covid-19 and enable a return to normalcy.
Earlier this year, Fauci said 60-70 percent – a typical range for such a virus –
but he moved the goalposts to 70-75 percent in television interviews about a month ago. Last
week, he
told CNBC that the magic number would be around "75, 80, 85 percent."
When pressed on the moving target in a New York Times interview
, Fauci said he purposely revised his estimates gradually. The newspaper, which posted the
article on Thursday, said Fauci changed his answers partly based on "science" and partly on his
hunch "that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks."
"When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd
immunity would take 70 to 75 percent," Fauci said.
Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, 'I can nudge
this up a bit,' so I went to 80, 85.
Fauci added that he doesn't know the real number but believes the range is 70-90 percent. He
said it may take nearly 90 percent, but he won't give that number because Americans might be
discouraged, knowing that voluntary acceptance won't be high enough to reach that goal.
... ... ...
But the doctor's changing story on herd immunity is only the latest in a series of Covid-19
flip-flops, including 180-degree shifts on such core issues as whether members of the general
public should wear masks and whether children should be sent back to school.
Just as his tone on herd immunity changed, his view on prospects for a return to normalcy
shifted dramatically. A few days before the November 3 presidential election, he echoed Biden's
gloomy Covid-19 outlook and implied that the Democrat challenger would deal with the crisis
more seriously than President Donald Trump. After the election, he turned far more
optimistic.
... ... ...
"This is not the first time that Fauci has admitted to deceiving the public for
utilitarian purposes in regard to coronavirus," journalist Ari Hoffman tweeted . Another
observer agreed, pointing out Fauci's flip-flop on masks. "The fact that people still listen to
these experts is the most worrying thing," he said.
Setting expectations for getting economic activity back to normal is virtually impossible
without realistic projections for the vaccination rate that would provide herd immunity. Dr.
Moncef Slaoui, chief scientific adviser for the Trump administration's vaccine rollout,
said in late November
that "true herd immunity" would take place without about 70 percent of Americans being
inoculated, which might be achieved by sometime in May 2021.
Fauci's admitted Covid-19 deception is symptomatic of how government officials
"infantilize the American people," one commenter said . "We're going to
be in trouble when we don't have Trump to blame everything on and people have to find a way to
cope."
Marek Weglinski 22 hours ago 24 Dec, 2020 09:09 PM
Dr. FRAUDCI is the face of chaotic, contradictory and completely bungled approach to this
pandemic, in the country which infamously claims the top spot of the number of the dead and
infected. Not any hero (what did he contribute beside the lies and misinformation?), and
definitely nothing to celebrate. His leadership and that of most other decision makers',
thoroughly failed the American people, during this challenging time. The real heroes are the
UNKNOWN, -those who put their lives on line to save others (mostly medical personnel).
It's me 23 hours ago 24 Dec, 2020 08:32 PM
And the next day, Dr Fraudci did a video: Had a good nights sleep, but the arm was a bit sore
(grabbing his RIGHT arm) but it's not that bad. Really, you can't remember which arm you got
Jabbed after 1 day. Normally you can't move the arm that gets jabbed with a needle without a
lot of pain.
ClairvoyantHW It's me 4 hours ago 25 Dec, 2020 03:39 PM
I don't unterstand why they can't use a real placebo in the studies when Fauci just recieved
one..
Fauci is presented as trustworthy, intelligent and a hero, all because of his status as part of the Authority: The WHO, Bill Gates,
Economic Forum & Fauci
Healthy Jean
751 subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
If you want to find out more about the
#casedemic
https://healthyjean.com/corona/
.
Sorry, but I do not have more context about this video. I will tell you that Kary hated Fauci because Fauci is one of the
main people behind the AIDS scam. Read here straight from Kary's website
https://www.karymullis.com/pdf/On_AID...
On AIDS Regarding AIDS I have published a hypothesis wherein the Retroviridae in general, rather than a particular species,
is the problem. This was published in Genetica 95:195- 197, 1995. It offers a mechanism for how the disease develops, and
importantly makes predictions that can be experimentally confirmed or falsified easily in rodents. This hypothesis may or
may not be true but it illustrates the nature of a useful scientific hypothesis. This is in contrast to the current AIDS
establishment's "It's the virus, stupid!" No experiments were ever done or even suggested to test the HIV hypothesis. The
fact that antiretroviral therapies may prolong the lives of some people infected with retroviruses says nothing more than
the fact, that. in other cases they are not at all useful. Something is going on here that we don't understand. Scientists
have to keep that in mind. If you want to see another great video on this topic of Kary then go
https://youtu.be/zYYmpT2y7Io
.
It talks about how the PCR is not really a test. He clearly states the PCR is not being misused. What Fauci and the others
are doing is amplifying the tests beyond what should be done. The issue is they use these results as is they are meaningful
is the problem. He also states that the measurement is not exact. He is clearly talking about how the results are being
used to say someone has AIDS when they clearly do not. Again, the interpretations are the issue. The PCR not meant to
diagnose, period.
Here is a link to a larger excerpt of this interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IifgAvXU3ts
However, this isn't the entire interview. I will try to find the entire interview.... everyone start searching. In any
case, I think THIS part of it might not be in the link I just posted (I haven't checked yet). Because a few months ago I
watched this video and I don't remember him going after Fauci this hard. But I will rewatch it to see. We need to find the
original video interview as a whole, that would be best.
Are not so called asymptomatic cases mostly a side effect of excessive amplifications in PcR
tests? So they are healthy people who were "false positives" in PcR test. If this is true they
present no danger.
Thanks in part to a massive investment in research by the British government, a lot of
interesting data has come out of the UK, including a study which supposedly found evidence that
immunity to
COVID 'degrades' in the months after infection . Now, other studies have come to
seemingly contradictory conclusions . It's just another reminder how fraught and
complicated the process of study and research can be during an unprecedented pandemic.
It should also be a reminder, particularly as all the world's top COVID-vaccine
manufacturers reassure the public that their vaccines will work against the more infectious
mutated strains allegedly discovered in the UK and South Africa, among other places, that the
leading scientific and public health authorities aren't always 100% certain when it comes to -
as they like to call it - "the science".
Some members of the public might remember all the way back in February and January when
public officials first speculated that mass mask-wearing might not be that helpful unless
individuals were actually sick. They famously back-tracked on that, and - for that, and other
reasons - decided that we should all wear masks, and that lockdowns were more or less the best
solution to the problem, even as millions of Americans continued to flout the new "rules"
daily.
But for those who don't, this paper makes one thing clear: For all the talk in the press
about asymptomatic people being infectious, which included a heavy-handed rebuke of a WHO
scientist who nonchalantly said a few months back that asymptomatic people don't spread the
virus as effectively, there haven't been many large-sample-size longer-term studies that study
how "asymptomatic" patients actually spread the virus vs. how "symptomatic" patients do, since
most public health agencies don't even collect data on whether people who test positive are
asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or symptomatic (a specification which, as most people probably
know by now, can vary widely).
Since the pandemic has only been ongoing for less than a year now, researchers have instead
tried conducting "meta studies" - that is, comparing data collected in dozens of studies
examining some aspect of the virus's functionality. In the paper noted above which examined 54
separate studies with nearly 78K total participants, the authors claim that "The lack of
substantial transmission from observed asymptomatic index cases is notable...These findings are
consistent with other household studies reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited
role in household transmission."
This is of course not the first time we have heard this. Aside from the WHO scientist
example cited above, two British scientists recently published an editorial in the BMJ
imploring scientists to rethink how the virus spreads "asymptomatically".
That's not to say that asymptomatic people can't spread the virus, it's just to say that
maybe there is a significant difference in risk levels in terms of exposure . Of course, public
health officials at this point seem to be afraid to acknowledge anything that questions the
notion that everybody is potentially a threat. To be clear, the WHO's current guidance on the
issue is that "while someone who never develops symptoms can also pass the virus to others, it
is still not clear to what extent this occurs, and more research is needed in this area" - but
at this point, they have changed their guidance and flip-flopped so many times, who even knows,
understands or cares what they say?
Anyway, it's just some more food for thought next time somebody tries to lecture you about
"the science".
adr 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
Asymptomatic people can not spread a viral infection.
This was considered fact until 2020.
valjoux7750 1 hour ago
Friend of mine passed away from non covid illness and the hospital offered to pay all his
medical bills if allowed to record as covid. His wife accepted.
Robespierre2020 23 minutes ago
They will never, ever admit that asymptomatic actually means false positive. They must
keep the case count up at all costs to keep stoking the fear.
Itchy and Scratchy 1 hour ago
The Big Lie is mutating quickly! Hide the women & children!
Newstarmistagain 1 hour ago
Anybody else get the feeling that this coronavirus nonsense is really nothing more than a
huge Pavlovian experiment being conducted on the entire population? You do realize that
Pavlov's dogs ended up catatonic, and in a state of perpetual fear, eh goiyim cattle?
PanGlossius 1 hour ago
Right on. This smells like the brute simplicity of Skinner or Pavlov programming. Crude,
careless, short time horizon. Like the practitioners are just running out the clock.
namrider 1 hour ago remove link
Conflicting reports and information because it = PSYOP
MrBoompi 33 minutes ago
What is a "covid patient"? Someone who tested positive? The pcr test doesn't detect live
viruses. Why would someone who is not sick, aka asymptomatic, be considered a patient?
According to analysis by data expert Justin Hart, who has been following COVID-19 data
for months , demonstrated in a Sunday Twitter thread that states with mask mandates had a
greater number of COVID cases per 100,000 people than states without mandates .
And while there were some objections to Hart's analysis - such as whether there might be
bias towards getting tested for mask-wearers, or regional differences in population density,
many of the replies to Hart's thread support his findings:
Maybe the CDC, WHO, Dr. Fauci and the Surgeon General were right in February when they said
masks don't work? On the other hand, they're so useful for other things...
It's an intuitive hypothesis Since the mask doesn't kill virus, it just collects them
reversing your natural defenses of expelling virus with large droplets that hit earth. The
mask accelerates evaporation through capillary action making smaller droplets 2 allow deep
inhalation.
In effect, the masks are a viral trampoline making the virus exponentially more infective and
reaching deeper into more thrombotic tissue. Some evidence Kanas jumped on this trampoline in
the summer.
Zacharias Fögen @ZachariasFoegen · Dec 14 You can translate the german intro with
google if you want. The study is written in English. https:// reitschuster.de/post/studie-er
hoehen-die-masken-die-sterblichkeit/
@Kevin_McKernan At best,
we can say for aerosolized virus that mask does nothing. At worst, worse after mask
saturation. For non-aerosolized virus, it would actually do some good. On the other hand,
airborne transmission of this type is minimal. Handwashing, good hygiene take care of the
rest.
@Kevin_McKernan
Interesting paper. It's somewhat difficult to disambiguate increased CFR from the Foegen
effect or another confounding variable (e.g., poor aseptic technique). The mathematical
comparison does a good job normalizing the two groups. Plotting as a function of time may be
of use.
Much heralded COVID-19 model-student South Korea saw
new infections with the virus rise again to more than 1,000 cases per day, dramatically higher
than during the first wave in February and March.
Here's
CNN : "In Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, South Korea, Japan and other Asian nations, mask
wearing is uncontroversial, near universal, and has been proven effective ..."
Here's Forbes : " What South Korea teaches us is that ... mass production and distribution
of face masks and the promotion of their use, are winning strategies in this battle. "
Here's
NYTimes : "The country showed that it is possible to contain the coronavirus without
shutting down the economy... Television broadcasts, subway station announcements and smartphone
alerts provide endless reminders to wear face masks ..."
The head of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has hailed South
Korea as demonstrating that containing the virus, while difficult, "can be done." He urged
countries to "apply the lessons learned in Korea and elsewhere."
As Statista's Willem
Roper notes , the country has been praised extensively for reducing cases of COVID-19
, but a continuously climbing case count shows how the threat of new outbreaks looms even after
flattening the curve (twice before).
After a second outbreak in August and September was squashed, South Korea had already
tightened restrictions again.
The highest number of daily new cases in the initial wave was recorded at 813 on Feb 29.
Still, these cases being recorded now are only a sliver of those detected daily in the U.S.
and Europe. There, daily new case counts of COVID-19 are still in the tens of thousands...
so keep wearing your
masks!!!
🔥 🔥 🔥!!!!
This is insane! Every country that introduced mandatory masks had their case numbers
explode after!! Mask don't work!
-- The Epigenetic Whisperer
👉The Bodhisattva Bastard (@epigwhisp) December 16,
2020
ebworthen 14 hours ago (Edited)
Because masks don't do a beaver dam thing.
Never have, never will. Especially not "surgical" masks, or cloth rags.
Symbolic only. Symbolic for oppression of the individual and the freedom of choice.
skizex 14 hours ago
and makes beaver eatin difficult if not downright unpleasant.
afronaut 13 hours ago
Thats submissive and unhygienic
Billy the Poet 13 hours ago (Edited)
Has it gotten cold enough yet for masks to start freezing to the faces of folks out in the
wind waiting for a bus?
xious 11 hours ago
In the summer, I almost drowned in one. Then I quit my job the next day. Haven't worn a
mask from that day, and never will again.
hawkinsse6543 7 hours ago (Edited)
Point three percent according to a Danish Study
.3% effective
I heard zinc impregnated masks work so it will increase effectiveness to what? I'm Too lazy
to do the math
Sunshine, D3, Tonic Water, C, wash hands (only thing proposed I agree with) moderate
preventives not a cure. But the virus goes where it goes and lets promote stopping smoke with
a chicken wire fence.
artless 2 hours ago
99.8% survival rate or as we say in there real world...
a cold virus. A flu.
all BS from day one.
exactly correct about sunshine, D3 ( also known as sunshine) and if really concerned a
zinc supplement as prophylaxis along with all the Vit C you want. Same as every winter as all
my 51 years. Currently on a 36-38 years streak of NEVER having a flu and I have worked in
every possible situation in which I should have gotten sick. Never have. never will.
Arising 2.0 13 hours ago
Masks are the elites pointing and saying 'look there' with the their right hand while
stealing wealth, your freedoms and your capacity to fight back with their left hand.
dude675 13 hours ago
Wag the dog
metaforge 10 hours ago
Choke the Chinkkkkk
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
We're all prisoners of China, forced into solitary confinement with matching outfits.
trailer park boys 13 hours ago
If masks worked, that box of masks you bought at the drug store or online would say so.
They don't. In fact, just the opposite, disclaiming any protection against any virus,
including covid.
JuliaS 13 hours ago (Edited)
Masks and lockdowns worked. They weakened immunity to the point where a common cold now
puts a person in a coma.
Slaytheist 13 hours ago
Fvcking NPC yelling at people to put a scrap of cotton on their face to contain a virus,
because the science is settled. Maybe eugenics isn't a 100% bad thing.
Free lead for NPCs! That's a government program I could get behind.
freedommusic 10 hours ago
Masks can't stop a psyop.
They can only measure it's effectiveness.
Fireman 8 hours ago
Best comment today!
chemist46 7 hours ago
How can they possibly work?
They are NOT designed to stop particles as small as a virus.
Surgical masks were not designed as filters and were not intended to be used as filters.
Surgical masks were designed to be used by surgeons standing face down over an operating
table holding a patient with an open wound. The surgeon wearing the mask would be able to
talk to others in the room without discharging spittle droplets into the patient's wound.
Spittle droplets are large and can cause infection.
I witnessed a test of surgical masks. Small plaster particles were generated in a room.
They were visible as a white dust in the air. A man was properly fitted with a surgical mask
and spent a short time in the room. When he came out the mask was removed. A camera was
focused on the man's face. The entire area that had been covered by the mask was coated by
the white dust. The camera showed that his nostrils and his mouth had been penetrated by the
white dust. The dust particles were measured and found to be around 40 micrometers in
diameter. The particles that penetrated the mask were the same diameter.
Covid-19 virus molecules are about 0.1 micrometers in diameter. That is 400 times smaller
than the plaster particles that penetrated the mask.
Surgical masks will not prevent the wearer from inhaling or exhaling viruses or bacteria.
They provide absolutely no protection for either the wearer or anyone nearby. They create a
very dangerous false sense of security for everyone. They also force the wearer to rebreath
carbon dioxide. Which will over time reduce the wearers blood oxygen level. That can become
very dangerous especially for older people.
This farce is being promoted by sleazy politicians who believe that if they can convince
people that they are protecting them or creating a safe environment for them by pushing this
mask farce those people will re-elect them.
All politicians pushing this dangerous mask farce should be voted out of office as soon as
possible.
Grand Solar Minimum 4 hours ago
Minor correction.
All politicians pushing this dangerous mask farce should be jailed soon as possible.
That's better.
Nature_Boy_Wooooo 13 hours ago
They rushed mask science out faster than the vaccine.
Worse...they debunked actual science done on N95 masks 4 years ago that said masks don't
work..... without a single scientific experiment.
They should never have lowered the bar for education.
@Amen 13 hours ago
It's not the masks. USA and most western countries forced their citizens to wear them,
most of them do, without visible results. Could it be that drinking green tea and taking zinc
really helps? (ZH wrote about it months ago). Everyone can get the virus, mask or no mask,
but the difference in consequences is quite startling.
In Deaths per million population, the leader is Belgium, with 1,582 / million, USA is in
12th place, with 958 per million.
Boosting one's immune system from cheap and easy-accessible sources would not make the
elite and big corporations rich, nor make the would be dictators in governments and
regulatory agencies so powerful, second to God.
So, we keep dying, destroying our economy, and voting for the mass murderers again and
again.
Happy 2021!
FightClubPanties 13 hours ago
Whadda bout ChyNa?
@Amen 12 hours ago (Edited)
China has 3 deaths per million, you make the judgement about the accuracy of their
reporting. Nevertheless, they drink mostly green tea and eat stuff rich in zinc. And they
have undestricted partying for months now, even in Wuhan.
and, so far, it works for me here in Canada. Costco supplies green tea (from Japan) and
Walmart zinc tablets, about 6 bucks for three months worth of prevention. And I don't plan to
take the vaccine, even if its free here.
Table 6. I-MASK+ Prophylaxis & Early Outpatient Treatment Protocol for COVID-19
PROPHYLAXIS PROTOCOL MEDICATION
lvermectin RECOMMENDED DOSING
Vitamin D3 Vitamin C Quercetin Zinc Melatonin
Works!
Snaffew16 10 hours ago
It's quite obvious that people should be exposing themselves to this predominantly non
lethal virus as much as possible. Herd immunity has likely already been achieved here in the
US and globally, but there is so much money to be made on these untested, genome altering
vaccines that they will not stop the propaganda. The incredible surge in power and control
over the populations has also enabled them to up their game in regards to ripping every
freedom imaginable from the populace and stepping the bullsh*it up to hyperdrive---
If you have already tested positive, then there is absolutely zero reason to get a
vaccine. if you had just recovered from the flu, do you run out and get a flu vaccine?
Nope...there is no reason to.
KirkPatrickN 7 hours ago
Even if masks worked for more than the first few minutes, that would mean we'd become
dependent on them.
afronaut 13 hours ago
Fvk I've had enough of this ****.
Cobra Commander 12 hours ago
"This tweet is from a suspended account. "
Thanks for nothing, Twitter. I just wanted to see the graph comparing mask wear with
positive cases.
Oh, is that too dangerous for me to see?
Cobra!
metaforge 10 hours ago
Wow when even Cobra Commander calls someone evil? They MUST be evil.
Cobra!
louie1 PREMIUM 12 hours ago
If you are at risk then take precautions. Everyone else- get on with life and tell the
government to go **** themselves.
Corn Popp 12 hours ago (Edited)
The corporations wont do that. and people have to work. There are not enough jobs outside
those businesses. and those businesses are forcing employees to wear face diapers or get
fired. It has to be a top down movement against the progenitors and they must be held
accountable, otherwise none of the states and business will follow thru to restore individual
rights
metaforge 10 hours ago
Only good comment I've seen from a premium tagged Kappo yet.
Tigbits 13 hours ago
Amazing that after nine months they still want to keep beating the mask drum.
Exhausting.
Corn Popp 13 hours ago (Edited)
I'm sure you are aware by now that all it ever was is a clear sign of your submission to
them. As well as a training tool to get you to accept whatever they push on
you...ie..mandatory vaxxing for sterilization, control and culling.....the next step. Well,
and to have a good laugh and masturbate to misery and suffering. It's what gets them off
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
Read the ZH article on the nurse collapsing and sort by Worst comments.
These people pushing vaccines will literally giggle as you drop dead.
Alan Cruiser 11 hours ago
The conclusion is wrong, if cases are still climbing so much, then apparently the masks
don't work because everybody is already wearing them. I am getting so tired of the
nonsense.
Taffer 12 hours ago
Liberal God Fauci in April: "Masks don't work! Only healthcare workers need to wear them
or even should be wearing them."
Liberal Keebler elf Fauci in May: "Masks work! Everyone should be wearing a mask!"
Seriously, you can't make lies on this level up. The man says this on national tv, calls
himself an expert, and the useful idiots lap it up like CNN propaganda.
halcyon 11 hours ago
Fauci co-authored a paper in 2008 that showed that napkin wearing increased prevalence of
bacterial pneumonia.
Maybe he just forgot about it...
Patmos 13 hours ago
Psychological warfare techniques from The Cold War to The War on Terror, compared to COVID
restrictions:
But ignore that, because this is all about safety. [/sarcasm]
FightClubPanties 13 hours ago
go look at the compliance rates for Covid-Burqas. The US is among the very highest
compliance.
Oh-Globits 14 hours ago
Wear a face diaper...it's patriotic!
afronaut 13 hours ago
It looks like underwear to me. I'd be too embarrassed to put one on in public. Its dirty
and looks retarded
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago (Edited)
I've never worn one. My (no) mask is to protect YOU (from tyranny).
Mrgior31513 14 hours ago
Masks are simply worse for a blatantly obvious reason: they provide false confidence and
therefor breed irresponsible behavior from the perceived sense of safety.
FightClubPanties 14 hours ago
Reusing any mask defeats the claimed purpose. And everybody is wearing filthy pieces of
cloth; stuffing in their purses, pants, fingering them on and off.
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
Some people hang them on their rear view mirror and I saw one with several shades of
lipstick on the inside.
I'd like to see a bacterial analysis of these masks people are wearing, and see them under
a black light.
"We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing
laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source
control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility ( Figure 2 ).
However, as with hand hygiene, face masks might be able to reduce the transmission of other
infections and therefore have value in an influenza pandemic when healthcare resources are
stretched."
It was known from the beginning. Are you tired of the lies and tyrrany yet? Stand up like
men and stop it.
Pater-Mater 7 hours ago
A 2008 study in Turkey showed a significant reduction in oxygen intake or rather carbon
monoxide respiration. This directly lowers the immune system making infection much more
likely. Do circumvent this oxygen is pumped into operating rooms..
Secondly, in medical practice the mask is changed every twenty minutes and not touched at
all. This is now followed.
Lastly, the virus has mutated to a benign form, it is highly likely that everyone has it,
thusly the likelihood of any further great event or health crisis is next to none. Aannd,
RLF-100 trial will be over soon, it's already proven effective, it's cheap, there are no long
term consequences, it will cure nearly all intensive care situations.. the propaganda is
obvious.
Cincinnatuus 9 hours ago
The number of cases of the China Flu is inversely proportional with the number of hours of
sunlight.
Supplement your Vitamin D (5,000 IU), and when you get it, you won't even know you had
it!
KirkPatrickN 7 hours ago
Exactly. Cold symptoms ARE Vitamin D deficiency. Covid victims have proven to be
deficient. Staying inside and wearing masks outside only hurt matters (you shameless,
shivering RETARDS).
What's the best natural source of, or supplement for Vitamin D?
Obake158 11 hours ago
So I can see the plan from the Globohomos already. They are going to lower the PCR test
thresholds from 45 to 20 and claim that the vaccine has substantially lessened the severity
and prevalence of Democrat Meme Flu. The cat is out of the bag now regarding the fake testing
regimen and people are waking up to the PCR testing amplification thresholds being set way
too high thus a massive wave of false positives. My state tests at 45 cycles. Anything over
around 20 renders the test useless with so much background noise as to almost ensure everyone
testing will be positive for viral RNA. So here is the next leg of their plan, mass inoculate
the fearful NPCs and then claim success while quietly manipulating the testing regimen.
metaforge 10 hours ago
My state's "cases" were already dropping fast from the "winter peak" even before the BS
vaccine. So that won't fly here, even if they try it.
Dash8 6 hours ago
Masks are for virtue signalling libtards.
The end.
KirkPatrickN 4 hours ago (Edited)
Masks never would have become a thing had we not let all the women become obese parasites.
For years the grocery store has been depressing as countless women of every race scramble to
buy free things with their EBT cards while hating on wh ite men. These creatures willingly
covered their faces because they are embarrassed to be seen.
AVmaster 13 hours ago
"The head of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has hailed South
Korea as demonstrating that containing the virus, while difficult, "can be done.""
Umm... we are way past the phase of containment...
... covid 19 is everywhere in the world...
wtf are you really talking about you idiots...
Fizzy Head 14 hours ago
So what happens when the ICU nurses become the patients? Well now we have a problem...
You could've had a functioning economy and a disease. You chose only the disease. Now the
healthy won't be able to help the sick, and will see how long the saved grandma will last
after her grandkids commit suicide due to depression, or overdose on drugs.
Thanks for saving the world.
KirkPatrickN 7 hours ago
It's the equivalent of a pilot of a loaded jumbo jet announcing "This is the pilot
speaking. Due to my fear of catching sniffles I've decided it's just too dangerous to land.
Ever."
Lore 12 hours ago
"Case" doesn't mean beans, because the polymerase chain reaction was never intended for
use as a "test." You might as well use a black box electronic device to tally votes in a
national election. Oh, wait...
Show us the data for deaths sans co-morbidities and fudge, and then we'll talk. In the
meantime, it's just another layer of BS.
asteroids 13 hours ago
One way or another, you WILL get the virus. Resistance is futile. Wake me up when "masks"
are as effective as birth control.
metaforge 10 hours ago
Not me bitch. I'm superdosing C, D, Zinc, Echinnacea, etc. That fvcking virus ain't
jumping this wall!
pods 7 hours ago
Careful on zinc. Too much is not good.
Magnum 13 hours ago
Twitter suspended The Epigenetic Whisperer now that he's pointed this out.
FightClubPanties 14 hours ago
I have no idea if their reporting isn't fraudulent, any more than the Japanese or
chinchongs.
writeround 7 hours ago
The increase d number of of cases is irrelevant unless presented as a percentage of the
number of tests. More tests/more cases?
Usuage of masks is usless if missused. Daily use of the same mask/turning mask inside
out/close proximity in enclosed places/not washing or sanitsing hands are all transmission
methods.
Pater-Mater 7 hours ago
So is reduced oxygen intake, increased carbon monoxide intake and a reduced immune system.
Why wouldnt infections increase?
kellys_eye 8 hours ago
... because wearing a mask that doesn't work to prevent an illness that doesn't exist (or
at worst has a 99.8% recovery rate i. e. better than the flu/influenza) is all our
'exceptional leadership' can come up with?
The problem isn't the virus - the problem is and always has been the MEDIA.
NIRP-BTFD 8 hours ago
No the problem are corrupt politicians that work for the 0.1% instead of the people. The
media of course is owned by the 0.1% so they are an issue as well.
Fireman 9 hours ago
Oxygen Deprivation Therapy ....all that can save US now.
Remember oh tax chattel, as Onkel Adolf said "Hypoxia und Hypercapnia macht frei."
Sieg Heil.......same as it ever was.
Onward to your doom, rag mouths coz the satanists need y'all dead.
hypoxia
[hi-pok´se-ah]
diminished availability of oxygen to the body tissues; its
causes are many and varied and includes a deficiency of oxygen in the atmosphere, as in
altitude sickness ;
pulmonary disorders that interfere with adequate ventilation of the lungs; anemia or
circulatory deficiencies, leading to inadequate transport and delivery of oxygen to the
tissues; and finally, edema or other abnormal conditions of the tissues themselves that
impair the exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide between capillaries and tissues. adj., adj
hypox´ic.
1. An abnormally high concentration of carbon dioxide in the blood, usually caused by
acute respiratory failure from conditions such as asthma and obstructive pulmonary disease.
It can lead to seizures and death if acute and untreated.
2. Carbon dioxide poisoning due to abnormally high concentrations of carbon dioxide in an
organism's environment.
Maybe it has something to do with even mask manufacturers have a disclaimer on their
surgical/cloth masks stating "does not protect against viruses".
Ledlak 8 hours ago
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." -
Voltaire
Fireman 8 hours ago (Edited)
Despite the herd of self-harming, virtue-signalling masked mutton that surrounds you there
are indeed millions of aware and decent people around the planet that get it. You are not
alone, we are 5%, as much of the population as the ruling psychopaths and sociopaths i.e. the
disgusting, Satanic pedovores like Schwab, Gates, STASI "Erika" Merkill, Bozo the clown,
banksters, presstitutes and almost all political mutts the sheeple call their "leaders" and
the rest of the evil Rothschild enablers.
The docile herd can be turned like a weathervane and will be turned again...that is the
beauty of the balance built into nature. Evolution has created a mass of ignorant, pliant
human livestock with a purpose. 10% of the naked apes can more or less reason and act upon
that reasoning for good or bad...the rest will be turned like sheep and always have been.
Look at the history of pedovores running the Catholic Church and yet the peasants flock to
these evil bastards on a Sunday to "commune" with God....god help us. Ask yourself the
question; would you prefer to live in a world with 90 wolves and ten sheep, or a world with
90 sheep and 10 wolves? As for the evil Klaus "Schwab", the geriatric bastard progeny of NAZI
Germany... his NAZI spawners also hallucinated about their wondervoll 1000 Year Reich
dystopia and if I recall...they and their anglozionazi backers may have slaughtered millions,
but in the end we are still pissing on their NAZI graves.
Ultimately what I think you're saying is that masks are not the be all and end all to
ending the covid pandemic.
And with that I wholeheartedly agree.
But where we differ is on the conclusions from this counter-intuitive fact.
Ultimately what masks do is they reduce the transmission of the virus. I say this from the
following observation...
It makes sense logically that masks prevents a lot of transmissions of the covid virus
because at the end of the day only sick people can infect others. It has been shown on the
Japanese broadcaster NHK that the particles thrown out by a sick person coughing when masked
up vs. non-masked is exponentially less. Infra-red cameras show that masks block a lot of
particles and thus even if a person is sick, their likelihood of infecting others through
spraying particles everywhere around them, is greatly reduced.
And it makes logical sense without overthinking it (a good example of Occam's razor) - if
you have some fabric that blocks your coughs, isn't it logical to presume that pretty much
all the spit and phlegm that usually accompanis a cough would be blocked by that same fabric?
(I mean why else do tissues get wet when u sneeze or cough in them?)
So the effectiveness of masks is in that they prevent a lot of dangerous situations from
turning into a transmission event. Its a preventative measure, people! That's the fundamental
thing you need to understand!!!!!
Is it gonna prevent every ******* roll of dice from turning into a transmission event? Of
course not.
There'll be instances where due to present circumstances a potential infection turns into
an actual infection. That is not something we can avoid. Something will always get through
the gates - how many times has a seemingly impregnable defence been breached throughout
history? I can name the Maginot Line and the Multiple Walls of Constantinople.
The point we all have to understand is that there is no silver bullet to this piece of
**** virus. We can't keep arguing about the fundamental fact that masks help prevent
transmissions. It prevents but does not eliminate - elimination is impossible. This ******
will eventually, always get through the most carefully laid traps.
We just need to learn that effective prevention means that half the war has already been
won.
on't tell me you actually think
deadcat2 8 hours ago
A truly stupid comment. What you should be asking is, When is a case, positive test or an
infection an actual illness. Who is supervising the labs which do the tests? Who decides on
what the size of the 'amplification should be? Karry Mullis, the world famous scientists and
Nobel prize winner who actually invented and designed the PCR test said, amplifications above
30 are useless. Currently, all countries are amplifying above 45 and some even as far as 50.
Lets put it this way: if there were no tests there would be no virus numbers. The only
numbers that would matter would be hospital admissions. Did you know, that here in the UK a
hospital admission is counted even if the patient is discharged the same day !!
The evidence shows that hospital admissions are the same this year (for the UK and the US
at least) as they have been on average for the last ten years.
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago (Edited)
Science is not based on your personal observation of what your female brain considers
logical.
It's about a double blind, placebo controlled study to PROVE something.
There is no silver bullet for these piece of **** people pushing lockdowns, masks and
vaccines over sniffles based on their innermost feelings.
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
Look at the side view of people in masks. There is a direct path to their mouth. Their
breath is now pushed sideways (see physics) and probably goes even further (just like
whistling is louder than breathing).
Galieo 7 hours ago
+5
Masks help a lot, distance is even better.
Pater-Mater 7 hours ago
You are looking at a single element justifying everything. If people can't be helped to
not sneeze on someone it's a bigger issue... Then why aren't only sick people wearing them?
What about oxygen deprivations? Increase risk and cases of bacterial infection?(from masks)
carcinogens of surgical masks??
Masks are not a solution, there is no science to back this, only the opposite.
MCDirtMigger 6 hours ago
From the CDC website:
In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the
effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in
the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis,
we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (RR
0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I2 = 30%, p = 0.25)
If you live somewhere cold, put your mask on, go outside and exhale a big breath of air,
come back and tell us what you see. Don't be an idiot.
pictur3plane 13 hours ago
The facts haven't changed: unless you are wearing a properly fitted N95 respirator your
mask is doing little to protect you or other people. While it is better than no mask as there
is the chance it will somewhat reduce to viral inoculum and possibly the severity of
infection, it gives people a false sense of security. The media/celebrity mantra of "JUST
WEAR THE MASK" gives the impression that is all you have to do to protect yourself. Also,
most people are so incredibly stupid. Have you seen people try and drive a car correctly? And
you think these people are well versed in how invisible disease is spread? I can't tell you
how many times I see people take their mask off unless someone comes in the office. They
don't get it. They are morons. It is kind of a miracle only 300,000 people a day are getting
infected in this country.
adr 13 hours ago
N95 respirators are not designed for and can not filter virus. Anyone saying so is lying.
The literature packed with every real N95 mask even says in the warning that they are
designed to filter specific particles and will not protect from biological agents.
The manufacturers aren't going to open themselves to billions in liability lawsuits for
making a claim that can not be backed up with evidence and an actual standard.
No mask outside a full on respirator with disposable filters will help you. If you are
infected, they are worthless because they only filter incoming air, not exhaled. So you will
be contaminating anything you breath on.
Cloth masks will not reduce the severity of an infection, they will make it worse. You
will increase the load of any respiratory pathogen as you breath it into the cloth and
breathe it back in.
Studies done on surgical masks found that they had no effect on preventing bacterial
infections of surgical wounds. The only purpose of a surgical mask is to prevent expelled
fluids from open body cavities from entering a surgeon's nose and mouth.
Sorry to break the bad news.
pictur3plane 12 hours ago
There is no such thing as free floating virus particles. They are attached to respiratory
droplets which are large enough to be filtered by N95 masks.
The idea that you would somehow increase your viral load by wearing a mask and
re-breathing particles back into your lungs is whatever the opposite of known science is.
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
While you are at it, why not drink your own urine to help stop the droplets from
spreading. And wear a diaper instead of using the rest room. My Depends are to protect
YOU.
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
N95 masks have a release valve. They don't help others.
pictur3plane 6 hours ago
It really is quite a spectacle to watch complete morons who don't know what they're
talking about strut around like hillbilly peacocks in the ZH comment section.
KirkPatrickN 4 hours ago
Dear angry, pudgy woman: please explain how N95 masks (specially designed with a VALVE on
the front) "protect others". What study proves they do?
Meanwhile, Surgical masks only work for 15 minutes in a STERILE environment. Hint: your
hand and Walmart are not sterile. What study proves masks do any good whatsoever? We know
filthy spit wads do lots of harm by cutting off children, oxygen and humanity.
KirkPatrickN 4 hours ago
I've had a box of 3M N95 masks since 2014 (back when they had an Asian guy on the box -
how you say Kung Fru?). Never wore one because it says right on the side of the box "DOES NOT
PREVENT COVID OR FLU".
pictur3plane 3 hours ago
A box of masks for 2014 says "DOES NOT PREVENT COVID", huh?
Go back to your NASCAR videos.
KirkPatrickN 4 hours ago
Describe how any study could possibly prove that "masks help others". Fat girls made that
up after donning them willingly to cover their fugly faces. Then they wanted the pretty girls
to do the same thing. Now: equality!
FightClubPanties 14 hours ago
A couple of thousand cases among 30 plus million. give me a break. And we don't even know
what their cycle threshold is if using the PCR test.
Delusion Spotter 3 hours ago (Edited)
Not Wearing Masks = today's Freedom Fries!
Think the more important issue is Lockdowns, which destroy businesses, livelihoods, and
the Economy.
Definately need legislation that would impose prison on any politician that proposes
Lockdowns for any reason in the future (Is immediate public Burning at a Stake after due
process / legal trial too extreme??)).
NumbNuts 10 hours ago
Masks don't beat phony test results.
trada101 11 hours ago (Edited)
Why do people have such short memories??? There is nothing surprising about the winter
surge. How many dumbasses are out there? People have been warning about the winter surge
since the summer.
Since you idiots don't seem to understand why, it's precisely BECAUSE
1. People spend more time with each other indoors during colder months leading to
increases viral load.
2. People also spend more time indoors for get togethers with friends ad family and not
wear masks.
metaforge 11 hours ago
#1 right
#2 half right
and not wear masks
You apparently missed the whole point of this article: masks don't work .
Cincinnatuus 9 hours ago
3. People don't get enough vitamin D in the winter. Supplementing with 5K UI of D will
fend off any virus...
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
Cold symptoms ARE Vitamin D deficiency symptoms. There is no vaccine for a vitamin
deficiency. We still have to eat a healthy diet.
Solio 11 hours ago
Relying on the bs that we have been fed for 75 years makes the garden fertile for total
idiocy.
Amel 14 hours ago (Edited)
My experience is transmission is primarily occurring in high traffic indoor spaces.
I wore a 3M industrial grade respirator inside a bulk food store last week stocking up for
the apocalypse and within hours my eyes were feeling infected, again. Being my second
exposure to covid, I know how my symptoms manifest. It did not get into my lungs because I
used a respirator, not a mask. I treated myself with a sinus rinse 10 drops betadine (Iodine)
per 1 cup water as per my ENT's direction for ANY sinus infection that night. The next 24
hours were pretty rough but after that I was fine,
If you have to line up to get inside a building in a dense urban area, use a respirator
and goggles inside. Masks are a joke, respirators work. Ebay has lots of respirators for
sale, they are hard to find locally.
FightClubPanties 13 hours ago
And those respirators, i.e. N95 cannot be reused.
adr 13 hours ago
Sure buddy. You might want to pull Fauchi's rod out of your mouth.
If the virus was floating in the air, everyone on Earth would have been infected 100 times
over by June.
Stranded Observer 13 hours ago
Great story. You are a lucky man to have cheated death like that. It must have been
terrifying
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
You're "stocking up for the apocalypse" that people like YOU created by trembling in fear
for 10 months and counting over sniffles?
"It did not get into my lungs because I used a respirator, not a mask. "
Are you sure it's not because you weren't wearing panties that day, because of your GRINDR
date?
-OMG - DeBlasio clip on FOX (sound off because of those gdamned "you can catch covid
...here'" PSAs))
urging faith leaders to push the vax! 'Spread the word!" J.C.!
Overpowered By Funk 14 hours ago
Why don't we just do what the Chinese did? It seems to have worked. Whatever it was they
did.
Crush the cube 14 hours ago
Pointed an accusatory finger at the weapon wielder and threatened to expose.
Mrgior31513 14 hours ago
Make tests read negative most likely.
JuliaS 13 hours ago
Chinese men in biosuits sprayed mystery syrup everywhere and then they were confident the
virus was gone. Safe to assume that if the lab worked on the virus, they also knew what the
antidote was.
waterwell 1 hour ago
Why is it that the entire continent of Africa appears to have been able to avoid the high
rates of cases and deaths caused by the Covid-19 virus.
Totin 3 hours ago
Why is it that with all the Brown Shirt enforcement in Kalifornia that they are suffering
the worst?
somedude 3 hours ago (Edited)
Maybe the Chinese put something in those made in China masks.
Americans buying masks from the Chinese is like **** buying masks from the Nazi.
RIGHTPOWER 3 hours ago
as long as housing prices keep crashing all is well
thimbus_xyz 4 hours ago (Edited)
So let me make sure I understand this correctly.....
South Korea, a country with over 5x the population density of the US , has 1,100 new cases
per day (or .002% of population ).
The US has 280,000 new cases (or .085% of population ), that's 43x the rate of South
Koriea
And the conclusion of this idiot is masks don't work.....hmm interesting. I see the
republican strategy of dumbing down our education is getting the desired results.
Still, these cases being recorded now are only a sliver of those detected daily in the
U.S. and Europe. There, daily new case counts of COVID-19 are still in the tens of
thousands... so keep wearing
your masks!!!
🔥 🔥 🔥!!!!
Uh no, in the US we count new cases in the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.
USA USA USA BITCHES.
SweetDoug 3 hours ago
'
'
You just watch the spread/infection rate increase. Learn a bit aboutr infection spreads.
Think oil on water and the increasing size of the diameter/area.
Give it a few months...
Everyone is gonna get this, sooner or later schmuck.
You stay in your basement.
OJO
V-V
thimbus_xyz 3 hours ago
That's a lot of words to say nothing.
What exactly did I get incorrect? That would be nothing. Facts is tough that way. LOL.
" The disproportionately higher rates of COVID deaths among American Indians and Alaska
Natives, 7 for example, are due to higher rates of obesity, diabetes, asthma and
heart disease than among more privileged U.S. communities."
Research 8 suggests even mild obesity can influence COVID-19 severity, raising
the risk of respiratory failure by 2.5 times and the risk of needing intensive care by nearly
five times. Inflammation triggered by obesity is also thought to be responsible for the
threefold greater risk of pulmonary embolism (blood clots in the lungs) seen in obese
COVID-19 patients. 9,10
Certain groups -- particularly the elderly and those with darker skin -- are also far more
prone to the illness due to the fact that they're also at highest risk for vitamin
D deficiency .
It's a Chinese bioweapon. Military tribunals and GITMO for TRAITORS.
Alice-the-dog 6 hours ago
As if there was a test for COVID that was remotely reliable. Both exhibit an abundance of
false positives. THE CASES THE CASES THE CASES, and deaths for that matter, are adjustable to
fit the needs of any tyrant that has any control over the number of tests administered. Need
more control of your subjects? More tests, more cases, more deaths. Want to make your vaxx
look good, or the unelected POTUS look good? Reduce testing, fewer cases and deaths.
flat earth guy 6 hours ago
Viruses are not alive, they are not contagious. Its a detox of the body.
Masks are stupid to use for viruses.
Terrain theory was allways right germ theory is wrong
TRM 7 hours ago
Can't retweet
"This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Justus_Americans 8 hours ago
Taking A Stand Against the Stand 2020 Whoopi and King can kiss my Trump voting a** Not
Viewing View https://youtu.be/_Mxa3bCprWc
Yup, the Thanksgiving Superspreader Doom was a nothing burger, just like the Trump rally
superspreader doom. They are LIARS! And the ones at the top... traitors.
Slapper 11 hours ago remove link
In WW1 and WW2 the same people marched you off to a war...
Nona Yobiznes 12 hours ago (Edited)
Argentina has worn masks since April or even March. Their cases didn't stop rising. In
fact they rose exponentially until a few weeks ago, which coincided with late spring for
them. Seasonality overrides all other factors.
KirkPatrickN 8 hours ago
Obesity doubles Covid risks. Should we mandate diets? I know it's inconvenient, but suck
it up, people. It's to save lives.
If you are generally aware, the PCR test is used to amplify small amount of genetic
material so as to recognize patterns of DNA by "cycling." (Also, for RNA virus, the RNA is
converted to DNA in order to be detected, it's just the way the test works) This is how we
have been able to recognize the genomes in Egyptian mummies and Wooly Mammoths. It works
because if you amplify and cycle enough times to "grow" legitimate DNA fragments, you get
something with with a fair amount of specificity. W hat is becoming more and more apparent is
that the PCR test was not designed as a diagnostic tool for infection, and really cannot
function as one without having a huge amount of false positives, period.
When it comes to COVID, the presence of viral particles picked up by the PCR technique
does not and has not been quantitatively linked to an active "symptomatic" infection. It
simply cannot be so, because infection threshold as a result of viral load is different for
each patient. It turns out, if you "cycle" over around 25 times, the false positivity of
COVID infection starts getting very high.
I and others have explained in blogs how people can be exposed to virus, and mount a
simple innate immune response and never know any differently. When you test these people with
very low viral loads, who are not sick, you can find the viral RNA code that is used to
"diagnose" if you cycle enough times. The last I read, Labcorp cycles at least 40 times to
detect viral genome fragments. The PCR test was never intended for diagnosis of infection but
as a qualitative test for presence of parts of a virus genome. I know there has been some
confusion circulating the net about what the inventor Kary Mullis had said about that. But we
walk daily with people who have any number of parts of killer virus or bacterial genomes
which one could pick up with a PCR test if one had the specific test for it. Would we claim
that that individual was an infected patient? No!
So given all that, PeakProsperity's Chris
Martenson explains below , in great details, the answer to the most important question you
should ask if you or a loved one gets a positive PCR test result .
"What's the Cycle Threshold (CT) value for that test?"
Sounds wonky but it's actually really important to understand. A low CT value means someone
is loaded with virus. A high value, oppositely, means less of a viral load.
Beyond a certain level the load is insufficient to either infect someone else or be of any
clinical or epidemiological relevance whatsoever.
The problem? Governments all over the country and world are basing their decisions on CT
values that are very high. Too high.
Jon Rappoport (excellent blog) nails it in some of his recent posts.
.
"July 16, 2020, podcast, 'This Week in Virology': Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the
PCR Covid test is useless and misleading when the test is run at '35 cycles or higher.' A
positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.
"Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci's key quote: ' If you get [perform the
test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more the chances of it being replication-competent [aka
accurate] are miniscule you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result]
from a 37 threshold cycle even 36 '
"Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be
wrongly interpreted as relevant.
"That's called a false positive.
"What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public
use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.
"Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly
participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because millions of Americans are being
told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and
"The total number of Covid cases in America -- which is based on the test -- is a gross
falsity.
"The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case
numbers.
play_arrow
GenuineAmerican 3 hours ago
Fauci has lied again the PCR maximum cycle for a accurate test results is 25 NOT 35. PCR
is run, or should be run at 21-25 cycles everything else will give a false positive. Had a
friend in Scottsdale MAYO. I had to go to this god-forsaken place to get him out. They were
running the PCR at 42 cycles to keep him in the hospital because he had very, very good UNION
insurance!! The health industries are all crooks, lying to people to get more money being
paid to the orgainizations by the feds.
BaNNeD oN THe RuN 7 hours ago
IQ tests were always seriously flawed, just like the PCR test
U.S TOTAL DEATHS
2015: 2,602,000
2016: 2,744,248
2017: 2,649,000
2018: 2,839,205
2019: 2,909,000
According to usalivestats(dot)com, there are 2,486,700 so far this year. There could be a lag
in reports, but I doubt enough to fulfill their doomsday claims. The CDC still admits only 6%
of these "COVID" are without 2 or more comorbidities, so that's about 25,000 or so. This is a
mild flu season. Here are the recent flu numbers:
FLU DEATHS 2010's
2010: 36,656
2011: 12,447
2012: 42,570
2013: 37,930
2014: 51,376
2015: 22,705
2016: 38,230
2017: 61,099
2018: 34,157
choctaw charley 5 hours ago remove link
so what's the purpose behind the bogus plandemic. In order to institute a one world
plantation several things have to happen. Foremost is the sense of "nationhood". a nation can
be thought of as modeled on the family unit. We look similar, we share religious beliefs,
economic and political views and we have a common history which we take pride in. We trust
rely on and help another. If you have half a brain you don't need me to describe how all
these are under attack. So how does the plandemic play into this? Yesterday you neighbor was
your neighbor. Today he is behind a mask because the government tells you that he is a threat
to you and your family and you to his! The plandemic was used to to hugely expand the mail-in
ballot fraud further driving in the wedge suspicion. Then there is this: when you get your
covid test there will be a permanent file created with your name on it. It will contain your
genetic code and the test result. this will become the social register that is all over
Europe. Get a traffic ticket; late in making a payment; engage in disapproved political
activity as I am doing at this moment? All these will find their way into your file and will
in the future determine the rate you pay on your home mortgage whether you can be employed in
a government job, what you have to endure to board a commercial aircraft etc. There is also a
great likelihood that contained in the vaccine will be a tracking component. Consider also
population segment most vulnerable to covid: older retired people drawing on an already
bankrupt social security ponzi scheme. Hitler referred to these as "Useless Eaters". He had a
system in place to rid society of these. Later these faciliries were expanded to include the
Jewish population.
flyonmywall 9 hours ago
I've done lots of PCR in my life. If you have to do over 35 cycles to detect or amplify
something, you're probably barking up the wrong tree or there is something wrong with your
assay.
Once you ramp up the cycles to past 35-40 cycles, you're just amplifying non-specific
competing amplification products, of which there are always some.
You could have the best designed primers in the world, there is always some random ****
that happens to get amplified at high cycle counts.
Zero-Hegemon 4 hours ago
False positives are beneficial for obtaining COVID money and creating hysteria.
KimAsa 9 hours ago (Edited)
these psychopaths have redesignated the normal course of annual deaths from heart disease,
and other common ailments that old people die from, to Covid 19, to create the illusion of a
deadly pandemic. they claim to have isolated this virus out of one side of their mouth, out
the the other side they claim it has mutated (how many times?) so can't produce proof that
this virus even exists. and out of their ******* they claim to have developed a vaccine?
this is and always has been about the vaccinating the public for free moral agency
prevention.
Ride_the_kali_yuga 9 hours ago
Covid "tests" are an efficient way to feed the false pandemic narrative with nonsensical
numbers of "contaminations". Masks are a mark of submission.
africoman 9 hours ago
Re-posting someone's comment from this article
Here
If the masks work -- Why the six feet?
If the six feet works -- Why the masks?
If both of the above work -- Why the lockdowns?
If all three of the above work -- Why the vaccine?
If the vaccine is safe -- Why protect it with a no liability clause?
If the vaccine is safe---Why not test it on animals first before using it on
humans?
If SARS-CoV-2 exists -- Why has it never been isolated?
If SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated -- How can an effective vaccine be
developed?
If the RT-PCR test works -- Why so many false positives?
If Kary Mullis, the inventor of the RT-PCR test who conveniently died in August 2019,
says his test shouldn't be used to diagnose infectious diseases -- Why use it to detect
SARS-CoV-2?
If there is an epidemic---Why so many empty hospitals?
If large numbers of people are dying from SARS-CoV-2---Why so many fake causes of death
on death certificates?
If SARS-CoV-2 exists -- Why give doctors financial incentives to diagnose
SARS-CoV-2?
If the official COVID-19 narrative is defensible -- Why censor people who dispute this
narrative?
by John Wear, (retired) lawyer, accountant, and author.
Excellent points, now let's threw a monkey wrench in it to the Operation Warp Speed
play_arrow
Schooey 6 hours ago
Its all BS
KimAsa 9 hours ago (Edited)
these psychopaths have redesignated the normal course of annual deaths from heart disease,
and other common ailments that old people die from, to Covid 19, to create the illusion of a
deadly pandemic. they claim to have isolated this virus out of one side of their mouth, out
the the other side they claim it has mutated (how many times?) so can't produce proof that
this virus even exists. and out of their ******* they claim to have developed a vaccine?
this is and always has been about the vaccinating the public for free moral agency
prevention.
Ms No 8 hours ago
They actually murdered people with the lockdown too though. Knowingly and
premeditated...certainly some of those were also declared covid.
smacker 8 hours ago
" this is and always has been about the vaccinating the public "
Correct.
That has become clear. What we are only now slowing learning is what the sinister motive
is.
kellys_eye 9 hours ago
Is the test for Covid or Covid-19. Can it tell the difference? The 'normal' flu and
influenza are both corona viruses and this is the 'high season' for such cases in the
Northern hemisphere.
Strangely (or not) the incidence of actual flu and influenza are suspiciously MUCH lower
than they should be.
Ergo - tests that prove 'positive' for Covid are likely either false OR reporting on the
flu/influenza.
The LIES keep mounting and mounting.
Harry Tools 5 hours ago
there is no pandemic
RedNeckMother 3 hours ago
I will add another: FDA: 40 recommendation for testing
And let's not forget the comments by Fauci that if they're testing at 35 they're going to
get a lot of false positives.
There's an attorney in Ohio who has filed a FOI to obtain all the ct levels used by the
labs testing in Ohio. It will be very interesting once that is revealed - I'm sure our
governor already knows the answer. If I recall, the NYT itself did an article on this very
topic awhile back and estimated that 90% of the positive results in CT and NY were bogus. And
going from 40 to 35 I believe reduces positives by 63%.
We're being played.
MoreFreedom 5 hours ago remove link
Dr. Martenson's videos are very good. He's clear.
As for "the science" and scientists, we all make mistakes. If we didn't make mistakes, we
wouldn't have scientists pointing out other scientist's mistakes. But it's not a question of
whose science is correct, it's that science is no excuse for taking away peoples'
liberty.
SRV 7 hours ago
The inventor of the test (Dr Kary Mullis) was very outspoken that it was NOT developed for
human virus confirmation...he died of cancer just weeks before the first Covid cases
(hmmmm).
The test procedure was developed as a screening tool in lab research, and he won a Nobel
Prize for it!
It's in your face proof of the scam we're all being subjected to that almost no one ever
questioned (brilliant move really)... ONE cycle above 35 (each cycle doubles the
amplification) will explode the the false positives.
And... if you have no symptoms you DO NOT have the virus (remember how much play the
"asymptomatic" BS story got early on... another psyop). Notice how none of the athletes never
get sick and are back in two weeks... yet it's never questioned by a soul paid to look the
other way!
smacker 9 hours ago
" What is becoming more and more apparent is that the PCR test was not designed
as a diagnostic tool for infection, and really cannot function as one without having
a huge amount of false positives, period. "
This is not knew and didn't need to become "more and more apparent".
The inventor of the PCR test Kary Mullis is on video record stating it. Sadly his
expert
knowledge has been wilfully ignored by the political elites and countless talking heads
and "experts" because it doesn't suit them and didn't fit their agenda.
It's time to prepare the gallows and stock up with rope.
smacker 7 hours ago remove link
The PCR test is used precisely because it can be manipulated to produce as many "cases" as
wanted.
Just turn the dial up on "amplification cycles" and hey presto, you get as many positives
as you want.
The cases are not genuine cases but simply PCR positive tests, but are reported as "cases"
and then
"infections" by MSM who are "In On It".
The idea is "FEAR Management" which allows draconian CovID rules like lockdowns and tiers
and
social distancing to be introduced which accustoms people to being managed and
controlled.
It then ramps up demand for vaccines which is the ultimate objective. Initially (or soon
after), the
vaccines will contain nano-technology - dust-chips - which will be used for surveillance and
control.
Some say they will also contain ingredients to render people infertile (ie population
control).
We are seeing in plain sight the biggest coup ever against mankind.
It must be stopped.
smacker 7 hours ago remove link
The PCR test is used precisely because it can be manipulated to produce as many "cases" as
wanted.
Just turn the dial up on "amplification cycles" and hey presto, you get as many positives
as you want.
The cases are not genuine cases but simply PCR positive tests, but are reported as "cases"
and then
"infections" by MSM who are "In On It".
The idea is "FEAR Management" which allows draconian CovID rules like lockdowns and tiers
and
social distancing to be introduced which accustoms people to being managed and
controlled.
It then ramps up demand for vaccines which is the ultimate objective. Initially (or soon
after), the
vaccines will contain nano-technology - dust-chips - which will be used for surveillance and
control.
Some say they will also contain ingredients to render people infertile (ie population
control).
We are seeing in plain sight the biggest coup ever against mankind.
considering cuomo was responsible for spreading the virus exponentially in the early days, he probably has had more
influence on all of our lives than the others
Story about Fauci, at least at the time was that it was so hospitals wouldn't be liable for deaths among medical
staff. But I think it was completely bad what both Cuomo and Fauci
Dr. Fauci was the trusted expert who intentionally lied to the American people and made things far worse. Cuomo is
directly responsible for why New York's response to the virus was so bad and cost many lives. Bullshit award.
This whole coronavirus thingy is becoming ridiculous. I don't think it's a complete fake ;
yes, there is coronavirus named COVID-19, yes it is highly contagious, yes it's a health
hazard.
But to sum it up, we have here a new coronavirus which is slightly more dangerous than the
flu, which kills practically only very old people with comorbidities, with 99,98% chances
(ok, 99,95% if you like) of surviving it. given these odds, I'll pass on the vaccine, thank
you.
From the beginning, the whole treatment of this thing stank to high heaven. I'm sorry, but
the only meaningful explanation I can give is this one : big pharma and its various shills
(politicians or doctors) recognized the opportunity such a virus would mean ; they then set
out to systematically downplay or kill any possibility of cheap and effective treatments, and
cleverly directed the firehose of dollars which was poured onto the laboratories developing a
vaccine.
Some facts :
- in France, we had two large-scale studies, Discovery and Hycovid, which were started (very
reluctantly) and were pratically forced to include HCQ+AZ in their panel.
- In the weekend following publication of the fraudulent Lancet newspaper, our health
minister ordered a full stop.
- Since then, months have gone by; NOT ONE JOURNALIST has either 1) investigated who were the
accomplices of the Lancet fraud 2) questioned why all national and international authorities
reacted in lockstep 3) and most importantly WHY THE DECISIONS TO STOP THE STUDIES WERE NOT
REVERSED following the Lancet's retractation.
-In October, we learn that the EU Commission gave a cool 1 billion to buy remdesivir. ONE
WEEK before the WHO study concluding on the ineffectiviness of remdesivir came out.
I'm sorry, but this is becoming a little too much. One coincidence OK, but here we are
talking about a string of improbable events, with NO ONE analyzing with a cool head what
happened or reversing decisions that were taken based on obvious frauds.
Three weeks ago, our president solemnly declared that our OR would be saturated in
mid-November with 9000 people under respiratory assistance, no matter what we do. Well here
were are, and the tally is 4.800. Not a good situation, but still only half ; and with nobody
pointing out that every winter, our OR are saturated anyway due to the flu and the
influenza.
I think we should all grow up and do a more level-headed analysis of the pros and cons.
The most ridiculous thing perhaps is to see all those politicos sanctimoniously declare the
sanctity of life ; in a world where you can abort babies at your convenience, practices
eugenics, and where euthanasy is aggressively pushed into the mainstream, this is perhaps the
most hypocritical bullshit I have ever heard.
@Posted by: Avid Lurker | Nov 17 2020 13:53 utc | 117
Meh...Fauci is a political creature who has talked on both sides of his mouth on many
$ubject$, and goes with the (money)flow as long as he can get away with it without reducing
his credibility too much.
I wonder if Fauci is *still* singing the praises of Gilead's remdesivir, that $3K per
treatment apparent snake oil, according to critics:
Dr. Eric Topol, vice president for research at Scripps Research sez:
Most likely a game changer:
Portugiese court rule against PCR-test
Sorry, guys, this is a link to one of the best real-left Corona blogs, but in German
language. In Portugal a court decided that a PCR-test cannot be accepted as a proof of a
viral infection. Now think about its consequences!
The Great Revenge - How Tony Fauci F*cked Donald TrumpLiberty Blogger , Nov
16 2020 20:12 utc |
2
In January 2017 the CIA claimed that Russia had kompromat on Trump. Trump shot back at the
CIA. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer then
warned the incoming president:
"You take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday to get back at
you," Schumer, a New York Democrat, told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. "So even for a practical,
supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he's being really dumb to do this."
As the years after the warning passed by it proved to have been valid. The CIA 'whistle
blowers' put a great effort into sabotaging Trump's presidency. But they were largely
unsuccessful.
The CIA failed to sabotaged Trump's reelection. It was health community, including parts
of Trump's administration, which did that.
Trump had especially angered Dr. Fauci, the well known infectious-disease expert and
member of the government's coronavirus taskforce. Fauci's advise had been ignored and efforts
were made to hold him back from making public pronouncements.
On November 1, two days before the election, Fauci gave a widely distributed
interview to the Washington Post :
President Trump's repeated assertions the United States is "rounding the turn" on the novel
coronavirus have increasingly alarmed the government's top health experts, who say the
country is heading into a long and potentially deadly winter with an unprepared government
unwilling to make tough choices.
"We're in for a whole lot of hurt. It's not a good situation," Anthony S. Fauci, the
country's leading infectious-disease expert, said in a wide-ranging interview late Friday.
"All the stars are aligned in the wrong place as you go into the fall and winter season,
with people congregating at home indoors. You could not possibly be positioned more
poorly."
Fauci's interview was not the first intervention he made. In October two leading vaccine
companies were ready to announce the success of their vaccine trials. But with at least the
knowledge of Fauci and the Federal Drug Administration both companies deviated from their
clinical protocols to intentionally move their success announcement to a date after the
election.
During the summer Trump had been hopeful that a vaccine against the Covid-19 disease could
be announced before the election. It would have been proof that his strategy to (not) fight
the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had at least one success. The announcement of a vaccine was part of
President Trump's planned 'October
surprises' to win the election.
Trump's summer hope that a vaccine success could be announced during October was not
unreasonable. Two important vaccines candidate, one from Pfizer with BioNTech and one from
Moderna, had been successful tested in their first phases and were ready launch their large
phase 3 trials.
In a phase 3 vaccine trial several ten thousand people are put into two groups. The people
in one group receive the vaccine, the people in the other one a placebo. One then has to wait
and see how many people will get the disease. At certain points a statistical team will look
at those cases and check how many occurred in each group. The differences of the number of
people in each group who catch the disease is a scale for the vaccines efficacy. For a known
group size one can estimate in advance after how many disease cases determinations should be
made to show statistical significance.
Pfizer had published its clinical
protocol for the phase 3 trial which foresaw four points of interim analyses (IA) during
which it would become clear how well the vaccine was working:
During Phase 2/3, 4 IAs are planned and will be performed by an unblinded statistical team
after accrual of 32, 62, 92, and 120 cases. At each IA:
[Vaccine efficacy] for the first primary objective will be evaluated. Overwhelming
efficacy will be declared if the first primary study objective is met. The criteria for
success at an interim analysis are based on the posterior probability (ie,P[VE
>30%|data]) at the current number of cases. Overwhelming efficacy will be declared if
the posterior probability is higher than the success threshold. The success threshold for
each interim analysis will be calibrated to protect overall type I error at 2.5%.
Additional details about the success threshold or boundary calculation at each interim
analysis will be provided in the SAP.
The time plan, on which Trump was certainly briefed, foresaw that the first interim
analysis would likely occur in late September or early October.
However Pfizer did not publish
any results when the first two interim analysis points were met. On November 9, after the
election, Pfizer
announced very positive results at the third interim analysis point:
Pfizer and partner BioNTech said Monday that their vaccine against Covid-19 was strongly
effective, exceeding expectations with results that are likely to be met with cautious
excitement -- and relief -- in the face of the global pandemic.
The vaccine is the first to be tested in the United States to generate late-stage data.
The companies said an early analysis of the results showed that individuals who received
two injections of the vaccine three weeks apart experienced more than 90% fewer cases of
symptomatic Covid-19 than those who received a placebo.
...
The story of how the data have been analyzed seems to include no small amount of drama.
...
The first analysis was to occur after 32 volunteers -- both those who received the vaccine
and those on placebo -- had contracted Covid-19. If fewer than six volunteers in the group
who received the vaccine had developed Covid-19, the companies would make an announcement
that the vaccine appeared to be effective. The study would continue until at least 164
cases of Covid-19 -- individuals with at least one symptom and a positive test result --
had been reported.
However, the announcement at the two first interim analysis points was never made.
[William Gruber, Pfizer's senior vice president of vaccine clinical research and
development,] said that Pfizer and BioNTech had decided in late October that they wanted to
drop the 32-case interim analysis . At that time, the companies decided to stop having
their lab confirm cases of Covid-19 in the study , instead leaving samples in storage. The
FDA was aware of this decision. Discussions between the agency and the companies concluded,
and testing began this past Wednesday. When the samples were tested, there were 94 cases of
Covid in the trial.
This means that the statistical strength of the result is likely far stronger than was
initially expected. It also means that if Pfizer had held to the original plan, the data
would likely have been available in October, as its CEO, Albert Bourla, had initially
predicted.
In October Pfizer already knew from its first interim analysis that its vaccine was
successful. But it intentionally held back on the announcement of its success. The FDA knew
of this!
Today Moderna announced the success of its Covid-19 vaccine. This is a vaccine in which
Dr. Fauci's organization is directly involved in. It seems that Moderna had, like Pfizer,
held back its very positive results until after the election:
The drugmaker Moderna announced on Monday that its coronavirus vaccine was 94.5 percent
effective, based on an early look at the results from its large, continuing study.
Researchers said the results were better than they had dared to imagine.
...
Moderna, based in Cambridge, Mass., developed its vaccine in collaboration with researchers
from the Vaccine Research Center, part of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases.
Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the institute, said in an interview: ...
...
Moderna had planned a first interim analysis of its trial data when the number of Covid-19
cases among participants reached 53. But the recent surge in cases drove the number to 95 ,
and it is likely to speed completion of the study.
Moderna, like Pfizer, skipped the announcement of the results at the first interim
analysis point in its clinical protocol.
The FDA and Dr. Fauci were involved in Pfizer's as well as the Moderna's decision to
deviate from their clinical protocols. Any change in these protocols must get the FDA's
approval. If the companies had not changed their plans the announcement of the good efficacy
of both vaccines' would have come before the election.
Trump's well planed vaccine 'October surprise' was sabotaged by two pharmaceutical
companies with at least the approval of Dr. Fauci and the FDA.
This might well have cost him his reelection.
It was the health community that really had 'six ways from Sunday' to get back at
Trump.
Posted by b on November 16, 2020 at 19:54 UTC | Permalink
How many ways did the vultures steal the US election?
The Big Guy will ensure Americans continue to pay twice as much for pharmaceuticals. His
10% is doubled too, after all.
The Corporate State envelopes the administrators of the MSM, Medical and Academic
Institutions, and State and Local Governments, in order to create and enforce a largely
fictitious health emergency -- the latest in a series of Disaster Capitalist scenarios
designed to rob us blind.
"... A staggering 9.2 million jobs could be lost in the U.S. Travel & Tourism sector in 2020 if barriers to global travel remain in place, the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) revealed. ..."
A staggering 9.2 million jobs could be lost in the U.S. Travel & Tourism sector in
2020 if barriers to global travel remain in place, the World Travel & Tourism Council
(WTTC) revealed.
The new figure comes from WTTC's latest economic modelling, which looks at the punishing
impact of COVID-19 and travel restrictions on the Travel & Tourism sector.
According to the latest data, 7.2 million jobs in the U.S. have been impacted. If there is
no immediate alleviation of restrictions on international travel, as many as 9.2 million jobs
– more than half of all jobs supported by the sector in the U.S. in 2019 – would be
lost.
WTTC has identified the four top priorities which should be addressed, including the
adoption of a comprehensive and cost-effective testing regime at departure to avoid
transmission, the re-opening of key 'air corridors' such as between New York and London, and
international coordination.
The challenge of restoring safe travels in the new normal is one of the biggest issues
facing the U.S. as it grapples with a depressed economy devastated by the COVID-19 pandemic,
which has hit the Travel & Tourism sector particularly hard.
The WTTC Economic Impact Report for 2019 revealed that Travel & Tourism contributed
$1.84 trillion to the U.S. economy and was responsible for more than one in 10 (10.7%) American
jobs.
"Surgeons have been using surgical masks since their introduction in 1897. It has for
some years been customary for surgeons and nurses to wear surgical masks in the operating
theatre and to change masks part of the way through any procedure lasting more than a few
hours.
"The dangers associated with mask wearing were assessed by five doctors and published
in the journal Neurocirugia in 2008.
"Although it is customary for operating theatres to be fitted with air conditioning
systems, the writers of the article, entitled, Preliminary Report on Surgical Mask induced
Deoxygenation During Major Surgery, pointed out that it is known that heat and moisture are
trapped beneath surgical masks and concluded that 'it seems reasonable that some of the
exhaled carbon dioxide may also be trapped beneath them, inducing a decrease in blood
oxygenation'.
"A total of 53 surgeons, of both sexes, all employed at university hospitals and aged
between 24 and 54 years of age were tested. All were non-smokers and none had any chronic
lung disease. The test involved pulse oximetry before and after the course of an operation.
The study showed that the longer a mask was worn the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels.
This may lead to the individual passing out and it may also affect natural immunity –
thereby increasing the risk of infection.
"The masks used were disposable, sterile, one-way surgical paper masks. To eliminate
the effect of dehydration over a several hour surgical operation, the surgeons were allowed
after every hour to drink water through a straw.
"The authors of the paper concluded that, 'When the values for oxygen saturation of
haemoglobin were compared, there were statistically significant differences only between
preoperational and post operational values. As the duration of the operation increases,
oxygen saturation of haemoglobin decreases significantly."
From "Proof That Face Masks Do More Harm Than Good" by Dr Vernon Coleman (which was
published on "Smashwords" but was suddenly removed the book in an gratuitous act of
censorship even though the book was entirely factual)
Intentionally or otherwise, Fauci put his thumb on the electoral scale by painting a
doomsday picture of the nation's Covid-19 outlook and suggesting the Democrat candidate is
more focused on the pandemic than is the Republican incumbent. Asked about differences between
the two on the virus issue, Fauci praised Biden for "taking it seriously from a
public-health perspective," and said Trump looks at it from the standpoint of "the
economy and reopening the country," according to the Post, which published its article
Saturday evening.
Fauci, who is the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
echoed Biden's predictions of a "dark winter," saying, "We're in for a whole lot of
hurt. All the stars are aligned in the wrong place as you go into the fall and winter season,
with people congregating at home indoors. You could not possibly be positioned more
poorly."
The doctor didn't specifically attribute his gloomy assessment to Trump's policies, but
Biden has made the virus outbreak the centerpiece of his campaign, repeatedly blaming the
president for the nation's Covid-19 death toll, which stands at more than
230,000.
Fauci complained to the Post that Trump is increasingly leaning on medical adviser
Scott
Atlas for advice on the pandemic. "I have real problems with that guy," Fauci said.
"He's a smart guy who's talking about things that I believe he doesn't have any real insight
or knowledge or experience in. He keeps talking about things that, when you dissect it out and
parse it out, it doesn't make any sense."
Fauci said in April that Trump had immediately backed all the Covid-19 mitigation
recommendations made to him by US public health officials, including Fauci himself. In
September, he said the president had taken the outbreak very seriously from the beginning.
White House spokesman Judd Deere blasted Fauci for "choosing three days before an
election to play politics," after previously praising Trump's actions.
"As a member of the (White House coronavirus) task force, Dr. Fauci has a duty to express
concerns or push for a change in strategy, but he's not done that, instead choosing to
criticize the president in the media and make his political leanings known by praising the
president's opponent – exactly what the American people have come to expect from the
swamp," Deere told the Post.
Fauci said in February that the risk of coronavirus in the US was "relatively low,"
and told CBS's 60 Minutes program in March that "people should not be walking around with
masks." By October, he was voicing support for a national mask mandate.
Atlas contended in an interview with RT's Going Underground show
that Covid-19 lockdowns have been an "epic failure" and are "killing people"
without curbing the spread of the virus.
"The public-health leadership have failed egregiously, and they're killing people with
their fear-inducing shutdown policies," Trump's coronavirus adviser said.
Investigative journalist Jordan Schachtel took to Twitter to criticize Fauci for attacking
Atlas while offering "zero evidence, data, etc," calling the comments "a little
character-assassination attempt by the tiny totalitarian."
Tweet See new Tweets
TweetJordan Schachtel @JordanSchachtel
· 19h Fauci has complete
breakdown, resorts to crying to the media. Notice his little rant (loaded with extreme amounts
of professional jealousy) has zero evidence, data, etc. A little character assassination
attempt by the tiny totalitarian. Quote Tweet Maggie Haberman
@maggieNYT · 21h "I have real problems with that guy," Fauci said of Atlas. "He's a
smart guy who's talking about things that I believe he doesn't have any real insight or
knowledge or experience in...when you dissect it out and parse it out, it doesn't make any
sense." https:// washingtonpost.com/politics/fauci
-covid-winter-forecast/2020/10/31/e3970eb0-1b8b-11eb-bb35-2dcfdab0a345_story.html 18
That's too broad of a headline. The real question is under which conditions masks help and
under which they do not or can be harmful. For example in public transport I think they are
definitely useful as they prevent spreading of virus from an infected person to others. The same
is probably true for shops and other closed spaces.
But outside they are harmful and can be increase your chances of getting an infection.
One of the biggest questions in the world right now is whether the use of masks is
beneficial in preventing contracting the China coronavirus. A study attempted to do just that
but publishers will not take it on and are preventing it from being published. A large mask
study out of Denmark is complete but being delayed in publishing. Although the size of the
study and the study's design are well within the parameters of a solid study, publishers will
not take it on:
The purpose of the study was once and for all to try to clarify the extent to which the
use of masks in public space provides protection against the corona infection.
Advertisement - story continues below
One of the authors of the study is upset the study has not been published for peer review.
The world needs to know the results of the study and should be provided a chance to challenge
it and determine its viability:
Advertisement - story continues below
Alex Berenson shared that the study should be released – we need to know if wearing
masks is harmful:
We can guess right now why the study is not being published – because masks don't work
in preventing the spread of the China coronavirus and likely are harmful to your health.
After Dr. Anthony
Fauci gave an interview in which he claimed the White House was controlling his media
appearances, the president lashed out at him, even taking to comparing how each of them throws
a baseball.
"Dr.Tony Fauci says we don't allow him to do television, and yet I saw him last night on
@60Minutes," Trump tweeted on Monday, referencing the interview where Fauci made his claims
about being limited in who he can talk to.
"He seems to get more airtime than anybody since the late, great, Bob Hope," the
president added, referencing the late comedian known for his near-constant rotation on
television while he was alive.
Trump said he wants Fauci to "make better decisions" and claimed the original
strategy to defeat the pandemic suggested by Fauci was "no masks & let China
in."
... ... ...
In the campaign call, Trump reportedly called Fauci a "disaster" and said people are
tired of coronavirus and hearing from "Fauci and all these idiots."
While Fauci has been frequently criticized by conservatives for his support of lockdowns to
battle Covid-19, his popularity with Democrats has been growing. Presidential candidate Joe
Biden has said he would give Fauci the opportunity to continue working with the White House on
the pandemic if he won the election.
Thus, Democrats have not taken Trump's latest criticisms of the doctor all that well with
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and others targeting the president on social media.
"After deceptively using Dr. Fauci's words in a TV ad last week, now Trump is attacking
him as a 'disaster.' For what? For telling the truth. We all know who the disaster is here, Mr.
President. You," Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) tweeted .
Biden also released a statement condemning Trump's Fauci comments and claiming he is waving
the "white flag" on the pandemic.
garyo550 1 hour ago Some time ago-this year-Fauci
was outed as having endorsed, 15 years ago, Hydroxychlorquine as a drug that would kill AIDS,
Ebola, SARS and a legion of other bugs. What has changed? Filthy lucre is one reason touted.
During a conference call with campaign staff that White House reporters were bizarrely
allowed to listen in on, President Trump complained that "there's a bomb" every time Dr.
Anthony Fauci goes on television, which is most days.
This is far from the first time President Trump has complained about the good doctor. But it
might be the first time he's offered some direct commentary on exactly why he won't fire Dr.
Fauci, even as Trump seems to have moved on with a new COVID-19 advisor, Dr. Scott Atlas, who has
faced persecution by Big Tech for his views on how to approach COVID-19.
Though he conceded that the good doctor is "a nice guy" who has "been around for 500 years",
Trump said the problem with Dr. Fauci is that every time he goes on TV "there's a bomb", yet if
you fire him, "there's an even bigger bomb".
"People are saying whatever...just leave us alone. People are tired of COVID... People are
tired of hearing Fauci and these idiots, all these idiots who got it wrong...every time he goes
on television there's always a bomb, but there's a bigger bomb if you fire him. This guy's a
disaster."
With less than 3 weeks to go before election day, Trump also asserted that the American people
are moving on from COVID-19 as cases rebound, while hospitalizations are also starting to creep
higher. However, so far at least, deaths have been mostly subdued.
Confirming that he was speaking mostly off the cuff, Trump added after that if there was a
reporter on the call (he didn't seem to realize that multiple WH reporters were apparently
listening) they could report it "just how I said it."
"If there's a reporter on you can have it just the way I said it, I couldn't care less,"
Trump said.
The NYT also brought up an interview with Dr. Fauci on '60 Minutes' last night where the
doctor refuted Trump's claims that the end of the outbreak is just around the corner.
Trump also reportedly called an NYT article claiming Trump was becoming increasingly
dissatisfied with some of his aides - which followed Trump hinting that he might not bring back
AG Bill Barr if elected for a second term due to his inability to charge any of the FBI officials
involved with Operation Crossfire Hurricane despite the mountain of evidence suggesting some
skulduggery was afoot as the FBI tried to put together an "insurance policy" to protect the
nation from Trump.
"I love Mark Meadows," Trump reportedly said (the NYT report focused on frictions between the
president and his chief of staff).
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Finally, Trump also told staff that the Wall Street Journal - which is controlled by Rupert
Murdoch, who also owns and controls the New York Post, the paper the published the string of
damning reports about Hunter Biden's influence-peddling abroad - is working on "an important
story".
artvandalai , 5 hours ago
....If there's a reporter on you can have it just the way I said it, I couldn't care less,"
Trump said.
And that, my friends, is why Trump won the first time and will win again.
He was APPOINTED to lead Trump's Corona virus task force.
spqrusa , 3 hours ago
Trump did not appoint Fauci - Fauci is a permanent fixture in government protected from
firing by your know... "laws"
What a crock - the President HAS the Authority under the Constitution to FIRE ANYONE under
his command.
Les D , 3 hours ago
Yup, sure did, and too many others.
Wray, Barr, Bolton, Kelly, McMaster, Sessions, Tillerson, Cohn, Mattis, Kelly, Mooch,
Kiersten and her successor McAleenan; CIA Brennan lap dancer Haspel; promoted Rosenstein to 1st
Asst who then took over; Minarosa or whatever her name was.
Add who I'm forgetting. The worst performance of any president, brings in one snake after
another. Gorsuch will be the next one that becomes obvious. His first majority opinion sounded
the alarm. PT, Gorsuch said publicly Justice Kennedy, a 100% traitor turncoat, who he clerked
for and swore him in, was his Judicial Idol. Donald, duh?
Inept, inattentive, betrayed, too trusting--choose your analysis but his people decisions,
his favorite word: "A disaster".
BaNNeD oN THe RuN , 3 hours ago
@spqrusa
Correct, ultimately Dr. Fauci reports to the Director of the Department of Health &
Human Services and Trump could insist that he be fired.
"... and that sumbytch got fired."
Pig Circus , 4 hours ago
Love him or hate him The Trumpster tells it like it is. Most transparent President in
history.
Thousands of Britons who suffer heart attacks and strokes are dying at home instead of
seeking medical treatment, a new study has found, as new government figures show 75,000 are
projected to die as a result of lockdown measures.
Stay-at-home orders prompted countless people suffering from serious medical conditions to
avoid hospitals, according to the study's findings, which were published in the Heart medical
journal and first reported by the Daily Mail. The paper noted that deaths from heart disease in
private homes surged by 35 percent from March to July, resulting in 2,279 more fatalities on
average over the past six years. However, heart and stroke deaths in hospitals dropped by
around 1,400 during the same period, suggesting that some who chose to stay home would have
died anyway even if they had been hospitalized. The researchers calculated that in total, there
were 2,085 excess deaths in England and Wales that could be linked to heart attack and stroke
sufferers who refused to seek out medical treatment. This means that between March 2 and June
30, every day 17 people died needlessly from heart attacks.
Testifying before the Senate Appropriations Committee Wednesday morning, CDC Director Robert
Redfield entered further into quack doctor territory, claiming that wearing a mask protects the
wearer against the novel coronavirus, even more so than a high-efficacy vaccine.
"These facemasks are the important, powerful public health tool we have," Redfield said,
while touching both sides of his mask and unconsciously contaminating it with his hands. "I
might even go so far as to say that this facemask is more guaranteed to protect me against
COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine," he added.
This appears to be another "scientific" evolution on masks from the "public health expert"
class. At first, we were advised not to wear masks. Then, the "my mask protects you. Your mask
protects me" mantra became the widely disseminated narrative. Now, masks apparently have the
incredible power of protecting the mask wearer from the virus.
In the February hearing, Redfield told Americans not to buy medical-grade
masks , saying there's "no role for these masks in the community."
There remains zero evidence that cloth masks or the earloop masks displayed by Redfield
helps to slow the spread of COVID-19 or protect the wearer from infection. No country in the
world has proven a link in slowing or stopping the spread due to mask wearing mandates, which
are in effect in countless nations.
Given the lack of demonstrated evidence supporting it, mask-wearing has become a cult-like religious
movement in the United States , one that relies on complete subservience to total
mysticism. Members of the mask movement frequently target Americans who engage in
non-compliance, likening these individuals to evil, plague-carrying menaces. Redfield's
testimony will only add fuel to the mask mania that is sowing discord in America.
In his testimony, Redfield added that a COVID vaccine probably won't be available to the
general public until
at least the second or third quarter of 2021.
"If you're asking me when is it going to be generally available to the American public, so
we can begin to take advantage of vaccine to get back to our regular life, I think we're
probably looking at third, late second quarter, third quarter 2021," he testified, adding
that first responders may have access to the vaccine before the end of the year.
Like many institutional bureaucracies in the federal government, the CDC has become plagued
with corruption and "woke" politics. A whistleblower recently revealed that the CDC was forcing
its staff to undergo "critical race theory" training.
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-4&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1305619445520318465&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmedical%2Fdr-quack-cdcs-redfield-claims-masks-guaranteed-protect-against-covid&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Under Redfield's leadership, the CDC dropped the ball on preparing Americans for the U.S.
coronavirus outbreak, as shown through
internal emails displaying the bureaucracy as an organizational mess.
* * *
Thanks for reading! I would be honored if you are willing to support my work and subscribe to The Mass
Illusion, my newsletter for people concerned about our "new normal."
American Thinker has run several articles like
this one about Dr. Anthony Fauci's political bias (which is his right). But the Miami
Herald published an article that was aimed at undermining President Trump , which actually
contains compelling evidence that Fauci's bias or ignorance is affecting what he is telling the
American people about Covid-19. In the article,
Dr. Fauci: 'I have to disagree' with Trump on coronavirus , the author writes:
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious diseases expert, disagreed on Friday with
President Donald Trump's assertion that the country is "rounding the corner" on the
coronavirus pandemic.
"I really do believe we're rounding the corner," Trump said
during a White House briefing on Thursday. He added that newweekly cases have gone down
by 44% since July.
"I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with that because if you look at the thing that you
just mentioned, the statistics, Andrea, they're disturbing,"
Fauci told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell on Friday.
"We're plateauing at around 40,000 cases a day and the deaths are around 1,000.
From his interview with Andrea Mitchell Friday, the Herald quotes Fauci as stating, "We're
plateauing at around 40,000 cases a day and the deaths are around 1,000."
In fact, he is very wrong : the average daily new cases for the past two weeks have been
31,411, dramatically less than Fauci's 40,000 number; and the average daily deaths for the past
two-weeks have been 697, a full 30% less than Fauci's 1,000.
More significant, do these graphs of weekly average new cases (blue graph) and deaths (red
graph) from Bloomberg look like we're "plateauing?"
Source: Bloomberg
Fauci has a right and obligation to express his views about the current situation and the
future risks, but he should not mislead the public about the facts.
"We've been through this before," he said. "Don't ever, ever underestimate the potential
of the pandemic. And don't try and look at the rosy side of things."
"I keep looking at that curve, and I get more depressed and more depressed about the fact
that we never really get down to the baseline that I'd like," he said.
EmmittFitzhume , 59 minutes ago
Deep State Fauci has to go. Perhaps to prison
GoldenDebt , 58 minutes ago
Dr FRAUDci is non stop lying and flip-flopping
SMSpiff , 42 minutes ago
It's safe to come out of your basement now, Joe.
Pope Innocent III , 37 minutes ago
The nature of the Fauci scam is the total intentional destruction of induction and
deduction.
Jerky Miester , 32 minutes ago
You've been ****ting up this board for 3 years 7 months, you little phaqqot. Time to get
out of the basement and earn an honest living....unless you make your bread and beer money
being a pro troll. KYS now.
NotAGenius , 39 minutes ago
This is the legal argument to indict Fauci on mass murder charges, justified but justice
no longer exists in the USA, written by a legal writer. These comments and Fauci's crimes
would convict Fauci of mass murder and sentence him to prison for life:
Zeroes want Fauci's head on a stick...but decry liberals who interfere with the free
speech rights of conservatives on college campuses.
Free speech or no free speech - which is it, Zeroes?
knopperz , 55 minutes ago
The flu vaccination is now 78 years around.
The flu is still there.
Next Stop --> 78 Years wearing a diaper in your face.
Get used to it suckers.
All those people pushing the Corona Narrative should be hanged by the Balls.
CheapBastard , 53 minutes ago
We are obviously rounding the corner with fewer cases and fewer deaths. Most businesses
trying to reopen. Fauci is political hack and was from the start. he's also totally
incompetent or a liar giving Americans completely wrong advice from the start. The MSM loves
him because he's anti-Trump.
2hangmen , 54 minutes ago
Fauci has been wrong since day 1 on Covid. He's done multiple 180s on policies, and the
fact this is NOT a deadly virus in comparison to all other virus outbreaks. He's still
playing politics and he's still making millions from Big Pharma and the Deep State. Fauci,
please say good bye, and ride off into the sunset with your ill gotten gains.
NotAGenius , 44 minutes ago
Trump can't fire Fauci. He is a career government employee. Trump gave him a platform in
the beginning. Trump has been right about Fauci now and mostly about this cold virus too,
advocating the best medicine possible for it - hcq - while Fauci prevented Americans from
getting this cheap commercial safe and effective medical treatment. Fauci has committed mass
murder by withholding a life-saving medicine from Americans. The FDA is criminal too, same
reason. FDA has also been paying hospitals $39,000 for every patient they kill with the fatal
ventilators, killing more than saving according to records. But the government wants more
deaths for bigger numbers. The American medical system is actually a genocidal organization
now, trying to kill as many Americans as possible in many different ways, many associated
with this medical fraud. Fauci should be imprisoned for life were any justice to exist in
America. At best, Trump can minimize and ignore him and arrange for him to have no venue to
spout b.s. and lies publicly. That's what we basically need: Fauci minimized if not
disappeared.
blueapples Staff , 33 minutes ago
Why would he ever fire the fall guy? If he fired him, you'd still have the push for
lockdowns, the policies based on flawed statistical models, and all the other nonsense.
Except then without a guy like Fauci to place blame on, the administrations role in this
becomes much more apparent.
It makes more sense to have a guy like Fauci on board to deflect to, especially given his
career as a government employee, so that it looks like there's some nefarious underlying
force that is working against the administration when the reality is that that nefarious
underlying force is working in tandem with it.
JaWS , 49 minutes ago
Damn the cases. I know about 10 people that have tested positive for covid19. Most cases
are not much more than a cold. Some not even that bad. Look at the deaths. That's where the
narrative should go. They are significantly down from the peak.
"Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious diseases expert ..."
I have to disagree with this.
SummerSausage , 36 minutes ago
If they left off the word "expert" it would be an accurate statement.
Bollixed , 6 minutes ago
Fauci is an expert. An 'ex' is a has-been and a 'spert' is a drip under pressure. He fits
the bill perfectly.
curtisw , 9 minutes ago
"Because I have a vaccine to peddle."
-- A. Fauci
scottyji , 19 minutes ago
FAUCI BELONGS IN PRISON.
Fauci's narcissisticly obsessed with his "expert image" and his lucrative role as pimp for
Big Pharma = total Napoleon Complex, two-faced, stinkin' bureaucrat of the Deep State.
Ergo I.C. , 28 minutes ago
Because Fauci and his buddy Bill Gates are trying peddle vaccines worth billions of
dollars.
adr , 39 minutes ago
Since Fauchi is supposedly an expert, maybe he can tell us why people suffering from hay
fever are being told they have Covid.
In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the
effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in
the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis,
we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (RR
0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I 2 = 30%, p = 0.25)
Of the 29 studies analyzed by the Lancet meta-study, seven studies are unpublished and
non-peer-reviewed observational studies that should not be used to guide clinical practice
according to the medRxiv disclaimer (references 3, 4, 31, 36, 37, 40 and 70; see table
above).
Of the 29 studies considered by the meta-study, only four are about the SARS-CoV-2
virus ; the other 25 studies are about the SARS-1 virus or the MERS virus, both of which
have very different transmission characteristics: they were transmitted almost exclusively
by severely ill hospitalized patients and not by community transmission.
Of the four studies relating to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, two were misinterpreted by the
Lancet meta-study authors ( refs. 44 and 70 ), one is
inconclusive ( ref. 37 ),
and one is about N95 (FFP2) respirators and not about medical masks or cloth masks (see
detailed analysis below).
The Lancet meta-study is used to guide global facemask policy for the general
population. However, of the 29 studies considered by the meta-study, only three are
classified as relating to a non-health-care (i.e. community) setting . Of these three
studies, one is misclassified ( ref. 50 , relating to a
hospital environment), one showed no benefit of facemasks (
ref. 69 ), and one is a poorly designed retrospective study about SARS-1 in Beijing
based on telephone interviews ( ref. 74 ). None of these
studies refer to SARS-CoV-2.
The authors of the Lancet meta-study acknowledge that the certainty of the evidence
regarding facemasks is "low" as all of the studies are observational and none is a
randomized controlled trial (RCT). The WHO itself admitted that its updated facemask policy
guidelines were based not on new evidence but on "political lobbying" .
In view of these shortcomings, University of Toronto epidemiology professor Peter Jueni
called
the WHO study "methodologically flawed" and "essentially useless".
In the US state of Kansas , the 90 counties without mask mandates had lower coronavirus
infection rates than the 15 counties with mask mandates. To hide this fact, the Kansas
health department tried to
manipulate the official statistics and data presentation.
Consuelo , 36 minutes ago
Fauci has been torpedoed here --- even without his lying numbers (of cases & deaths).
With the actual non-LYING numbers, he should be stripped of his medical license and
prosecuted for gross negligence, even gross-er Incompetence, and for potential Criminal $Gain
off his rather cozy relationship with Big Pharma and Bill Gates...
This whole thing was a $SCAM of the highest order.
aelfheld , 34 minutes ago
Fauci's a bureaucrat.
Bureaucrats have unqualified immunity.
Everybodys All American , 43 minutes ago
During the Spanish Flu of 1918 no one as I can tell was advocating for everyone to be
vaccinated either for or against their will. That tells you everything about this Dr. Fauci
imo. He should be removed from the planet.
drstrangelove73 , 6 minutes ago
I've posted about Tony several times this year.I spent an academic quarter as a medical
student on his service at the NIH,then saw him again many times in the 80's when I returned
as a fellow.He is a lifelong democrat,and card carrying member of the deep state who has
played politics with the management of viral infections for 40 years.Let that sink in.He has
been the director of the same NIH institute for 40 years.No one else in the history of the institute has been a director
for half that long.You think he doesn't know
how to play the game? _arrow
asteroids , 14 minutes ago
How does Fauci explane Sweden? The number of new cases is very low. Their death rate is
almost zero. Sweden now has herd immunity without a vaccine.
Hyzer , 9 minutes ago
He pretends it doesn't exist, just like the MSM.
TannyDanner , 3 minutes ago
He's trusting the plebs won't do their own research. I'm looking at the data almost daily
and am beyond thankful that Sweden had the balls to go about it the way they did and not bow
down to the bullies.
legalize , 18 minutes ago
Fauci himself has said that asymptomatic cases are "not the driver of infection"
We keep measuring "cases" instead of symptomatic cases
Therefore, I could give **** all about "case numbers"; I want to know about number of
people who are infectious/symptomatic
Useful_Idiot714 , 35 minutes ago
700 mostly old people with other diseases are dying from this each day in a country of
325,000,000. Sounds like we need mail in voting so that the frightened commies can vote early
and often to save us by electing a senile racist rapist pedophile.
SummerSausage , 46 minutes ago
Panic is Fauci's objective.
Democrats love big government which means more power for Fauci, more taxes and less
freedom for you.
Robert Paulson , 30 minutes ago
Panic is too unpredictable, and disruptive.
The "hope" is for respectful, solemn acceptance that Big Brother/Sister can save "us" from
ill health, poverty and international "enemies."
I mean **** was broken across most institutions throughout Western Civilization before the
flu was weaponized into a means of control. But the whole theater has become absurd.
The casedemic is pure and blatant FUD targeted towards Trump and Americans.
JamcaicanMeAfraid , 27 minutes ago
I predict on November 4th and if Dementia Joe is elected Fauci and his super ego will
stand before any microphone put in fromt of him and say "Joe Biden has put a stop to covid,
he has conquered the virus."
aelfheld , 44 minutes ago
Fauci sees the statistics as disturbing because they indicate an endpoint to his
prominence.
JaWS , 51 minutes ago
There are 4 men in my county that were tested positive within about 3 days of each other
and they had to quarantine for 14 days. About a week into it they started meeting everyday
down at the local fishing hole to fish while no one else was around. One of these men is 80
years old. The other 3 are in their 70s. Does this sound like something to shut the entire
country down?
GoldenDebt , 1 hour ago
Dont be a moron
Dr Fraudci is all politics and he's LYING. Dr FRAUDci also never condemned the protests as
being potential SUPER-SPREADER events
He's a criminal
moneybots , 13 minutes ago
"I really do believe we're rounding the corner," Trump said
during a White House briefing on Thursday. He added that newweekly cases have gone down
by 44% since July.
"I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with that because if you look at the thing that you
just mentioned, the statistics, Andrea, they're disturbing," Fauci told Andrea Mitchell on
Friday.
The statistics say Trump is right, according to the chart. Why is Fauci lying to the
American people?
Thalamus , 45 minutes ago
Fauci's worst case prediction of 1.7 million deaths from Covid-19 kind of came up short at
only 10K; but at least he didn't yell fire in a crowded theater .
Zerogenous_Zone , 48 minutes ago
which statistics?
to quote the great Mark Twain (now classified by the leftists as a rassiss)...
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics ."
the one statistic that is relevant, is the decrease in mortality...
and I for one, would like to know how they created a Covid-19 specific test...wait...what
was that?
THEY HAVEN'T?! it is an antigen test...that is, if you have any residual from your LAST
flu shot (they inject you with lysed virus to build up your antibody count...antigens!) you
could test positive...
and probably a majority of the tests are at issue since the test is highly
inaccurate...
but who cares? the virus is out of the box and here to stay...so you have either already
been exposed, or you will soon be exposed...and NO vaccine will be sufficient (since viral
strains mutate almost immediately)...especially the comment cold (news flash!! the 'common
cold' is a CORONAVIRUS!!)
At what point does the man on the street realize that he has been had? It took me about 2
weeks, 6 months ago to realize what Fauci and his cronies were saying was nonsense. Smart
people that I know, took months to reach the same conclusion but many people are still buying
the disinfo.
Choomwagon Roof Hits , 3 hours ago
Once I started getting into the influenza-like-illness data and realized this was
spreading exponentially worldwide since at least November - there were probably millions or
tens of millions of people infected and recovered in the US by the time the first cases were
identified.
fackbankz , 3 hours ago
The scam just gets bigger and more absurd every week.
Wait until cold and flu season when people freak out over every little case of the
sniffles. Many will have forgotten completely that one year ago it was normal for people to
catch cold, and nobody worried about it.
Just when the fear starts to subside, and growing public skepticism seems to push governors
into opening, something predictable happens . The entire apparatus of mass media hops on some
new, super-scary headline designed to instill more Coronaphobia and extend the lockdowns yet
again.
It's a cycle that never stops. It comes back again and again.
A great example occurred this weekend. A poll appeared on Friday from the Kaiser Family
Foundation. It showed
that confidence in Anthony Fauci is evaporating along with support for lockdowns and mandatory
Covid vaccines.
The news barely made the headlines, and very quickly this was overshadowed by a scary new
claim: restaurants will give you Covid!
It's tailor-made for the mainstream press. The study is from the
CDC, which means: credible. And the thesis is easily digestible: those who test positive
for Covid are twice as likely as those who tested negative to have eaten at a restaurant.
"Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk
factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection," the study says.
Very scary!
Thus the implied conclusion: don't allow indoor dining! Otherwise Covid will spread like
wildfire!
After six months of this Corona Kabuki dance, driven by alarmist media and imposed by wacko,
power-abusing governors and mayors, I've become rather cynical about the whole enterprise, so I
mostly ignore the latest nonsense.
In this case, however, I decided to take a closer look simply because so many millions of
owners, workers, and customers have been treated so brutally in the "War on Restaurants."
It turns out, of course, that this is not what the study said. What's more interesting is to
consider exactly what's going on here. The study was based on interviews with 314 people who
had been tested of their own volition. It included 154 patients with positive test results and
160 control participants with negative test results.
The interviews took place two weeks following the tests, and they concerned life activities
two weeks prior to getting the test.
Before we go on here, remember that what alarmed people about Covid was the prospect of
dying. The study says nothing about this subject, nor about hospitalization. It's a fair
assumption that the positive cases being interviewed here got it (presumably, if the tests are
accurate, which they are not )
and got over it.
This alone is interesting simply because it reveals how much the whole subject has been
changed: the pandemic has become a casedemic.
Now, to the question of life activities. In the study, based on answers to a survey, the
following were not correlated in any significant degree with positive cases of Covid:
Wearing a mask or not wearing a mask
Going to church
Riding on public transportation
Attending large house parties
Going to the gym
Going to the office
Going to the hair salon
Going shopping
Now one might suppose, if you think the study has any merit, that this would be the
headline.
The massive power of the state has been deployed all over the United States and the world to
force the closure of churches, gyms, offices, salons, and malls. This all happened and is still
happening. Also mask mandates became the new normal. The public has been invited by health
authorities to jeer at, denounce, and turn in anyone who doesn't have a cloth strapped to his
or her face.
All of this happened in complete contradiction to every commercial right, property right, or
normal human freedoms. We threw it all away in the name of virus control. Our lives have been
completely upended and our assumptions about our rights and liberties have been overturned.
And yet here is a study that is unable to document any correlation between these life
activities and catching the disease.
That's an amazing conclusion that could have generated headlines like:
Salons Won't Get You Sick, CDC Reports
You Won't Catch Covid at the Gym, CDC Shows
No, Your Hairstylist Doesn't Spread the Coronavirus
Scared to Go Shopping? Don't Be, Says the CDC
Your Mask Is Pointless, New Study Says
Church Goers Shouldn't Fear Sickness, Scientists Reveal
Study: Your House Party Didn't Spread the Virus
And so on. But none of this was to be. Not one single story in the mainstream press said
anything like this, even though this was all implied by the CDC study.
The one place that the study revealed a positive correlation between positive cases and life
activities was going to restaurants.
So that's what got the alarmist headlines. Yes, these are all real.
And so on for thousands of times in every mainstream venue. They are all competing for
clicks in the great agenda of extending lockdowns and feeding public fear as much as possible.
So the worst-possible spin on this slightly sketchy study gets all the headlines.
Thus is it burned into many people's minds that restaurants are really disease-spreading
venues. Go out to eat and you might die!
And here is what makes this even stranger. The interviewers never asked the people in the
survey whether they were eating indoors or outdoors, as incredible as that seems. The authors
admit this:
"Of note, the question assessing dining at a restaurant did not distinguish between indoor
and outdoor options."
Why not? Did they just forget to ask? What's going on here?
Which is to say that even if the results are meaningful – and there's so much about
this study that is murky and error prone – they are practically useless for knowing what
to do about it. If there is no distinction between indoor and outdoor, all speculation about
ventilation or crowds or the presence of food and so on, is utterly pointless.
Without knowing that, we are at a loss to figure out any answer to the question of why and
what to do. Instead, the message comes down to: don't go out to eat.
Here is how bad the science has become. In the discussion, the authors write the
following:
"Direction, ventilation, and intensity of airflow might affect virus transmission, even if
social distancing measures and mask use are implemented according to current guidance. Masks
cannot be effectively worn while eating and drinking, whereas shopping and numerous other
indoor activities do not preclude mask use."
Here is what is weird: the study itself supports none of that paragraph.
The survey never asked about ventilation because the people who made the survey somehow
forgot to make a query concerning indoor vs. outdoor dining . As for masks, the study did in
fact ask respondents about mask wearing and the results showed no correlation between the
sickness and whether and to what extent people were wearing masks!
In other words, that paragraph in the discussion is contradicted in two places by the
authors' own study.
In addition, the authors themselves point to an intriguing issue: the people in the survey
might have biased their answers based on their personal knowledge of the test results.
Think about it this way. The people who had a positive Covid test are more likely to ask
themselves the great question: how did I get this? Going to restaurants is such a rare activity
these days that it stands out in one's mind. When the survey asked people if they had gone out
to eat, it is possible that the memory of the Covid positive person might be more likely to
blame the restaurant, whereas the Covid negative person might be more likely to have forgotten
the locale of every meal in the last 30 days.
In other words, the real result of the study might be: Covid patients are more likely to
scapegoat restaurants than gyms, churches, and salons.
Alas, none of these interesting considerations appear in the media-rendered version of this
study: panic and keep the lockdowns in place!
Lockdowns have become a conclusion in a desperate search for evidence. Imagine if you
undertook a study of C-positive vs. C-negative cases and asked the people if they mostly wear
lace-up or slip-on shoes. If you come up with some positive correlation, the CDC will publish
you and a media panic will ensue.
This is precisely where we've been for six solid months now. The media has become the
handmaiden of lockdown tyranny, blasting out simplistic versions of sketchy studies to keep the
panic going as long as possible. And the public, which is far too trusting of the media and its
capacity for rational and accurate reporting, eats it up.
For now. Once the dust settles on all of this, it seems highly likely that media science
reporting will lose credibility for a generation. It certainly deserves that fate.
"Cloth masks that are used to slow the spread of COVID-19 offer little protection
against wildfire smoke. They do not catch small particles found in wildfire smoke that
can harm your health."
Just checking if that's the same CDC.
LA_Goldbug , 3 hours ago
Wow !!!!!
Nice find :-)
honest injun , 3 hours ago
At what point does the man on the street realize that he has been had? It took me about
2 weeks, 6 months ago to realize what Fauci and his cronies were saying was nonsense. Smart
people that I know, took months to reach the same conclusion but many people are still
buying the disinfo.
Be it Resolved, the scientific community has overreacted to the threat of COVID-19 and the
data prove it...
Six months into a global pandemic and 63,000 scientific papers later, scientists and
medical researchers continue to be perplexed by COVID-19. There are many unknowns with the
virus, and one of the most controversial is how deadly it really is. Since the beginning of
the pandemic, leading health institutions such as the World Health Organization and the
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases have warned that COVID-19 is much more
dangerous than the seasonal flu and that, without expansive public health measures, millions
of people around the world could die from the virus.
But there are some in the scientific community who disagree. And they say they have the
data to prove it. Antibody testing of large population groups indicates that we could be
grossly underestimating the number of people who have been infected by the virus –
which means we are dramatically overestimating the death rate. Given these findings, they
question whether sweeping public health controls are the way to approach a possible second
wave of COVID-19 this autumn.
GUESTS
To understand the true prevalence of COVID-19 infections in the United States, Jay
Bhattacharya has recently undertaken several seroprevalence studies (the study of antibodies in
a population). You can read about his study of Santa Clara County in California
here and his study of 5,600 Major League Baseball employees
here .
Sten Vermund has published numerous scholarly studies on infectious diseases, which you can
view here
.
During the debate both Jay and Sten speak about COVID-19's "infection fatality rate" (IFR).
IFR is one of the most important characteristics of an infectious disease in determining its
severity. It is basically the ultimate measure of a disease's ability to cause death. You can
learn more about IFR and how it is estimated here
. In the debate, both Jay and Sten agree that the current estimates of the COVID-19 infection
fatality rates are overestimated and therefore misleading. To learn more, read Jay's Wall Street
Journal op ed.
During the debate, Sten points out that between March and May of 2020 there was a 19 per
cent excess death rate in the United States. Excess death rates refer to
the difference between the observed numbers of deaths in specific time period and expected
number of deaths in the same time period. According to Sten, the excess rates are probably 28
per cent higher than the official deaths tally of COVID-19 because so many cases are not
reported. This
Nature.com article supports this view.
Jay argues that part of the science community's overreaction to COVID-19 has been censorship
of unpopular scientific views . Jay refers to an op ed in the New York Times by
Michael Eisen that expresses concern about how scientific study pre-prints are being
released before they are peer reviewed, and calling for the establishment of a scientific
"rapid review" service for pre-prints.
One of the scientists Jay identifies as having an unorthodox view on COVID-19 is Gabriela
Gomez, She speaks about her research on herd immunity occurring when as little as ten percent
of the population has been infected with the virus here
and you can read her research article
here .
Sten and Jay disagree with each other about the feasibility of isolating the most vulnerable
members of society, particularly the elderly, while letting the rest of the population continue
to live normally . Sten refers to a
New York Times article by David Katz which supports the strategy of "vertical
interdiction", where those over 60 are "preferentially protected."
Jay refers to the recent release of findings from a
Public Health England study that found negligible spread among one million students who
returned to school in June.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
From comments: "Article is poorly written by someone who does not know medical science. There
are no viral "cells" so the headline is a put off right away. The comment about "sensitivity" is
misplaced as PCR tests are too sensitive: ergo false positives. I believe "specificity" is the
word the author was searching for. If a test lumps true positives with false positives, then it
lacks specificity."
That's because new research from the University of Oxford's Center for Evidence-Based
Medicine and the University of the West of England has found that the swab-based technique used
for most COVID-19 testing is at risk of returning "false positives" since copies of the virus's
RNA detected by the tests might simply be dead, inactive material from a weeks-old infection.
Although patients infected with COVID-19 are typically only infectious for a week or less,
tests can be triggered by virus genetic material left over from a weeks-old infection.
The team's research involved analyzing 25 studies on the widely used polymerase chain
reaction test. PCR tests use material collected with a swab - the most common type of test
around the world, and especially in the US - then utilize a "genetic photocopying" technique
that allows scientists to magnify the small sample of genetic material collected, which they
can then analyze for signs of viral RNA.
What the researchers here have effectively found is that these PCR tests just aren't
sensitive enough to distinguish if the viral material is active and infectious, or dead and
inert.
For those who desire a more comprehensive understanding of how these tests work, the chart
below can be helpful.
Professor Carl Heneghan, one of the authors of the study, said there was a risk that a surge
in testing across the UK was increasing the risk of this sample contamination occurring and it
may explain why the number of Covid-19 cases is rising but the number of deaths is static.
"Evidence is mounting that a good proportion of 'new' mild cases and people re-testing
positives after quarantine or discharge from hospital are not infectious, but are simply
clearing harmless virus particles which their immune system has efficiently dealt with," he
told the Spectator.
Professor Heneghan added that international scrutiny might be required to avoid "the dangers
of isolating non-infectious people or whole communities." ZKnight 14 minutes ago
Fake science. How about purify the virus first and establish a gold standard for testing
first. No, of course not because the CDC has a patent for Covid-19 and nobody is allowed to try
find it to see if it exists. play_arrow LogicFusion 27 minutes ago
Everybody is a Covid-19 / Coronavirus expert now!
Read about the failed coin dealer and convicted felon's performance. It's hilarious!
Covid -19 has been so politicized that I don't believe a word of any publication for or
against testing, existence of the Virus, or anything that provokes testing or issues opinions
about locking down communities. Just like the riots, Covid news is just plain boring.
play_arrow ominous 3 hours ago
"Give me control of a nation's money, and I care not who makes the laws" - Mayer Amschel
Rothschild. play_arrow play_arrow tangent 4 hours ago remove link
People who recommend a vaccine for an entirely cured virus should lose their license to
practice medicine. 99.9% cure rate applying to people who take it before being hospitalized is
one of the biggest success stories in the history of medicine for HCQ. Not only that, but there
are multiple other likely cures that simply have not been studied well. You'd think people
would appreciate the fact that the common cold has been cured, but instead they just whine that
big pharma isn't getting those bucko bucks.
I honestly expected a ticker tape parade like in the movies when that first cure study came
out. But instead they took a massive **** on the study and on the doctor... ****ty world we
live in. ay_arrow Pair Of Dimes Shift 2 hours ago
An exec (55+) at my company is gung ho about the vaccine.
Unfortunately, I just had to give him a "wait and see" response although I know vaccines for
coronaviruses are impossible. play_arrow 2 play_arrow ThanksIwillHaveAnother 4 hours ago
(Edited)
Viruses are not full cells. They are DNA/RNA wrapped with a protein the clings to a cell
then the cell imports the DNA/RNA to start making its proteins. So what is inactive? If that
person sneezes on another person depending on immune system status that other person could get
a bad infection. y_arrow 4 CrabbyR 3 hours ago
viruses utilizes CELL structures and host DNA to replicate dna or rna according to the
viruses genetic code, the protein jacket is the final product to
disguise the virus from detection and to bind on another cell after the compromised cell
RUPTURES, there's more to it but if it cannot copy itself effectively it can become nonviable
and unable to infect another cell. It replicates DNA inside a host cell, It is not a complete
organism and cannot replicate unless it can inject its DNA into a host cell. Antibodies cling
to viruses and destroy this ability to bind to a target cell. A non viable virus has a damaged
coat or DNA RNA that has to many Dimers (damage or code breaks) Bacteria is more in line with
what you think a virus is y_arrow onewayticket2 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
they lost me when they changed the definition of "death" to include "presumed, untested"
cases (while bI@#$% ing at me that we needed to "follow the science")....and even got busted
for the laughable motorcycle accident being classified as a covid death and the Labs that were
sending in 100% positive results. (until they were caught) play_arrow OutaTime43 4 hours ago
remove link
The test detects RNA. Not necessarily viable virus. Also, it will detect RNA presence in an
individual who may already have antibodies and may be immune. We are bombarded daily by viruses
of which we already have immunity. play_arrow sun tzu 10 hours ago
Shocking news that the South Koreans already discovered and published back in May. Western
big pharma driven medicine is garbage 😂😂😂
Interesting play_arrow play_arrow Jack Mehoff 1 more time 9 hours ago
Business as usual play_arrow play_arrow Argon1 7 hours ago
Preparation for agenda 2021 in 2017. play_arrow 1 play_arrow CrabbyR 4 hours ago
WOW.......ties a few strands from other sources together into a real ugly picture play_arrow
play_arrow Welsh Bard 10 hours ago
The professor who won the Nobel prize for work in this field, said that the way this test is
being operated with over forty cycles, means that any results are entirely meaningless.
In Britain, having spent over £15 billion setting up PCR testing systems and a shaky
test and trace apparatus on top of that, it appears that 90% of positive results now appear to
be false. This is compounded by the fact that when a hot spot develops, more testing is done to
show a rapid increase in more false positive results, meaning further new lockdowns and even
more testing to prove yet more false positive results ad infinitum.
Now whether this is by design or ineptitude, people must decide for themselves but the
outcome is utter chaos.
For those countries who have not followed the Swedish model especially countries like
Australia and New Zealand who have set up complete isolation, now face a future perpetually cut
off from the rest of the world.
Okay, new techniques will and are coming along to treat the disease like HCQ when used
correctly maybe as a prophylactic and a vaccine that will need to be constantly upgraded like
the Flu vaccine, means that the whole world has painted itself into a corner unless drastic
revision is now made to the whole sorry mess.
In the meantime, we will now be stuck with digital currency and the introduction of ID
Health Cards that will limit people in how they travel where they work and access to a whole
heap of things like government services.
Welcome to the new world order! play_arrow 1 KuriousKat 11 hours ago (Edited) remove
link
Don't tell the Shameless Aussie gov that after arresting hundreds for simply voicing doubt
on need to lockdown entire city...Next time it will be thousands and not a damn thing they can
do to stop it..These people are trickling us the truth how worthless the tests are when pretty
much everyone knows. play_arrow espirit 12 hours ago remove link
Lessee.
WHO
Imperial College
John Hopkins
CDC
Line all those peeps up against the wall, and the first one to rat gets to live.
I'll provide my own ammo... ay_arrow Sick Monkey 6 hours ago
Not everyone working in these agencies are dishonest but like you and I we have to work and
eat.
Most of them are trapped in this mess with bills to pay threatened by NDA.
play_arrow 1 Urban Roman 12 hours ago
Not particularly new news. Been talked about since April at least -- it's an RNA virus, it
has its own polymerase, and it leaves lots of RNA fragments in its wake.
The Corona family of viruses make 5 or 6 strands with partial copies of their RNA molecule.
negative copies are made first, and then copied again into positive copies. Finally the one big
RNA is made with the entire genome on it.
So about a dozen RNA molecules are made for each finished virus particle that is produced.
And finally, a variety of different primers are used for the PCR tests, some are matched to the
small partial RNA copies and others are matched to various features on the large whole-virus
RNA. They can give different results for the same sample.
So, someone who registers on a PCR test has probably been exposed to the virus, but the test
gives no clue as to whether it is an active infection, or the person is contagious, or they are
just coming down with it, or they got over it six months ago. play_arrow 4 play_arrow 1
10 play_arrow gordo 12 hours ago remove link
Sweden, no masks, no lock downs, ALL SCHOOLS OPEN, herd immunity, no second wave.
Still think your masks and lock downs are working muppets?
1 play_arrow The 3rd Dimentia 13 hours ago
https://youtu.be/sjYvitCeMPc
SARS-CoV2 and the Rise of Medical Technocracy. Lee Merritt, M.D. play_arrow 3 play_arrow
hugin-o-munin 13 hours ago
I'm glad to see that many are starting to counter the official narrative.
We've been asleep for too long and allowed these agendas to fester to the point we're at now
where a college dropout software salesman and a former 3rd world communist terrorist (neither
of whom have any medical degree) are dictating to the world how everyone needs to get a DNA
altering vaccine and a medical ID. It's completely nuts and bonkers yet more or less the entire
planet's governments follow in 'lockstep' with ever more draconian laws and regulations
incarcerating people in their own homes, making them wear masks causing oxygen deprivation and
shutting down the entire world economy.
lay_arrow Warthog777 , 13 hours ago
Article is poorly written by someone who does not know medical science. There are no viral
"cells" so the headline is a put off right away. The comment about "sensitivity" is misplaced
as PCR tests are too sensitive: ergo false positives. I believe "specificity" is the word the
author was searching for. If a test lumps true positives with false positives, then it lacks
specificity.
Anyone who would use the term "virus cells", has no clue what they're talking about and
should be completely disregarded. Viruses are not cells. PCR tests are searching for
something your body produces in response to a virus as well. They are not produced
specifically for a singular virus either. The entire concept of PCR testing is garbage. This
**** was a scam from the get-go.
hugin-o-munin , 13 hours ago
Yes it is evident now that this entire pandemic is false and political. The goal seems to
be to vaccinate entire populations and the question people need to ask is - why? what for?
Aside from the obvious economic motives there are some more sinister plans that most people
will have a hard time accepting but these need to be looked at. Several years ago there were
a group of doctors and researchers that died of suspicious suicides who were collaborating
and studying vaccines and the link to autism.
The effort was led by Dr.Jeffrey Bradstreet who was researching the natural substance
GcMAF and how this could boost the immune system. What he discovered was that many vaccines
had a compound/substance called Nagalase in them that is unnatural and has a detrimental
effect on the immune system and function of GcMAF (which is produced by our own bodies) and
has no business at all being in vaccines. Just before he was able to blow the whistle on this
he also died of a suspicious 'suicide' and today most of the clinics and research groups
working on GcMAF have been destroyed and ruined. Draw your own conclusions.
snblitz , 14 hours ago
Dr. Kary Mullis invented the PCR test. He said it was ineffective for this purpose.
Though he was addressing its use in a prior virus hoax unleashed upon the world.
I bet you didn't know this scam has been used before.
That is why I was able to call out the scam right from the start. The second I saw them
using the PCR again, I knew it was from the same playbook.
snblitz , 14 hours ago
So many lies.
Viruses are not alive. They have no metabolic functions. They cannot move.
Don't believe me? Get a degree is virology or microbiology or just a read a book on the
subject. Or capture a wuhan-virus yourself and watch it under a microscope. It won't move. It
won't consume anything. It will just sit there inert.
The problem is that you are being lied to at a scale you cannot imagine.
I know, off to the fema re-education camp for me for spreading false information about the
wuhan-virus.
Though I am not the one spreading fear and hysteria.
aldousd , 13 hours ago
There article is confused, but the work of the doctor is not. Viruses use your cells to
reproduce. When your immune system targets the virus it actually kills your own cell which
has become host to the virus. The virus particles and markers, and the DNA of the virus can
be detected in these dead cells, but dead cells cannot serve as a factory for more viruses.
So it's effectively a dead virus infected cell. Not a dead virus cell.
So while the transcription of the idea here was done by an idiot, it's not an idiotic
idea. The tests cannot tell if the virus came in a living cell that is actively producing
more viruses or a dead host cell that has been assassinated by your immune system. That's
what they're talking about here.
mstyle , 11 hours ago
what about the chromosome 8 stuff that has been mentioned lately?
(since you appear to be rather intelligent)
hugin-o-munin , 11 hours ago
Thanks. Well the chromosome 8 discovery in the PCR test specifications/details is strange
and worrying because it makes you wonder why it's part of this at all. Some believe it's to
get more false positive results while others believe it is what the mRNA vaccines are
intended to target and if that's right then it's really sinister. What exactly is the plan?
To make all of us get Downs Syndrome? I don't know but judging by all their other lies and
schemes it wouldn't surprise me.
IRC162 , 14 hours ago
Fuggin progressives and their pandemic political prop. But really this reaction is the
same as their reaction to 'racial injustice'. They focus on feelings before the facts are
known in order to achieve their end, and then do their best to bury/ignore the facts when
they are gathered later.
94% COVID deaths with multiple comorbidities.
10 unarmed blacks killed by police in 2019 (6 were in self-defense).
adr , 15 hours ago
Why didn't you mention that nearly all labs are running 35-40 cycles which guarantees a
positive test, simply from noise.
The inventor of the test said if you don't find anything after 15 cycles, it probably
isn't there. After 20 cycles the noise starts to be greater than any real information. By 30,
the test is mostly noise. More than 35, the test is completely worthless.
Of course I've been saying this for five months, but most people didn't listen. After the
NYT article came out, people I know started saying, "How did you know?"
I said, "Because I have critical thinking skills. Why didn't you believe me? Name a time
I've steered you wrong."
Antiduck , 14 hours ago
333 labs in florida had 100% positivity. (stupid word.)
ZenStick , 12 hours ago
Exactly correct.
Nobody will touch this line of reasoning in public or on media.
Bastages.
Identify as Ferengi , 15 hours ago
See above, Born2Bwired.
The PCR test is not useful for what they are using it for apparently. This has been
known since the beginning. Here is quote regarding AIDS:
"Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Science for inventing the PCR, is thoroughly
convinced that HIV is not the cause of "AIDS". With regard to the viral load tests, which
attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: "Quantitative PCR is an
oxymoron." PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is
unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral
load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect
free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some
cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but
not viruses themselves.
What PCR does is to select a genetic sequence and then amplify it enormously. It can
accomplish the equivalent of finding a needle in a haystack; it can amplify that needle
into a haystack. Like an electronically amplified antenna, PCR greatly amplifies the
signal, but it also greatly amplifies the noise. Since the amplification is exponential,
the slightest error in measurement, the slightest contamination, can result in errors of
many orders of magnitude."
In six or twelve months a majority of people will start to get that they were had. It will
be too late.
afronaut , 15 hours ago
Doubt it. Unless the media or government says it
palmereldritch , 14 hours ago
There will be mask wearing long before then for totally different reasons.
mstyle , 11 hours ago
There's a rather large percentage of the US population that's going to die with a mask on
their face, a BLM sign in their yard, and a Lemon on their screen.
Sad :-(
_wayfarer , 9 hours ago
They were had with 9/11, never got it.
Salisarsims , 5 hours ago
Most of the United States where had by 9/11, and still are.
BlueGreen , 15 hours ago
End lockdowns around the world now! Lockdowns kill. Never again. Sweden's death rate is
lower than US, and many other countries.
Gaedamfukn democrap virus. Botox face carcinogenic hair dyed fossilized demented nasty
wicked witch of the west ... and her army of flying monkey stooge guvners and mayors keeping
their states shut down to oust Orange Julius and they could give two diarrhea schitz about
you and your family All these terds care about is power
NoDebt , 15 hours ago
It's not just that the (government) response to this virus has ****** a lot of people
royally, it's the absolute certainty that they will do it again in exactly the same manner,
pretty much every damned year moving forward forever.
MaF , 15 hours ago
In many blue states they can do it until 2022 when they are voted out...unless the people
rise up.
drendebe10 , 15 hours ago
Sheeple rise up? Phat phukn chance
PaulDF , 15 hours ago
Hey, some people think that as long as Trump is gone ~ it doesn't matter what it takes.
Nothing is too extreme.
palmereldritch , 14 hours ago
The MS-DOS virus subscription model.
Sound familiar? lay_arrow
Implied Violins , 15 hours ago
The Nobel Prize winner, Kary Mullis, who developed the PCR test called out Fraudci for his
******** during the AIDS crisis on Nightline back in 1994:
Even then that ******* was practicing fraud in order to garner more tax dollars. His
"test" ruined hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of lives.
Fraudci deserves to be EXECUTED for his BS.
EuroPox , 16 hours ago
Who cares how many 'cases' there are? The virus is not lethal except for a tiny number of
people, who already have other problems. Quarantine them and let the rest of us get on with
it.
Did Fauci and Birx knew something about origin or the virus that we do not know and that's why they panicked?
Notable quotes:
"... When you are over 75 years old, you are going to succumb to serious underlying conditions covid or no covid. Those who's deaths are being attributed to covid are primarily in that age group. It is disingenuous to create a panic over a virus that almost exclusively contributes (at most) to the deaths of the elderly with underlying serious conditions. Many of those who have died, succumbed to the underlying condition, but incidentally had covid. ..."
"... Actually, Laura, when you are over 75 years old, the risk of dying increases, period. Once you're into the 85 year old and over bucket, which many covid deaths are, you were probably going to die regardless; unless you're a vampire or some other inhuman death defying creature. Is this really news to anyone? ..."
"... CDC has an annual budget of $12 billion. Then there are public health budgets at NIH and other federal, state and counties. ..."
"... How come there was no agreed upon pandemic response plan? If there was, why wasn't it executed? Do public health authorities have a plan now that can be executed? ..."
"... It would appear to me this was a failure across all segments of society. The public because they so easily succumbed to fear. The media for fanning the flames of hysteria. Private healthcare for not providing realistic and alternative views. The government for not executing a coordinated response. ..."
"... dan of Steele - a contributory factor in the death toll in Italy might be the mandatory influenza vaccine. In the autumn/winter 2019, a super influenza vaccine (4 strains in one dose) was administered to old people and health care workers in Italy. Research suggests that influenza vaccine derived virus interference is significantly associated with coronavirus. ..."
"... For some reason, the authorities want COVID-19 to be recognized as The New Black Death. Rising numbers of 'cases' substitute for deaths in order to keep the fear factor high (as far as I can make out) when higher case numbers are an unsurprising consequence of ramped-up testing. There are allegedly high numbers of false positives, and many if not most of the cases uncovered by testing are in people who are asymptomatic or not very sick, certainly not in danger of dying or even having to be hospitalized. ..."
"So get this straight – based on the recommendation of doctors Fauci and Birx the
US shut down the entire economy based on 9,000 American deaths to the China coronavirus." The
Gateway Pundit."
"... the coronavirus fatality rate reported by the liberal mainstream media was completely
inaccurate and the actual rate more like a typical seasonal flu – the media was lying
again.
Doctors Fauci and Birx were next to push ridiculous and highly exaggerated mortality rates
related to the coronavirus:
Dr. Tony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx used the Imperial College Model to persuade President
Trump to lock down the ENTIRE US ECONOMY.
The fraudulent model predicted 2.2 million American deaths from the coronavirus
pandemic.
The authors of the Imperial College Model shared their findings with the White House
Coronavirus task force in early March
Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx then met with President Trump privately and urged him to shut down
the US economy and destroy the record Trump economy based on this model
But the Imperial College model Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx pushed was garbage and they
recommended the destruction of the US economy using this model." Gateway Pundit
----------
Hmmm ... The Fauci is a god crowd will heap scorn on this but, thing about it. pl
Yes, Col Lang., as you know, this is what I've been saying for months. It is what the good
data and analysis (not that CDC garbage) reveals. However, no one wants to believe the evil
capitalist private insurance companies. They think government is far more trustworthy and
competent. More of that conditioning of attitude and perception by the powers that be in the
plan to implement a big global govt.
The govt could have worked with the insurance companies to understand this thing. Seems
like the logical move if you have poor quality data and insurance has good data, and you
really believe there is a lethal pandemic on the loose.
When you are over 75 years old, you are going to succumb to serious underlying conditions
covid or no covid. Those who's deaths are being attributed to covid are primarily in that age
group. It is disingenuous to create a panic over a virus that almost exclusively contributes
(at most) to the deaths of the elderly with underlying serious conditions. Many of those who
have died, succumbed to the underlying condition, but incidentally had covid.
Another new report has come out that shows a significant proportion of covid positive
tests are showing positive for minuscule viral loads in the system; not enough to cause
illness (or serious illness). How many of those elderly that died of underlying conditions
fall into that category? Many of the tests show false positives.
This whole thing has been one big scam - and I believe deliberately.
Actually, Laura, when you are over 75 years old, the risk of dying increases, period. Once
you're into the 85 year old and over bucket, which many covid deaths are, you were probably
going to die regardless; unless you're a vampire or some other inhuman death defying
creature. Is this really news to anyone?
We must look at years of expected life lost, not raw body counts. That approach reveals
covid to not be a threat to society.
The numbers are consistent because the strategy has been carefully worked out to have
consistent documents. There will not be 20 million COVID cases requiring hospitalization
because a high percentage do not get sick. In re the IO, been there done that myself. My
question is, which group or constellation of groups is running the op.
"Here in old Europe it seems we are on the verge of a new outbreak. Some people have gone
on vacation and the number of daily new cases is on the rise."
The number of daily new cases in Germany has recently doubled because the number of daily
tests has also roughly doubled. The share of positive tests among all tests has remained
constant at around 1% for 3 months now.
Must be a very strange "new outbreak". The number of Covid patients in the ICUs of German
hospitals have been stagnating at a very low level (around 250 patients in the whole country)
for several weeks.
What has intrigued me about the Wuhan virus is the panicked, off-the-cuff response. A
pandemic is not new. We've had several in the recent past. SARS, H1N1, H2N2.
CDC has an annual budget of $12 billion. Then there are public health budgets at NIH and
other federal, state and counties.
How come there was no agreed upon pandemic response plan? If there was, why wasn't it
executed? Do public health authorities have a plan now that can be executed?
It would appear to me this was a failure across all segments of society. The public
because they so easily succumbed to fear. The media for fanning the flames of hysteria.
Private healthcare for not providing realistic and alternative views. The government for not
executing a coordinated response.
Money is never the issue in the USA. No one spends like us on healthcare, education,
national security. Outcomes are a different matter altogether. Value for money is poor since
there's a high "corruption" factor.
We've had many "wars". War on Poverty. War on Drugs. War on Terror. We've spent huge
amounts on each. They've all been failures!
Laura, When you get to a certain age, everyday you wake up to most of obituaries being for
people younger than yourself. It is a landmark point in one's life.
Before they were all so old. Now they are all so young. And no, they did not die "of
covid". The died. Fate played out their final hand. And you ask not for whom the bells toll
............. you just praise every single blessed day that is still yours to enjoy.
182,000 did not die "of covid" in the US. CDC played games with the numbers from day one.
The only mystery is why? And why did we let them do this. Because we did - Brix admitted up
front on TV they tossed anyone suspected of "covid" into the covid basket.
Any screw up were not facing covid, but overkilling "covid". The leftist cabal made sure
no other points of view were allowed. If a covid report did not include or imply
OrangemanBad, it never reached the airwaves. Please don't have selective memory problems
about any of this. Or else you have come to the wrong place to push them.
So now tell us where the new CDC data is flawed (9K deaths), and why that is justification
for believing their prior data is not flawed. (182K deaths)
I don't have a dog in this fight. I do hope that one day we will find out what is really going on with this covid-19. I
merely look at worldofmeters corona virus page and watch the numbers of new cases, serious cases, and deaths. Those numbers
were horrible for Italy for a long time and after months of being locked down hard, the numbers got better.
15 August is a very famous Italian holiday with everyone going to the beach, having picnics, and so on. Oddly enough a week
to 10 days later the numbers of new cases went up...quite a bit. Happily the deaths have not gone back to the 1000 a day from
the early days but I am holding my breath. In our little village we have 4 active cases and 21 in quarantine. They were
infected by people who had gone on vacation somewhere else.
as for Germany, my son lives near Hamburg and he is mostly teleworking and overall they are quite good at implementing good
pandemic control measures. Testing was free but I believe they are starting to charge for it again. My brother in law went to
Cyprus on his vacation this year and upon return he and his family were all tested.
believe me, I don't want this crap to go on any more than you do. It does not affect me all that much as I am finally
retired and have a single family home with a yard. being somewhat of a recluse anyway didn't make it worse.
"New outbreaks" that lead to herd immunity are a good thing; when the death rate remains
static or declines. Which is what is happening right now.
As long as every passing day adds more very elderly with 3.5 co-morbidities to the body
count, one can assume this flu is taking its normal course through this population
demographics.
As it does every single year, since the flu was always previously known as "the old man's
friend". Sad, of course. Any death is sad. Very sad.
For reflection on eternal life however, take a look at the Czech opera "The Makropolus
Case". The diva lives for 300 years, and when it comes time to take the magic potion again
that keeps her eternally alive, she muses about the trials, tribulations and practical
burdens of her eternal life.......... and she finally decides to .......?????
Always hate it when media reports a percentage increase - "twice as many cases" -- but
never mentions the numbers. 2 case is twice as many as one case. Zut alors! We need new cases
to finally reach herd immunity.
Cases are okay. In fact, it is relief we are finally existing outside of this artificial
bubble, and at a time we now know a lot more about treatment and to stop killing people with
forced ventilator abuse.
Original game plan - flatten the curve - end up with the same numbers of cases, but over a
longer period time to ensure health care delivery would not be overwhelmed should they all
happen at once. That was the bargain - flatten the curve, but not change the numbers
infected.
When did "someone" demand we flat-line the numbers of infections, until they reach
absolute zero? Who, what, where, when, how or why did that change?
Will anti-Trump riots after Trump's 2020 re-election push "covid" off the front pages?
How many of the 500,000 attendees at Bike Week died of this, it's been three weeks
already? How about all those 'mostly peaceful' protests? (Not counting than the two who died
of the AR15 virus in Kenosha)
dan of Steele - a contributory factor in the death toll in Italy might be the mandatory
influenza vaccine. In the autumn/winter 2019, a super influenza vaccine (4 strains in one
dose) was administered to old people and health care workers in Italy. Research suggests that
influenza vaccine derived virus interference is significantly associated with
coronavirus.
For some reason, the authorities want COVID-19 to be recognized as The New Black Death.
Rising numbers of 'cases' substitute for deaths in order to keep the fear factor high (as far
as I can make out) when higher case numbers are an unsurprising consequence of ramped-up
testing. There are allegedly high numbers of false positives, and many if not most of the
cases uncovered by testing are in people who are asymptomatic or not very sick, certainly not
in danger of dying or even having to be hospitalized.
The WHO admitted publicly that the chief reason it declared a pandemic was that too many
countries were - in its opinion - not taking the threat seriously enough. Therefore, even the
declaration of a pandemic was for scare value. When COVID-19 was at its peak for infections
and deaths, the WHO (Dr. Fauci himself, actually) claimed that medical-grade masks were not
necessary for the public, because the WHO deemed it necessary to reserve the supply of masks
for medical use. I don't think anyone would disagree that non-medical cloth masks have much
less filtration capability. But then Fauci reversed himself, and now a plethora of 'experts'
claim it is proven that non-medical cloth masks work to reduce the spread of COVID-19, and
there is growing and relentless pressure from the busybody sector to make them mandatory wear
in all public settings. Now, when the death rate is steadily dropping. No clinical trials
have ever achieved results which demonstrate that cloth masks do anything to stop the spread
of an airborne virus - not masks and only masks. Trials in which the subjects regularly
washed their hands, avoided touching their faces after touching other surfaces AND wore a
mask demonstrated a somewhat reduced infection rate. Tests in which only masks were used
showed either a statistically insignificant difference or no difference at all, but were not
proper clinical trials as the sample size was comparatively small and the masked group
contained a significant number who admitted they did not wear it all the time. But forcing
everyone to wear a mask has become a test of will for public authorities against a public in
which many do not want to wear them and are afraid compulsory wear will become the norm. Once
again, there is NO PROOF that they work, as the theory has never been properly tested, I
don't care what 'expert' is telling you the results are in, and masks work.
For those 'COVID warriors' who label all dissenters 'maskholes' and 'Covidiots', cite me a
proper clinical trial that establishes masks on their own significantly reduced the infection
rate of an airborne virus. That means show me how uninfected people wore a mask and did not
take other precautions, in the presence of an infected person (without touching them or
handling objects infected people handled) and remained uninfected. While you're at it, find
me where the '6-foot rule' came from. Nobody seems to know how that number was arrived upon,
the WHO says it did not come from them, and how does it account for different environments
such as the presence or absence of wind? People have to stand six feet apart outside while
waiting to be allowed in to the grocery store. How does that protect you from an airborne
virus that theoretically can only travel six feet in still air?
I am always willing to have my mind changed by actual science. But so far I am not seeing
it. Just a lot of politics.
"... It's time to stop fetishizing scientific methods. We have to accept that there are many elements of Covid-19 that science may never understand and if we wait for it to do so, we will never again be able to live a normal life. ..."
"... Science, if it is working properly, will not come to a conclusion that is wholly wrong. But not everything that is true can be established by a randomized control trial followed by peer review. Take the theory, popularized by Dr John Lee's work in the Spectator , that Covid has become less deadly as it spreads, and is now basically inert. ..."
"... People need to accept this about Covid (and hopefully later, much else) and stop fetishizing the scientific method at times when a bit of common sense would do the job. ..."
"... Consider this article , written by three scientific minds. It is a measured and 'data driven' analysis of whether Covid is becoming less deadly. But is blinkered by an assumption that only official data, no matter how muddled, can be relied upon. All you really need to do is ask doctors whether they are seeing people come in with Covid, or if they are dying of Covid when they do. Instead it focuses on case numbers, which are not worth the paper they are written on. ..."
"... So many people have been so frightened – understandably – by exaggerated accounts of the threat posed by Covid-19, and it will take a lot to persuade them that they have been sold a pup. But they need to be persuaded, so that can get their old lives back. The present regime will never take on this responsibility because it would center on an admission of massive guilt on their part. ..."
"... What is needed now from all sensible people is calm but insistent argument, with friends, relations and authorities alike, for the total abolition of all coronavirus-related restrictions. We saw some of that in London and Berlin over the weekend, and it was fantastic to see such well organized and clear minded dissent against the sinister 'new normal'. ..."
By Peter Andrews , Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a
background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in
genetics
It's time to stop fetishizing scientific methods. We have to accept that there are
many elements of Covid-19 that science may never understand and if we wait for it to do so, we
will never again be able to live a normal life.
The Covid-19 outbreak is largely over, and man's attempts to slow, stop or understand the
virus have failed. Science will eventually discover more about the pandemic but it is a slow
process.
Science, if it is working properly, will not come to a conclusion that is wholly wrong. But
not everything that is true can be established by a randomized control trial followed by peer
review. Take the theory, popularized by Dr John Lee's work in the
Spectator , that Covid has become less deadly as it spreads, and is now basically
inert.
This would perfectly explain why so many people died of Covid-19 in a short period of time,
and why deaths have basically flat-lined since April. It fits with many Covid studies
confirming fast
evolution , different strains and reinfection .
Furthermore, a change to the virus itself could explain why the same patterns in deaths have
been seen everywhere, irrespective of lockdowns, demographics, contact tracing or any other
scheme.
In fact, with each passing day it is increasingly probable that the virus has mutated to a
milder form. The trouble is it would be nigh on impossible to establish this with the
instruments of science, now or any time soon. The vagaries of individual human bodies and
microscopic particles are just beyond the scope of exact science.
People need to accept this about Covid (and hopefully later, much else) and stop fetishizing
the scientific method at times when a bit of common sense would do the job. We are paralysed by
a need for the World Health Organization or Public Health England to conjure up some
peer-reviewed study or other confirming to 99.9 percent likelihood that we can go back to
normal now. That will never happen, but we have to get back to normal.
Consider this
article , written by three scientific minds. It is a measured and 'data driven' analysis of
whether Covid is becoming less deadly. But is blinkered by an assumption that only official
data, no matter how muddled, can be relied upon. All you really need to do is ask doctors
whether they are seeing people come in with Covid, or if they are dying of Covid when they do.
Instead it focuses on case numbers, which are not worth the paper they are written on.
Here is another paper ,
co-authored by the brilliant Professor Carl Heneghan of the University of Oxford's Center for
Evidence-Based Medicine. He has been tireless in his questioning of the government's
interpretation of coronavirus statistics, although it has taken far too long for him to be
given any kind of
platform from which to address the public.
The study, while no doubt accurate and valuable for establishing fine points of detail,
seeks to answer whether the infection fatality ratio has been falling in the UK. A
comprehensive review of the limited data suggests that it has, but so what? What does that mean
to the average Joe, confused as to whether they should send their child to school in the
morning, or whether it would be irresponsible to give their elderly parents a
hug?
So many people have been so frightened – understandably – by exaggerated
accounts of the threat posed by Covid-19, and it will take a lot to persuade them that they
have been sold a pup. But they need to be persuaded, so that can get their old lives back. The
present regime will never take on this responsibility because it would center on an admission
of massive guilt on their part.
What is needed now from all sensible people is calm but insistent argument, with friends,
relations and authorities alike, for the total abolition of all coronavirus-related
restrictions. We saw some of that in London and Berlin over
the weekend, and it was fantastic to see such well organized and clear minded dissent against
the sinister 'new normal'.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
he US Justice Department is mulling civil rights investigations of four Democrat-run
states whose governors forced elder care homes to take in Covid-19 patients, potentially
contributing to thousands of deaths.
The governments of New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and Pennsylvania have been ordered
to turn over Covid-19 data to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division as the agency
weighs whether to pursue the probes, according to a statement released on Wednesday.
Investigations would be launched under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
(CRIPA), a law meant to protect the rights of those living in state-run nursing
homes.
Likely the responses will be "We didn't know " or "How could anyone accuse us
compassionate/all-caring/liberty-affirming of doing nothing but good ".
Now, there is a campaign weapon the Trump team should wield like a sledge hammer. It will
be high quality protein for the us conspiracy-theory folks as well.
Worth quoting from the above: All four states' Democratic governors infamously required care homes to admit patients
from hospitals without testing them for Covid-19, despite knowing that the virus could
– in the now-immortal words of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo – spread through
the facilities "like fire through dry grass."
As public outcry grew with awareness of the NY governor's order, Cuomo tried to blame
virus-stricken care homes for not disobeying him and refusing Covid-19-positive patients. The
order itself was even stealthily deleted from the New York healthcare website amid the
outrage.
While Cuomo has tried to defend his policies by arguing New York actually had a lower
percentage of deaths in nursing homes than other states, recently-released federal statistics
suggest the state dramatically undercounted its care home fatalities by omitting residents
who died in hospitals from the totals. While the official tally of 6,600 care home deaths is
already the highest in the nation, an AP report earlier this month suggested the real number
may be as much as 65 percent higher.
Per the internet, total Covid deaths in New York State is currently about 35,000. Per the
above, nearly 11,000 were killed in nursing homes or in hospitals after being infected in
nursing homes. Most of those were apparently in the early stages of the pandemic thus perhaps
accounting for a majority of the deaths.
Per the internet, over 40% of all fatalities were related to nursing homes
nation-wide.
I have to say, the behavior of governments in the COVID 'crisis' has been appalling.
Formerly polite and reserved Canada is no more, and I would say it is just like America if
America had not reached for new levels of bizarre that still just barely edge it out –
let's settle for saying Canada is just like America was just before the
COVID/BLM/pre-election frenzy of hyperbole. Check this out;
"But Ball went too far. He responded with amendments to the province's Public Health
Protection and Promotion Act that looked more like something from a police state than a
democracy. The new law suggested inspectors could pull people over, scroll through their
cellphones, copy their private information and forcibly perform COVID-19 tests. The law made
clear that if two ministers decided that a person had contravened the act, he or she could be
imprisoned or expelled from the province without a hearing. The province also began barring
non-Newfoundlanders from entering, contrary to the division of powers set out in the
Constitution Act, 1867, and without any regard to the interprovincial mobility rights set out
under Section 6 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This unconstitutional order meant that
a woman who lived in Nova Scotia -- which was nearly COVID-free -- couldn't attend her
mother's funeral."
The 'crisis' has encouraged people who could not be trusted to look after your cat while
you're in Little Rock to assume limitless powers, to the point where jumped-up jackass
'ministers' have the power to expel you from your province if they determine you have
contravened some 'Act' they just made up. If they don't look out, they'll have an armed
insurrection on their hands, just like our neighbours – threatening to 'deport' people
because they are suspected of spreading a virus that most people have a better than 99%
chance of surviving and which global medics are trying to kill by suppression, by denying it
victims. Everyone has lost their minds.
There is at the present time not a single soul in the Canadian political stable who is
worth the effort of casting a ballot. Democracy is just another word for nothing left to
lose. Political parties everywhere should be starved to death the way they are trying to
starve the coronavirus – by waking up to find the entire electorate stayed home and not
a single vote was cast. It'll never happen, because too many people are sheep and buy that
'change is coming' bullshit that accompanies every election the way flies swarm on dung. But
'democracy' has descended too deep into farce to be saved.
It has happened so fast! One must assume that there is a renewing reservoir of people with
a propensity to become petty tyrants when it was safe and the opportunity was there to do so.
What a profoundly sick society!
However, I will vote and vote for Trump. Heck, I might even put a Trump in 2020, 2024 and
2028 sign in my yard (although we live at the end of a dead end street so hardy anyone will
see it). Why? If this country is heading for a civil war, lets get it on.
One thing that is definitely Not Happening is the psychopaths in both parties, the media,
the medical mafia, Wall Street, and corporations taking responsibility for their crime spree
and fraud.
Now the medical community has been fully exposed to be less legitimate than crack dealers,
because at least crack dealers are not pretending to cure people like the medical mafia is
all based on blatant scientific fraud!
Now that these evil fraudulent psychopaths have totally destroyed the lives of hundreds of
millions locking the country down resulting in people losing their businesses, jobs, homes,
and apartments let Nuremburg 2 trials begin!
"... the government is owned by finance people. I guess we can't really stop them from using the money to pay for military stuff but the idea that any of this has any relationship to what's good or bad for "Americans" has been proven to be a complete crock of bull. ..."
"... We are all basically squatters in the parking lot of a shopping mall living in RVs and eating whatever food they sell at the nearest convenience store. That's all America is for me these days. ..."
One thing that is definitely Not Happening is the psychopaths in both parties, the media,
the medical mafia, Wall Street, and corporations taking responsibility for their crime spree
and fraud.
Now the medical community has been fully exposed to be less legitimate than crack dealers,
because at least crack dealers are not pretending to cure people like the medical mafia is
all based on blatant scientific fraud!
@No Friend Of The Devil ree-for-all for cash where you don't even have to be a US citizen
to get benefits anymore What exactly is the point of having a military other than it's just
another way to spend loads of cash. I definitely wouldn't support any kind of war on behalf
of "American Interests" now.
We have been swamped by illegal immigrants and the government is
owned by finance people. I guess we can't really stop them from using the money to pay for
military stuff but the idea that any of this has any relationship to what's good or bad for
"Americans" has been proven to be a complete crock of bull.
We are all basically squatters in
the parking lot of a shopping mall living in RVs and eating whatever food they sell at the
nearest convenience store. That's all America is for me these days.
Contrary to claims by the media and the ego maniac Dr. Fauci about a tidal wave of Covid
infections, I have first hand, albeit anecdotal evidence, that there is a lot of bullshit
surrounding reports of people who have "tested" positive for Covid.
WASHINGTON -- An investigation released Friday by House Democrats says President Donald
Trump's administration overpaid by up to $500 million on
ventilators as the
coronavirus pandemic first struck the United States.
Click to expand 00:00 00:47 Fauci
optimistic on COVID-19 vaccine availability
In a review of thousands of pages of internal administration documents, Democrats on the
House Oversight Committee said Phillips North America was contracted to deliver 43,000
ventilators to the federal government for a significantly higher price than it did under
previous contracts for functionally identical ventilator models delivered under contracts
dating to President Barack Obama's administration.
"The American people got ripped off, and Donald Trump and his team got taken to the
cleaners," said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., whose subcommittee led the investigation.
"The Trump Administration's mishandling of ventilator procurement for the nation's stockpile
cost the American people dearly during the worst public health crisis of our generation."
Phillips denied the report's findings, saying the company did not raise prices in relation
to the pandemic, and argued the increased price of the ventilators actually represented a
"discount."
Frans van Houten, CEO of Royal Philips, said in a statement the company did "not recognize
the conclusions in the subcommittee's report, and we believe that not all the information that
we provided has been reflected in the report."
"I would like to make clear that at no occasion has Philips raised prices to benefit from
the crisis situation," van Houten said.
According to Phillips, the list price of the ventilator ordered under the contract is
$21,000 and was supplied to the Trump administration for $15,000, which the company called a
"discount" given the rushed production schedule.
The report, however, disagreed with Phillips' claim. A functionally identical ventilator was
delivered to the Obama administration under a 2014 contract for $3,280. Based on the report's
review of purchases between December 2019 and May 2020, other small purchasers, even those that
purchased only one ventilator of the same model, secured them for as low as $9,327.
"No American purchaser paid more than the U.S. government," the report said.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere told USA TODAY in a statement the report was
"misleading and inaccurate."
"Because of the President's leadership, the United States leads the world in the production
and acquisition of ventilators. No American who needed a ventilator was denied one, and no
American who needs a ventilator in the future will be denied one."
Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Ryan Murphy said the Trump
administration's efforts ensured the "federal government procured enough equipment to care for
all hospitalized patients in the United States who needed a ventilator for respiratory support
related to COVID-19 infections."
Some of the ventilators ordered under the contract were already in use to treat COVID-19
patients, he added.
Murphy declined to comment on an ongoing contract, but said HHS follows "all Federal
Acquisition Regulations for Strategic National Stockpile contracting efforts."
The Trump administration has frequently touted the production of ventilators as evidence of
its response to the coronavirus pandemic.
"When you look at the United States response, you look at the fact that we were supposed to
have a ventilator shortage. In fact, we had a ventilator surplus," White House Press Secretary
Kayleigh McEnany said at a Friday briefing.
Phillips had first signed a contract with the Obama administration to deliver 100,000
ventilators in the event of a pandemic by June 2019, but the delivery date was pushed back,
eventually to June 2021, as the company missed deadlines, the report said. Phillips approached
the Trump administration about moving up the delivery date in January 2020, when the first
coronavirus cases were reported in the United States, but the Trump administration ignored the
offer, according to the report.
Then, in March 2020, the Trump administration agreed to extend the ventilator delivery
deadline to September 2022, but did not ask Phillips to produce more ventilators or move up
delivery times. Instead, in April 2020, the Trump administration negotiated a new contract with
Phillips to deliver 43,000 ventilators at a price of $15,000 per ventilator.
According to the report's review of documents, "the Administration accepted Philips' first
offer without even trying to negotiate a lower price."
According to emails released by the committee, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, who
served as the lead negotiator with Phillips, offered to prepay half of the total cost, or over
$323 million, to Phillips before a single ventilator was even delivered. Department of Health
and Human Services staff later reduced the amount prepaid to 10% of the total cost of the
contract, or about $65 million.
N95 Masks DO WORK, and the Proof is Available All Over the Net!
There has been so much oh-so-earnest and so much oh-so-authoritarian nonsense bruited
about on this site about the non-effectiveness of the N95 masks that it's getting really,
really disgusting. It also calls into question either the honesty (trolls?) or the
intelligence of those who could so easily have just looked up the information from, and
about, the inventor of the N95, Dr. Peter Tsai.
If they had done just that little bit of research, they would have discovered that the N95
works because of an inner layer of plastic fiber that carries an electro-static charge that
attracts and destroys the virus, and that can be cleansed and sterilized for re-use by a
number of different techniques.
Please do not believe any of the contra-factual and sometimes dangerous nonsense being
spewed about by people who don't know what the hell they're talking about.
Oh, and N95 masks are not all "vented to breathe straight out without filtration." Not
those intended for medical use, for certain. There are some vented N95 masks that are
intended for firefighters and other non-medical usages, and not for protection against
viruses. And as you can see below, the electric charge attracts even sub-micron particles, so
the idea that the mask cannot trap viruses because they're too small is simply more nonsense
from uninformed and/or deviously motivated individuals.
//
Here's just a small sample of information that's easily found all over the net:
Brief bio: Peter Tsai, Ph.D.
Employment: Research faculty, Joint Institute of Advanced Materials, The University of
Tennessee, Knoxville
Expertise: Development of meltblowing (MB) systems and the electrostatic charging (EC) of
materials for making air filter electrets. The MB and the EC developed by Tsai have been used
in the industries worldwide making tens of billions of pieces of N95 respirators or face
masks. He has received three prestigious awards from UT in recognition of his contribution to
technology innovation. Tsai is a Fellow Member of American Filtration and Separation Society
and a member of Electrostatic Society of America.
https://utrf.tennessee.edu/information-faqs-charged-filtration-material-performance-after-various-sterilization-techniques/
//
Peter Tsai and the Electrostatic Filter Mask
https://engineeringethicsblog.blogspot.com/2020/04/peter-tsai-and-electrostatic-filter-mask.html
"Prof. Tsai's innovation was to find a way to take a cold pre-fabricated mat of non-woven
material and subject it to two electric discharges of opposite polarity, one after the other.
Under the right conditions, this process embedded quasi-permanent electric charges into the
plastic fibers and made them very attractive to even sub-micron particles, like the
100-nanometer-diameter SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. The charge is durable and will
persist even if the masks are sterilized with steam, according to a new article that Prof.
Tsai just put up on a University of Tennessee website.'
//
The retired inventor of N95 masks is back at work, mostly for free, to fight covid-19 https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2020/07/07/peter-tsai-n95-mask-covid/
//
More technical information for those curious enough: https://aim.autm.net/public/project/53844/
//
Finally, let's dispense with a couple of other oh-so-popular misconceptions:
"Q: Do face masks cause oxygen deficiency?
"A: The prolonged use of medical masks when properly worn, does not cause oxygen deficiency
nor CO2 intoxication, according to WHO. Make sure your face covering fits properly and that
it is tight enough to allow you to breathe normally.
" 'This is a common misconception being perpetuated that has no evidence behind it,' said
Krutika Kuppalli, a Palo Alto infectious disease doctor and a biosecurity fellow with the
Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.
"Q: Does wearing a face covering put you at risk for carbon dioxide poisoning?
"A: No. CO2 molecules diffuse easily through everything from bandannas to medical masks to
N95 respirators, allowing for normal breathing." Aidin Vaziri. San Francisco Chronicle
Thanks b. The mask - a simple and elegant precaution in high risk environments. But so
much foaming hysteria and opposition from pumped up nay sayers its just like the response to
the early motor car or the mandatory seat belt. Extraordinary, hyperventilated nonsense and
inflamed debating points.
I assume this noise is to distract from calling it by its proper name - Fort Detrick
Flu.
Mr Gohmert then wondered if his mask was to blame for contracting COVID-19.
"But I can't help but wonder if my keeping a mask on and keeping it in place, that if I
might have put some germs or some of the virus onto the mask and breathed it in -- I don't
know. But I got it, we'll see what happens from here, but the reports of my demise are very
premature," he said."
about a decade ago there was outbreak of TB in Seattle I was a nurse at the time. We were
told by infection disease at the time if we were to see TB patients we had to wear an
individually fitted respirator... every nurse was fitted and red pepper was sprayed around
the masks to test the fit. I couldn't wear one ... and was told I could wear a surgical mask
but that it would only provide about 30 min of protection and then I would need a new mask...
Now tell me why me way a fashion mask, a bandanna or scarf can protect me or another from a
virus (which is much smaller than a TB bacteria?
I just drove from coast to coast across the US. I avoided large cities and felt perfectly
comfortable with social distancing. I was in two states that never had a "true" lock down and
no mask mandates,,,, and you know what people weren't dropping like flies, people weren't
afraid... they were just acting respectful to one another"s personal space.
Let's see now... we have an aerosolized pathogen; shades of the discussion in 2001
regarding weaponized Antrax! We have, seemingly, a very low number of mutations; it's either
been out there or cultured for some time. No one has any 100% accurate test; the test
criteria of Koch's Postulates seem to have
been forgotten or ignored. In the dearth of trustworthy data, the deluge of untrustworthy
data, and the general level of greed-generated-mistrust towards all western societal
organizations, no one in the general public has the proper knowledge to make life-or-death
decisions concerning themselves or their families. Perhaps, rather than the "Trump flu" that
the partisan-oriented commenter proposed previously, if a large group of people called it
instead the "Fort Detrick Flu," western governments might be persuaded to seek and/or
spread truthful data.
The purpose of the mask is to stop (asymptomatic) carriers of the disease from spreading
it, or at least dramatically reduce the spreading. The mask limits outgoing aerosols,
not incoming ones.
Moreover, rural areas where people spend a lot of time outdoors and generally meet only a
limited amount of different people are much less likely to be affected by the initial phase
of a pandemic than densely populated cities where most people spend most of their days
closely packed with numerous other random people in badly ventilated indoor places such as
offices, factories, subways.
During an in-depth interview that will air Tuesday night on ABC News as part of a primetime
special, "American Catastrophe: How Did We Get Here?," Fauci was pressed to explain why, months
after COVID-19 first reached U.S. soil, the U.S. government is still struggling to provide
adequate testing for Americans and sufficient personal protective gear for essential
workers.
"We keep hearing when we go to these task force meetings that these [issues] are being
corrected," Fauci said. "But yet when you go into the trenches, you still hear about that."
Fauci said he does not have a "good answer" and "cannot explain" the discrepancy, especially
since those matters are not part of his "day-by-day" responsibilities, but part of the problem
stems from the fact that "many of the things that we needed were not produced in the United
States."
The U.S. government ended up competing for those materials with other nations stricken by
the pandemic, and the White House ultimately had to invoke emergency powers to push U.S.
companies to help.
Those challenges were exacerbated by what Fauci admitted were early missteps on testing by
the Centers for Disease Control, which developed tests that "didn't work" initially because
– it turned out – their results were based on potentially contaminated samples.
That forced the federal government to further rely private companies.
Asked about any missteps he may have made himself – including initially telling the
public that the average American didn't need to wear a mask – he said such decisions were
"based on the information at the moment."
In a segment due to air this
weekend, 'America This Week' host Eric Bolling sat down with Dr Judy Mikovits, a disgraced scientist who believes that the
coronavirus pandemic was orchestrated by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases head Dr Anthony Fauci and Bill
Gates to push vaccines on the population – a theory she set out in the documentary film 'Plandemic,' which has been effectively
censored off the internet.
Bolling called Mikovits' claims "hefty," and brought on medical contributor Dr Nicole Saphier to refute them, but CNN
claimed
the
host didn't push back hard enough against Mikovits' "baseless conspiracy theory," and hammered Bolling for allowing Mikovits to
"continue to make her case."
As CNN's article circulated
on Twitter on Saturday morning, the network's liberal audience called for a boycott of Sinclair. The broadcaster initially stood
by its decision to run the segment, declaring that
"at no juncture are we aligning with or
endorsing the viewpoints of Dr Mikovits."
However, within an hour,
Sinclair bent the knee and pulled the episode from the air until additional content could be added to counter Mikovits.
"All
stations have been notified not to air this and will instead be re-airing last week's episode in its place,"
Sinclair
tweeted. For good measure, the company added
"we valiantly support Dr Fauci and the work he
and his team are doing to further prevent the spread of Covid-19."
Sinclair is an incredibly
powerful organization to have been swayed by an online outrage campaign. The company and its partner organizations own nearly 300
local TV stations around the country, and reach 40 percent of American households.
Proponents of the boycott
celebrated their victory on Twitter, declaring that
"we shamed them into doing the right
thing."
Amid a recent upsurge in
'cancel culture,' few campaigns have brought a company to its knees as fast as Saturday's blitz by CNN. Similar campaigns have
been mounted against Fox News'
Tucker
Carlson
– with an advertiser boycott and attempts by journalists to doxx his family among the most recent moves, but Carlson
remains on the air and unapologetic.
For Bolling and his
colleagues at Sinclair on the other hand, it's back to the studio to reshoot their offending segment at CNN's behest.
The real problem is masks that don't measure up.
This article says half of the masks manufactured in China don't actually capture 95% of
particles. Since all of my masks are from China, that is concerning to me. However, even if a
mask only does 50%, that's still better than most non-respirator masks.
Mask-wearing obligatory in confined public spaces in France from today .Initially
announced by Macron in his july 14th speech for the first of August,but over the weekend
Health minister said it is in application from this monday 2 july.Fine is 135 euros.This will
lead to more gigs cancelled,unless they are in the street.How can one sing masked?
Well,I tried wearing one saturday,but it is a sloppy experience and I don't think I will wear
one correctly,it hangs down from my nose,it is to escape french fines.Before people start
insulting me for that,i have to tell you that I see practically nobody,apart from going to
supermarket once a week....
I pointed out that cloth masks were ineffective relative to N95 months ago here. The
hierarchy is N100, N99, N95, surgical masks, then anything else. There is a reduction of
maybe 25% in effectiveness per level (except for the N masks.) T-shirts are almost useless,
having an effectiveness of maybe 10-15%.
*Doesn't mean they shouldn't be worn.*
People don't seem to understand that avoiding infection is a game of probabilities. It's
not a binary either-or situation. Anything you can do to impede the progress of a viral load
from the environment to your vulnerable surfaces is worth doing if it's practical. Wearing a
mask is practical.
Minor repeated reductions in oxygen or increases in carbon dioxide is not going to kill
you and is unlikely to have long-term physical effects. And there's a good chance that
eventually we'll stop wearing them once the virus has been reduced in the environment.
Asians have been wearing masks frequently for a long time. Health workers wear masks
frequently for extended periods. Cite a study where that has had long-term negative health
effects.
"But there is a graph here that if I explain this properly, it'll make sense to you. This is
from the Centers for Disease Control. And it is death counts attributable to COVID-19 through
July 11th. The week ending July 11th, which is the most recent date for data. They run about,
you know, a week to two weeks behind here.
So throw the chart up. This is by age. All sexes by age. So if you look at the top line, the
red line, the very top, that is the week ending April 11th. You can't see this on the chart. Go
ahead and put the chart up there, Brian, switch it over. The top line is red. You can't even
probably tell that. But, trust me. The top-most line is red, and it occurs on April the 11th.
That is the peak death rate, and it's probably about 6,000 . I don't know in what interval that
this thing is reporting.
Probably Eh, it's in a week. The key is to go all the way over to the right side. You see
the peak of death rates was April the 11th. It isn't now. The peak death rate was April 11.
That red line is people 85 years and older. The line under it is people 75 to 84. That's the
yellow line. The blue line underneath that is people 65 to 74. We're under 4,000 now in a week.
So the top line is people 85 and older.
If you go to the This is where I'm not gonna There are two reds, but you can't tell the
difference in them. Just trust me. Let's move to the far-right side of the chart. That's July
11th, and you'll see that the death rate is not even 500, right now, per week -- CDC -- in all
ages, in all demographics, says the CDC. We're not at peak death rate. The peak death rate was
April the 11th to April the 18th." Limbaugh
I see now we are being encouraged to ignore "death rate" as unimportant. What we are told to
panic about is a higher incidence of "positives" among population under 40 years of age. This
population apparently doesn't have as bad an outcome (hospitalization/death) and that's "bad"
because they don't get contact traced and thus have "community spread".
I just love how AP/NYT and local journos all quote seemingly random "experts" with no
discussion of just what their "expertise" consists of, other than perhaps a credential (and the
relevance of the credential to the "expert statement" (more correctly opinion) is never
provided).
Sir, Yes. You are thinking right about Cuomo murdering the elderly that cost the state so much money
- many having the homes and medical treatment paid for by Medicaid (Medicare only pays for 30
days). Only it wasn't just Cuomo it was also Witmer in Michigan and Murphy in New Jersey. They
killed off the costly elderly and got the bonus of more deaths to raise the fear of the virus
and gain subsequent control over the lives of citizens + via twisted logic, try to give Trump a
black eye. Those govs are are morally sick people. It is a no brainer, if you care about the
elderly, to not place people with what you believe is a deadly highly contagious virus in homes
full of elderly infirm people. I mean what is there to even consider or weigh about that
decision?
Had those murderers handled the nursing homes correctly (like Florida did) the virus would
have been a lot less deadly.
Btw, with regard to schools re-opening, note that the line of the graph for school and
college age people is basically synonymous with the X-axis; meaning they didn't die from the
virus even at its peak lethality.
To know what Fauci [don't wear a mask it don't help; wear a mask it helps] would say, let's
look at how Aristotle would help us elucidate this answer.
Q: What can one conclude from [the mouth of] the liar [Fauci]?
A: Answer: nothing Absolutely Nothing. +++++++++++++++ And on this basis, from his mouth, our national "pandemic" "strategy" was thus formulated, from
Mr. Nothing aka Fauci.
And onto more black humor, and the wearing a mask as virtue signalling -- since they can
only slow down by at most ten minutes any disease transmission of the novel coronvirus, there
is this "gem" spoken by someone who apparently believes the mask kool aid? I D K . . . --and
for me at least, his essay, Attorney Jonathan Turley, was funny to read, irrespective of
whether that was his intent:
[[There is a new form of protests sweeping across the country as individuals put on
anti-Mask masks to defy mandatory mask rules. The anti-masks are made of thin material, mesh or
even crochet and are advertised as having no protective qualities for Covid-19. The question is
whether they are legal. They appear to be so.]]
The the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases was actually on sidelines and
did not yet contribute anything signigicat in understadning this coronavirus
The level of subservience of Fauci to Big Pharma is open for review
WASHINGTON -- Dr. Anthony Fauci on Monday rejected President Donald Trump's
recent criticism of him in which he called the infectious disease expert an "alarmist."
... Fauci warned last week that the coronavirus pandemic could be as bad as the
1918 flu pandemic, which is estimated to have killed at least 50 million people worldwide. He
also warned late last month that the number of
COVID-19 cases could top 100,000 a day.
And this Big Pharma stooge was right: in open spaces unless you are inthe dence coud there is no reason to wear any mask
Notable quotes:
"... No – for a solid hour, I heard the following: that COVID19 – in reality, at most, a moderately serious flu virus – is the worst medical threat the United States has ever faced. ..."
For anyone who has forgotten, Fauci told 60 Minutes that:
There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you're in the middle of an
outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little better and it might even block a
droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think it is. And often
there are unintended consequences – people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep
touching their face."
But he does make an astute point:
"Recently I had the poor judgment to turn on National Public Radio for about an hour, under the impression that I was
going to learn something about the day’s news.
... No – for a solid hour, I heard the following: that COVID19 – in reality, at most, a moderately serious flu virus – is
the worst medical threat the United States has ever faced.
...
But the real theme of the hour was masks, masks, masks: how to make them, how to wear them, their different types, who
doesn’t seem to have enough of them, and why muffling our faces (even though no such thing was ever demanded of us during
dozens of past viral outbreaks) is absolutely, positively good for us all."
When it comes to the topic of clown cars, we'd say Dr. Fauci gets a limo version all to himself...
Yesterday he uttered the following incoherent babble, saying the recent surge in new cases is because the Virus Patrol didn't
go far enough in throwing 50 million Americans out of work:
'We did not shut down entirely,' Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said. 'We need
to draw back a few yards and say, "OK, we can't stay shut down forever." You've got to shut down but then you've got to gradually
open.'
Got that?
What does this pretentious old windbag think - that the blooming, buzzing mass of a $21 trillion economy can be calibrated up
and down by the week via some magical dimmer switch?
Never mind because he was then on to this preposterous comparison:
Fauci also said he expects the public to compare the Covid-19 pandemic to the 1918 pandemic flu, which killed around 50 million
people, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Well, it so happens that the US death rate from the Spanish Flu was 655 per 100,000 persons (675,000 deaths in a population of
103 million). That's obviously orders of magnitude larger than the 39 per 100,000 deaths to date from the Covid.
In fact, the impact of the Spanish Flu was not only 17X greater in terms of the overall mortality rate, but it was also a true
Grim Reaper in the sense that it struck across the entire age spectrum of the population (dark blue bars).
It actually started in the giant domestic military training compounds stood up by Woodrow Wilson to join a European war that was
none of America's business, but the virus did kill tens of thousands of 18-30 year-old draftees in their own barracks long before
they got to the killing fields of France.
By contrast, as we now surely understand, and you would think Fauci would, too, the Covid (light blue bars) is primarily a harvester
of elderly persons already struggling with life-threatening respiratory, heart, vascular, renal and diabetic illnesses.
Accordingly, among the 191 million Americans under the age of 45 years, there have been only 1.5 WITH-Covid deaths per 100,000,
while for the elderly, the opposite is true. Nearly 70,000 or more than 60 percent of all WITH-Covid death have been among the 75
years and older population, resulting in mortality rates as follows:
85 years & Over: 581 per 100,000 persons;
75-84 years: 200 per 100,000 persons;
Now, you don't need to take a single class in epidemiology to understand a core truth: That is, when nearly 60 percent of the
population under 45 years accounts for only 2.5 percent of the reported WITH-Covid deaths and has a rounding error mortality rate,
while the 6.5 percent of the population 75 years and older accounts for 60 percent of the deaths -- you don't fight the disease with
a one-size-fits all strategy of generic lockdowns, quarantines, and social regimentation.
And surely you don't shutdown the schools, gyms, bars, restaurants, movies, ball games, concerts, beaches, theme parks etc. because
the vulnerable elderly don't patronize these venues in appreciable numbers anyway, and could easily be warned to stay strictly away.
The key point, however, is that this whole unspeakable Lockdown Folly does not remotely stem from the "science", as the MSM supporters
of Fauci claim.
It's just a hair-brained experiment in social control that happened because the Donald was too weak, ill-informed, distracted,
and innumerate to send Fauci and his camarilla of doctors and vaccine-peddlers packing when the mid-March guidelines were first issued
by the CDC.
Yes, the Donald's political enemies in the ranks of big city mayors and Blue State governors have feasted upon the chum Fauci
& Co have persistently tossed into the fetid waters of national politics, but that doesn't let Trump off the hook.
If the truth be told, this is the Trump Lockdown Folly and ranks among the greatest blunders ever committed by a US President.
That's because even at this late date nearly four months into the resulting economic disaster:
there is no evidence that asymptomatic persons are transmitters of the virus,
there is powerful statistical evidence that 95 percent of the population can cope with the disease and recover if they do become
infected.
Yet, the twin pillars of Fauci's hare-brained social regimentation scheme assumes they very opposite: Namely, that healthy Americans
must be put under house arrest because they are silent spreaders and killers of their fellow citizens; and that the disease is so
virulent that its #1 enemy -- the powerful immune system of every healthy American -- cannot be trusted to do its job if the virus
is permitted to follow its natural course of contagion and eventual herd immunity.
As to the silent spreaders trope, here is how the very head of WHO's COVID-19 Task Force, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, recently explained
that transmission of the virus from asymptomatic patients appears to be very rare:
It still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual."
For crying out loud. That knocks the very rationale for stay-at-home orders to hundreds of millions of healthy citizens into a
cocked hat.
In a constitutional democracy, where the liberties and properties of citizens are protected by law, you need overwhelming proof
of an existential threat to society before ordering mass house arrests. But in this instance, the head of the WHO task force–the
agency that fomented the whole coronavirus hysteria in the first place–has said quite unequivocally: No cigar!
In a word, Dr. Fauci is peddling dangerous humbug under the banner of pseudo-science, and should have been shut-up and forced
into retirement long ago. The unfortunate truth, however, is that the Donald is too chicken to use the Fake "your fired" tool that
made him a short-lived TV star, if not a successful businessman.
His defenders, of course, mumble that his hands are tied because Fauci is a member of the legally protected Senior Executive Service
(SES). That's Jimmy Carter's gift to insubordinate bureaucracy, which your editor happily voted against back in the day -- but the
excuse is poppycock.
Under Federal law, Fauci can be fired if he is found to have engaged in --
misconduct, neglect of duty, malfeasance, or failure to accept a direct reassignment or to accompany a position in a transfer
of function", is or to be "less than successful [in his] executive performance.
If not "malfeasance", what would you call the absolute savaging of the livelihoods and life's work of tens of millions of American
workers and small businessmen for no good reason of state, which have resulted from Fauci's idiotic pronouncements and guidelines?
The thing is, after four months Fauci's blatherings and instructions to state and local authorities have fomented an outright
public Hysteria of biblical proportions.
It is not just that officialdom has closed restaurants and gyms via unconstitutional "takings" of their owners' properties. By
now, Fauci's Virus Patrol and its megaphones and misanthropes in the MSM have rendered large portions of the American public fearful
about leaving their own homes.
And, needless to say, they have also given the Donald's legions of rabid political enemies license to stage malign theatrics in
the name of Covid-fighting that would be unthinkable under any other circumstances.
For instance, it has now been announced that the school districts of Los Angeles and San Diego, which collectively serve nearly
one million students, will not have in-person teaching to start the school year.
But if you are conversant with any facts at all, you can only sputter: WTF!
There are nine million school age children in California, and not a single WITH-Covid death has occurred among them.
That's right. There have been 27,400 positive tests among these nine million kids, but all of them, positively all of them, have
been either asymptomatic or mildly ill -- as children are wont to become -- and have recovered.
Yet here is where America's growing fleet of clown cars comes in. It seems that the politicization has gone so far off the deep
end that the LA teachers union–35,000 strong -- is now taking the schools hostage for their own parochial ends.
They recently proclaimed that no schools should open in LA until there is a Charter School freeze; the police are defunded; Medicare-for-all
is adopted by the US Congress; new state taxes on the wealthy are enacted; and there is a Federal bailout of the LA school district.
You can't make this stuff up. And while they were taking the children hostage in the name of Covid-fighting, they also insisted
that the already dysfunctional schools of LA become completely pointless:
The union outlined numerous major provisions it says will be necessary to reopen schools again, including sequestering students
in small groups throughout the school day, providing students with masks and other forms of protective equipment, and re-designing
school layouts in order to facilitate 'social distancing.'
Of course, the latest outbursts of this kind of mindless social destruction has been fueled by the absolute mendacity of the Virus
Patrol and its MSM megaphones with respect to the so-called outbreak of new cases in the Sun Belt states.
But the whole brouhaha is a crock. There is no public health crisis in the so-called hot spots, as the up-to-date chart below
makes abundantly clear.
Yes, the 42-day trend of "new cases" has risen sharply in tandem with far more testing, and repeat testing of the same individuals
-- outcomes that were inherent in re-opening plans, which required employers to have their employees tested as a condition of operating.
But, alas, the death count trend in these 50 counties has not risen at all - except for the last few days when a lot of "catch-up"
data for earlier fatalities was thrown into the data hoppers by some of the counties involved.
That hasn't stopped the Covid-Howlers from proclaiming a phony medical crisis in Texas and elsewhere, with the same old tropes
about overflowing hospitals and strained ICU capacity in places like Houston.
But as the eagle-eyed maven of the corona-data, Alex Berenson, tweeted this AM, it's just a big fat lie. While CNN may have managed
to find one or two crowded facilities in the whole of the Houston-Harris county region of some 5 million souls, there are actually
still more than 2,500 empty hospital beds in the area.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Here's the thing. The Virus Patrol has switched from the death count to the "case" count because the latter is not at the 3,000
per day predicted by the CDC in early May, and ballyhooed by the NYT and MSM as the leading edge of a horrid "second wave" coming
down the pike.
In fact, during July to date (thru the 14th), the daily WITH-Covid death count has averaged 613, or only one-fifth of the projected
June-July-August surge; and even that level is suspect, given the growing evidence that many local jurisdictions are doing retrospective
death audits to pad their case counts.
In any event, the readily available state-by-state data tells you all you need to know. This so-called Sun Belt wave of cases
is, indeed, the equivalent of the normal flu.
In the case of Florida, for instance, during the first 14 days of July, there have been 139,195 new cases reported, but only 4,322
new hospitalizations. So that means only 3.1 percent of this ballyhooed surge of cases was sick enough to even require hospitalization.
Needless to say, that's not a crisis; it's just one more part of the indictment against Fauci and his gang of malpracticing doctors.
They have put the anti-Trump press into a rabid feeding frenzy, and that coverage, in turn, has caused the American public to head
back into their Covid holes.
As it happened, three of the nation's largest banks reported their totally confected earnings for Q2 this AM, but the one thing
that stood out as meaningful was a collective $28 billion provision for future loan losses. That is, they see the massive wave of
defaults set in motion by Fauci's misbegotten Lockdown Nation strategy, and are getting prepared for the worst.
Meanwhile, the Fed's lunatic $3 trillion injection of liquidity into the canyons of Wall Street since the Lockdown Nation incepted
in mid-March continues to do its mischief, fueling a stock market bubble that gets more ludicrous (and dangerous) by the day.
We noted yesterday that during the Monday's great reversal on the stock market that Tesla had gained a "GM" ($38 billion) in the
morning spike, but lost a "BMW" ($42 billion) in the afternoon.
A timely piece by Bloomberg this AM helps explain how this kind of madness actually happened:
Almost 40,000 Robinhood accounts added shares of the automaker during a single fourhour span on Monday, according to website
Robintrack.net, which compiles data on the investing platform that's much beloved by day trading millennials.
The frenzy in interest means that as of the end of Monday's trading session, there are now roughly 457,000 users on the Robinhood
app that hold shares of the company in some form. That makes it the 10th-most popular stock on the platform, ahead of even Amazon.com
Inc., which is held by 358,000 users.
The one-day return may not have turned out so well. Tesla was up as much as 16 percent at one point before paring gains through
the day and finishing 3 percent lower. It was a rare losing day for the high flying stock, which has surged 56 percent over the
past 10 days.
So how did these mindless gamblers reason about a company that has never, ever made a four-quarter profit, and which reported
Q2 volumes well below last year, in coming to a peak valuation of $325 billion Monday morning?
Well, a sell-side analyst explained both that question, and the large fleet of clown cars now cruising up and down Wall Street
about as well as could be expected. Said this master of the crystal ball:
'At the current price, Tesla's stock reflects an expectation of 2030 volume of 5 million units, which is more than ten times
what the company appears on track to achieve this year,' Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas said.
Why, you don't say!
Then again, projecting EV car sales in the year 2030 is probably as good a use for Wall Street's clown car riders as any other.
Certainly, it would not dawn on them to ask whether a stock market held up by the Terrific Ten, and especially the FAANGs and
Microsoft, has anything at all to do with the dire state of the US economy.
It seems these trading sardines make up a quarter of the S&P 500 index by value, but just 8 percent of its composite revenues
and a mere 1 percent of jobs in the American workforce.
So, yes, the Acela Corridor has the clown cars coming and going - even as the stock bubble which will take down this whole fantasy
reaches its historic asymptote, as we will essay further in Part 3.
Nearly 71,000 Americans died from drug overdoses last year...
Soaring overdose deaths in the US have helped drag down average life expectancy for 3
straight years, and by the looks of it, No. 4 might be right around the corner.
play_arrow
sbin , 1 hour ago
St Floyd died of an overdose.
2 years of drug overdose killed as many Americans as plandemic.
Work for funeral homes many more overdose and suicide deaths 20 to 40 year olds than covid
+70 and most were already dead but still breathing and making nursing home money.
Lucius Quinctius , 1 hour ago
The Chinese have a legitimate grievance ,(actually several), with regards to the
deliberate introduction of opium into their country by the British, in the 1800 s,as a means
to repatriate sterling used to pay for tea .Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank,(HSBC),very central
to funding this traffic as well as a Jewish-British banking family, the Sassoons, originally
from Baghdad ,directly involved.The immiseration of millions of Chinese in opium addiction as
well as the failed Chinese attempt To free themselves from this in the Opium Wars has left
them bitter,rightfully.
So, introducing fentanyl to the west is payback. Two years ago I looked up on Alibaba ,out
of curiosity ,the cost , quantity and availability of a common antibiotic, Vancomycin. It was
amazing, at least 30 responses, producing in quantity, hundreds of kilograms, cheap ....,,you
want it when? The Chinese pharmaceutical production capacity is enormous. Fentanyl is no
problem to produce in huge quantity for these folks. They, in their minds, have reason to
send it our way. We are at war.
MerLynn , 1 hour ago
yes its a Bio Chemical War.... and all Bio Weapons come from the Barrel of a Needle
Sid Davis , 1 hour ago
If you are free, that means you can make good choices for yourself and bad ones, too.
When you are a slave on the big government run plantation we call the USA, pain from being
subjugated encourages escape, and since the underground market in drugs is one of the few
remaining free markets, you still have the freedom there to make bad choices.
It isn't much solace to those you leave behind that you managed to permanently escape your
pain.
Off topic, but yesterday on Newsmax network in the US the guest COMPLETELY ripped into
Gates and Fauci. Newsmax is a major conservative media outlet that has both a TV network and
website with millions of viewers/readers. You can watch it here: https://twitter.com/KarluskaP/status/1283315374025515008
"And when Fauci was telling the White House Coronavirus Task Force that there was only
anecdotal evidence in support of hydroxychloroquine to fight the virus, I confronted him with
scientific studies providing evidence of safety and efficacy. A recent Detroit hospital study
showed a 50% reduction in the mortality rate when
the medicine is used in early treatment.
Now Fauci says a falling
mortality rate doesn't matter when it is the single most important statistic to help guide
the pace of our economic reopening. The lower the mortality rate, the faster and more we can
open." Navarro in USA Today
-------------
"Laputa's population consists mainly of an educated elite, who are fond of mathematics,
astronomy , music and
technology, but fail to make practical use of their knowledge. Servants make up the rest of the
population.
The Laputans have mastered magnetic levitation. They also are very fond of astronomy, and
discovered two moons of Mars. (This is 151 years earlier than the
recognized
discovery of the two moons of Mars by Asaph Hall in 1877.) However, they are unable to
construct well-designed clothing or buildings, as they despise practical geometry as "vulgar
and mechanick". The houses are ill-built, lacking any right angles, [6] and
the clothes of Laputans, which are decorated with astrological symbols and musical figures, do
not fit, as they take measurements with instruments such as quadrants and a compass rather than with tape measures . [7] They
spend their time listening to the music of the spheres. They believe in astrology and worry
constantly that the sun will go out." wiki on Gullivers Travels.
--------------
Ah, I see it now! Dr. Fauci is a Laputan seer! He is devoid of any real comprehension or
respect for the ordinary humans trying to deal with actual pandemic problems rather than "the
music of the spheres."
Is he a Democratic Party operative? I doubt it. He is simply "out of it." pl
Fauci doesn't matter. Over the weekend the WH tried to strongarm parents to get on board
with school reopening. They are fucking with the wrong interest group.
There is a better, albeit a more difficult way to undermine Fauci. Educate the people that
this issue has vast economic consequences and we must factor in those consequences when
crafting an over-all policy. Fauci, I expect, will openly admit he is approaching the topic
from a purely medical perspective...which is exactly what he's supposed to be doing.
As is, Trump is leaves himself wide open to the obvious counter: Neither he nor his
economic adviser have any medical expertise.
"Tony Fauci has many, many vaccine patents and there's one vaccine patent that he has that
is a way of packaging a coronavirus with some other vaccine in a protein sheet and then
delivering it through a vaccine he somehow ended up owning that patent Tony Fauci will be
able to cash in . So Fauci's agency will collect half the royalties for that vaccine [related
to the coronavirus]."
"Sunderland co-founded the VC firm, known for making ambitious investments, after having
led program-related investments for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provided
financial support to Moderna while she was there. Since 2010, Moderna has been working on
developing messenger RNA (mRNA) that allows the body's cells to act like reprogrammed
biological factories, producing antibodies needed to battle diseases, including viruses.
"The nice thing about big bets is that they play out over time. ... We made an investment
five years ago in Moderna, and mRNA was a big bet, and you see it playing out in terms of
their ability to get a rapid vaccine for Covid. ... You have to take those big bets,"
Sunderland said."
"The other thing that is amazing in its evolution is the amount that we've learned about
HIV pathogenesis, the reservoir, the potential for controlling the virus, either in the
absence of antiretroviral [treatment] or in a modified regimen that takes away the need to
have a single pill or multiple pills every single day. The thing that remains the holy grail
of unaccomplished goals is the development of a highly effective, safe vaccine. And that is
something that's not surprising because of the very special situation with HIV, that the body
-- as much as we study pathogenesis and understand it so incredibly well -- the body does not
make an adequate immune response against HIV, which is the reason why no one has yet
spontaneously cleared the virus by their immune system. And so what we need to do, and where
we're combination putting a lot of effort into, but also struggling with, is the issue of the
development of a vaccine that would be effective enough to be able to be deployed.
We have one situation that took place, well after that meeting in San Francisco, where a
trial of a candidate vaccine -- in a trial named RV 144 that took place in Thailand -- showed
a 31% efficacy, which gave us some great hints of correlates of immunity and are the basis
for a number of subsequent trials, but still was not good enough to deploy. So we have a
number of very large vaccine trials, going on now throughout the world, including a heavy
concentration in southern Africa. But we also are pursuing another line of vaccine research,
which is the attempt to present to the body, in the proper conformation with sequential
immunizations, the capability of making broadly neutralizing antibodies. And if we're
successful in that, then I think we have a really good chance of developing a vaccine that
would have an efficacy and safety profile good enough to actually deploy it."
I think over time mrna "vaccines" will change medicine. Are we opening Pandora's box?
Possibly.
Navarro wrote in the
op-ed for USA TODAY Tuesday that "Fauci has a good bedside manner with the public, but he
has been wrong about everything I have interacted with him on."
...
The White House's deputy chief of staff for communications, Dan Scavino, who has been by the
president's side since the 2016 campaign, on Sunday posted a cartoon on Facebook depicting
Fauci as a running faucet washing the U.S. economy down the drain.
"Sorry, Dr. Faucet! At least you know if I'm going to disagree with a colleague, such as
yourself, it's done publicly -- and not cowardly, behind journalists with leaks. See you
tomorrow!" Scavino wrote in a caption accompanying the cartoon.
>But media - and USA health officials - have been silent about long-term effects of
SARS-COV-2
I find it a very cruel irony that Fauci of all people is in charge of the virus
non-response. He was a boat-anchor at NIH during the initial response to the AIDS crisis. He
has been instrumental in wrecking the NIH research program for ME. For example, he kicked the
ME research program out of his institute in Oct 1999:
"Dr. Anthony Fauci, NIAID Director, met with the Dr. Harold Varmus, Director of NIH, and
concluded that CFS was more complex and activities should be relocated from a single NIH
institute." (CFSAC minutes Sept 2003)
The NIH research program has been in limbo ever since, subject to an unworkable
multi-institute something-or-other designed to make sure no one has authority or
responsibility to actually do something.
Fauci will soon be working overtime together with the UK psychobabblers to discredit
the personal reports of the COVID Longhaulers. They will be diagnosed with "stress" and given
a course of "computerized" CBT, which will tell them to ignore symptoms and carry on, until
they collapse.
When patients don't come back, doctors always assume they got better. Honest to god,
doctors have said that to me. It does not occur to them that patients get too sick to go to
the clinic, or they got tired of being fobbed off.
"... The study analyzed 2,541 patients hospitalized among the system's six hospitals between March 10 and May 2 and found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine died while 26% of those who did not receive the drug died. ..."
"... Among all patients in the study, there was an overall in-hospital mortality rate of 18%, and many who died had underlying conditions that put them at greater risk, according to Henry Ford Health System. Globally, the mortality rate for hospitalized patients is between 10% and 30%, and it's 58% among those in the intensive care unit or on a ventilator." Detroit News ..."
"... A long "take down" of Fauci: https://www.unz.com/audio/kbarrett_ken-mccarthy-tony-fauci-is-corrupt-to-the-core/ ..."
"... This is not Fauci's first rodeo. He's been pumping hysteria for 36 years. He always gets it wrong. He was wrong about swine flu. He was wrong about bird flu. He was wrong about Zika. He was wrong about Ebola. He wildly exaggerated AIDS. And he always is wrong in the favor of pharmaceutical companies. And he's always wrong in favor of 'we've got to develop a vaccine now. We have to throw out all the rules. ..."
"... Observational studies are never the equivalent of double-blind randomized studies; but there can still provide important and fare more readily obtained early information about these connections and conditions. ..."
"... This stuff is hard. There are lots of variations in patient populations and treatment protocols. We have to consider doses, concomitant meds (such as azithromycin), patient status at time of treatment, age, and, comorbidities. ..."
"... the recently halted NIH trial was randomized, double-blinded; this was in a hospital setting. The prophylactic trial reported at the beginning of June in NEJM (author Boulware) was also randomized, double-blinded; this was in a prophylactic setting. ..."
"A Henry Ford Health System study shows the controversial anti-malaria drug
hydroxychloroquine helps lower the death rate of COVID-19 patients, the Detroit-based health
system said Thursday.
Officials with the Michigan health system said the study found the drug "significantly"
decreased the death rate of patients involved in the analysis.
The study analyzed 2,541 patients hospitalized among the system's six hospitals between
March 10 and May 2 and found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine died while 26% of
those who did not receive the drug died.
Among all patients in the study, there was an overall in-hospital mortality rate of 18%, and
many who died had underlying conditions that put them at greater risk, according to Henry Ford
Health System. Globally, the mortality rate for hospitalized patients is between 10% and 30%,
and it's 58% among those in the intensive care unit or on a ventilator." Detroit News
There will be no accountability: The b-stards have set the standards.
https://www.bcazlaw.com/surgical-mishaps/ Medical malpractice is a legal term used to describe a medical professional's failing to
uphold the acceptable standard of care in a situation. Doctors must adhere to accepted
medical community standards concerning treatment methods and technique, and failing to
do so can leave them liable for any resulting damages.
https://www.lynchlawyers.com/blog/hospital-medical-malpractice/ When a patient is under a hospitals care, the facility must operate at a level that meets the
medical community's standards for treating patients. This means the hospital or its
staff members cannot cause the patient harm as a result of negligence.
https://www.fortheinjured.com/blog/common-medical-errors/ When a doctor or medical facility's
failure to meet these standards results in a
patient's injury or death, the at-fault party can be held liable for medical malpractice
.
https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/map/TheCommunityStandard.html The community standard is the older standard and reflects the traditional deference of the
law toward physicians. It is based on what physicians as a group do in a given circumstance.
The community standard requires that the patient be told what other physicians in the same
community would tell a patient in the same or similar circumstances. "Community" refers both
to the geographic community and to the specialty (intellectual community) of the
physician.
It'll be 37 years this year he's had the same job in the federal bureaucracy.
There are two million people getting a paycheck from the federal government as
employees. Who do you think the third highest paid employee in the entire federal
bureaucracy is? It's Tony Fauci.
So just to sum all this up: This is not Fauci's first rodeo. He's been pumping hysteria
for 36 years. He always gets it wrong. He was wrong about swine flu. He was wrong about
bird flu. He was wrong about Zika. He was wrong about Ebola. He wildly exaggerated AIDS.
And he always is wrong in the favor of pharmaceutical companies. And he's always wrong in
favor of 'we've got to develop a vaccine now. We have to throw out all the rules.
And his wife is Christine Grady, chief of the Department of Bioethics of the National
Institute of Health and the head of the section on Human Subject Research. She is the
person that makes decisions on what's ethical to do with human subjects. That's his
wife.
Uncharted research: areas where anti-malarial drugs are sold widely over the counter - in
malaria prone parts of the world - eg: Central America, SEA and Pacific Islands. How do their
covid rates relate to these specific localities (not just generalized country numbers), where
ongoing prophylactic sales of OTC anti-malaria drugs are most prevalent?
Why does the CDC travel and tourism website info still recommend taking anti-malarial
drugs, when the other hand of our deep state bureaucrats are screaming these drugs will kill
you?
Observational studies are never the equivalent of double-blind randomized studies; but
there can still provide important and fare more readily obtained early information about
these connections and conditions.
No comment/s needed perhaps. But deliciously anticipated. Here, from the Committee, and
especially from the MSM. Even if only silence. Because "silence is really violence" in this
case.
https://www.yourdailyshakespeare.com/2020/06/08/the-world-upside-down/ And here is an example, a reported 'case-study'. A prince of Persia had melancholia and
suffered from the delusion of being a cow. He would moo like a cow, crying "Kill me so that a
good stew may be made of my flesh," and would never eat anything. Avicenna was persuaded to
treat the case and sent a message to the patient, asking him to be happy as the butcher was
coming to slaughter him. The sick man rejoiced. When Avicenna approached the prince with a
knife in his hand, he asked, "Where is the cow so I may kill it."
The patient then mooed like a cow to indicate where he was. He was then laid on the ground
for slaughter. When Avicenna approached the patient pretending to slaughter him, he said,
"The cow is too lean and not ready to be killed. He must be fed properly and I will kill it
when it becomes healthy and fat. The patient was then offered food, which he ate eagerly and
gradually gained strength, got rid of his delusion, and was completely cured.
How relevant may be the Avicennian case study to the current dynamics of the pandemic I will
leave it to my possible and patient readers to decide.
Dr. Marc Siegel a medical correspondent for Foxnews told T. Carlson weeks ago that an
emergency treatment of this drug saved the life of his 96 year old father who was at the
point of death, cured him overnight in fact.
It is a fact that cancer drugs are not uniformly effective in all patients.
The causes must be sought in the genotypes of the patients.
The differential response as well as effectiveness are not reasons to discard a
therapy.
In further news on COVID-19 Treatments I have 2 items to report:
First one:
The 3-drug mixture of Azittomycin, Naproxen, and prednisolone (oral or injectable) have
been used successfully for reduction of the inflammation of respiratory system.
3 systematic trials have been undertaken and results were conclusive in expediting faster
recovery.
Second one:
Clinical trials in Iran (in Masih Daneshvari hospital) – indicated 100% cure of
COVID-19 in 20 patients using a combination of ReciGen and Cultera (sic?) which is an AIDS
drug.
A second group of patients – 152 – had a reduction in mortality of 20% as
compared to those who were only receiving Cultera (sic.?)
This stuff is hard. There are lots of variations in patient populations and treatment
protocols. We have to consider doses, concomitant meds (such as azithromycin), patient status
at time of treatment, age, and, comorbidities.
A big difference: the Ford study was not randomized, not double-blinded. They used a
statistical technique to try to make the groups comparable on factors believed to be
relevant, but this is after fact. (It's a nice technique, I've used it myself, but it doesn't
magically solve all of the difficulties of retrospective analysis.)
In contrast, the recently halted NIH trial was randomized, double-blinded; this was in a
hospital setting. The prophylactic trial reported at the beginning of June in NEJM (author
Boulware) was also randomized, double-blinded; this was in a prophylactic setting.
Hydroxychloroquine is the active ingredient in the tonic portion of gin and tonics, which
I've been drinking for prophylactic purposes since the pandemic began.
"... Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent . He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary . ..."
alifornia-based pharmaceutical giant Gilead Sciences has
announced that a five-day course of its antiviral drug Remdesivir -- shown in tests to
effectively fight COVID-19 -- will cost $3,120 to Americans with health insurance and $2,340 to
those on Medicaid. Yet
research published in April calculated that the drug could be produced at a profit for as
little as $0.93 per day.
The study, led by Dr. Andrew Hill from the Department of Translational Medicine, University
of Liverpool, U.K., and published in the
Journal of Virus Eradication , found that a five-day course of lifesaving Remdesivir
could be mass-produced for less than the cost of a Subway sandwich. So cheap is the drug that
the saline solution and the syringe needed to administer it would be more costly.
MintPress spoke with Dr. Hill, who was dismayed by the company's announcement.
We are in a health emergency. We can't have a situation right now where people are unable
to access medicine because the prices are too high. Remdesivir is a drug that has had its
development costs paid for, in large part, by independent donors like governments and
ministries of health in China, the WHO, and the U.S. government. So why should a company be
making money in the middle of a pandemic by selling a drug which has largely been developed
independently of them?" he said.
News of the decision led to an explosion of public anger. "As Gilead charges $3,120 for its
COVID drug, Remdesivir, remember that the drug was developed with a $70,000,000 grant from the
federal government paid for by American taxpayers. Once again, Big Pharma is set to profit on
the people's dime," wrote former Secretary of Labor
Robert Reich. "This isn't healthcare. It's extortion," appeared to be the overwhelming sentiment
on social media.
Gilead itself, however, seemed not to share this sentiment. Indeed, its
press release on the subject positioned its decision as a selfless and magnanimous gesture
of corporate philanthropy. "We approached this with the aim of helping as many patients as
possible, as quickly as possible and in the most responsible way," said its CEO, Daniel O'Day,
adding that, "under normal circumstances" the company would have charged the public $12,000 per
patient.
"A new low"
Remdesivir is an intravenous antiviral drug that has been used to fight other coronaviruses
like SARS and MERS and has shown some effectiveness against Ebola. Although far from a miracle
treatment, studies have concluded that it aids
recovery, reducing the average hospital visit for COVID-19 patients from 15 days to 11 days
when compared to a placebo. Like with everything coronavirus-related, there is no absolute
scientific consensus. In late April, the WHO accidentally leaked a
Chinese study that suggested Remdesivir may not be as effective as Gilead claims it to be.
Nevertheless, the Trump administration has now bought
up the entire world's stock of the drug, effectively confiscating it and shutting out every
other country from the medicine.
"I've been working in medicine for 32 years and I have never seen anything like it. I've
never seen a country be that brazen. We have to work together. This could be a taste of the
future. They've tried to also do this with advanced orders of vaccines. Imagine if we had a 100
percent effective vaccine and it only went to Americans," Dr. Hill told MintPress
.
At the moment people don't quite understand the gravity of the decision that the American
government has made. This is a worldwide epidemic and we have got to remember that the
clinical trials of Remdesivir were not just conducted in the United States; they were
conducted around European and Chinese centers. Patients put themselves at risk to take part
in an experimental drug trial, and the gratitude we get as other countries after our people
were involved in these studies is to be shut out of the future supply of the drug?! It is
simply ethically unacceptable. I think there are serious questions to be answered. This is a
new low ground, unfortunately," he added.
Gilead has been under considerable public scrutiny of late. The company, which
announced profits of $5.4 billion last year, has increased its value by $15 billion since
the pandemic began. In December, MintPressreported
that it was being sued, accused of deliberately holding back a lifesaving HIV drug to extend
the profitability of their previous, inferior one. With shades of the Remdesivir announcement,
the drug is sold in Australia for $8 per month, but the company charges Americans around $2,000
for the same dosage. "Gilead has a long history of profiteering," said Dr. Hill. "Its CEO is a
billionaire and has been accused of tax avoidance; by keeping their intellectual property in
Ireland they avoided $10 billion in taxes in 2016 and they sell drugs for between 100 and 1,000
times the cost of production. And nobody is stopping them. I think this is a taste of things to
come if we don't have better controls on the pharmaceutical industry's excesses."
As of Wednesday morning, there have been 2.73 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the
United States, the six worst days for the virus in terms of infections all occurring in the
previous week.
Feature photo | A lab tech displays a package of the Remdesivir at the Eva Pharma Facility
in Cairo, Egypt June 29, 2020. Amr Abdallah | Reuters
Deaths from just *Pneumonia* from Feb1st to June20/20 =*119,174* Deaths from just Covid by
its self for same time period = 109,188 And for this time period 1,232,269 Deaths from all
causes. The numbers Fear game,obviously is being played up large by the DemoTards and we know
why! Funny how the Fake News,never speaks of this.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1113051/number-reported-deaths-from-covid-pneumonia-and-flu-us/
Arch_Stanton , 47 minutes ago
Fauci should have had his microphone taken away months ago. A testament to the power of
big pharma.
razorthin , 59 minutes ago
Little Fascist Koxucker.
"Please understand the people who have built this international order reject natural law,
so they do not like sovereign citizens. They do not believe people have inherent rights or
sacred liberties. Most frankly find God anathema and believe in no higher authority than
themselves and the heartless arithmetic they serve. So, while they have happily plundered
America of blood and treasure which we were foolish enough to provide in copious quantities,
they have no love or need of our nation or antiquated concepts such as those enshrined in the
Constitution and Bill of Rights. In their calculation, America needed to be taken down in
order to realize the global project, and as you see the first glimmers of a national effort
in opposition to that, a positive limited effort struggling to overcome the bureaucrats who
betray us all at every opportunity, it becomes clear the Left would rather collapse America
than see us oppose the new world without borders where everyone intermingles under a
controlling network of agencies. No guns, no resistance, no free speech, and no problems is
what they want. Only we stand in the way of the fulfillment of this Orwellian vision, and as
each day's hysteria on the news reveals, the powers that be are working overtime to push the
Left into revolt to topple America into a conflict that will remove us from prominence on the
world scene. Should they win, our rights are gone. Should they fail, the rest of the world
will have consolidated against us, save those few brave nations trying to fight themselves
free of the same entanglements that brought us low. This is where we are today, and it is one
hell of a dilemma for a person who cares about this country and our historic values. No
matter what we choose, any path but submission and surrender only leads to greater conflict,
so this makes us consider the first important question: What are we willing to fight to
preserve? Individuals and families will have to answer this question in the coming months and
years in a much more meaningful way than has been required in generations. The easy days are
coming to an end, and while the economy is booming and we're enjoying an Indian Summer for
our embattled nation, these questions will only become more pressing in the days ahead."
-- The Coming Civil War by Tom Kawczynski
nsurf9 , 1 hour ago
The nasolacrimal duct (also called the tear duct) carries tears from the lacrimal sac of
the eye into the nasal cavity. This virus seems to be able aerosol its particles more readily
than other viruses so as to spread its RNA/DNA in the air - as well as being normally
contracted through fluid droplets.
The eyes are large wet areas, perfect for collecting dust and viruses. If you're a part of
an at-risk demographic or just worried, make sure you cover you eyes. And, upon returning
home, I rinse the eyes out with water along with washing my hands.
Right now, I'm using some tight-fitting fishing glasses with my n99 mask, when I go into
stores or hi-density areas - but, looking for something better.
IvannaHumpalot , 1 hour ago
Rinsing your eyes wont help
yes you can get it through your eyes but that is very difficult via aerosol and
unlikely
far more likely is you touch a contaminated surface after some dirty person without a
facemask has been talking and breathing out their infected droplets earlier
those droplets fall to the surface and you touch it then touch your eyes, nose or
mouth
or you breathe in an infective dose by not wearing a mask to reduce viral load
exposure
or you walk it home on your shoes
IvannaHumpalot , 1 hour ago
Herd immunity at 80%
america has 328 million
That means 262 million must get infected for fantasy herd immunity
US infected is now at 2.7 million infected
let us be generous and say 10x havent been diagnosed but have it
so the US is at 27 million infected
27 out of 262 million
there goes the stupid herd immunity sham
Wear a facemask, avoid catching or spreading it
tranium , 1 hour ago
Dr. HOAX is spreading plandemic.
ZKnight , 1 hour ago
Does anyone even believe this sleazy little man who's corona predictions were 20x off?
He single handedly destroyed the economy and people's jobs over a false alarm all to try
and get his vaccine's in.
WhiteHose , 1 hour ago
Hes been wrong on everything since Jan!
hugin-o-munin , 1 hour ago
We applaud the approval of chemical sweeteners, fluoride, GMOs, antibiotic saturated meat
products and poultry, not to mention the continued use of Glyphosate on just about all food
products. Eat and drink your industrial sugar and chemicals. Now we need a global vaccine
schedule and license linked to passports to make sure everyone on the planet is inoculated
all the time before we can allow them to buy and sell. This is all done out of pure love and
care for all people.
/s
JamcaicanMeAfraid , 1 hour ago
Fauci's ego may start to encroach on the king of all egos, Barry Soreto
Peak Finance , 1 hour ago
This:
"tremendous burden" that the US health care system might face this fall if COVID-19 and
the flu are circulating at the same time.
This man is truly a fool and should be arrested.
Death rates and statistics do not work that way
This coming flu season is going to be the MILDEST EVER because of Covid, as, the people
that WOULD HAVE DIED this season have ALREADY PASSED
Similar to the "Demand-pull" concept in economics
Random ZH posters smarter than people in the upper reaches of government
Fauci and Redfield are complete pieces of s h i t. So much misdirection and lies.
RTP , 2 hours ago
Gallo + Fauci = AIDS swindle
Fauci + Gates = COVID-19 swindle
How much longer will this poisonous dwarf ruin the future of mankind?
k3g , 2 hours ago
Question in March: Doc, you've been a Director at NIH infectious disease unit for 36
years. You're our top virologist. You're in the spotlight, your moment to shine, to show why
we've paid your salary and bene's all these years, we're counting on you. First question:
should we wear masks, would that help?
A: Dunno. Have to study it.
Q: Well, if we want to wear masks, how to we get them? When will the gubmint release masks
from the billions it has in storage?
A: Dunno. Not sure if we have any masks. Have you tried Home Depot?
The government and the FED dumping TRILLIONS of dollars to all these corporations,
meanwhile they can't even provide FREE MASKS for everyone. If they really wanted to help,
they could have given everyone masks. That's how you could have helped prevent it. And MASKS
are expensive why not subsidized it, and maybe we would have this in control and are
re-opening sooner.
On Monday, Gilead disclosed its pricing plan for Gilead as it prepares to begin charging for
the drug at the beginning of next month (several international governments have already placed
orders). Given the high demand, thanks in part due to the breathless media coverage despite the
drug's still-questionable study data, Gilead apparently feels justified in charging $3,120 for
a patient getting the shorter, more common, treatment course, and $5,720 for the longer course
for more seriously ill patients. These are the prices for patients with commercial insurance in
the US, according to Gilead's official pricing plan.
As per usual, the price charged to those on government plans will be lower, and hospitals
will also receive a slight discount. Additionally, the US is the only developed country where
Gilead will charge two prices, according to Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day. In much of Europe and
Canada, governments negotiate drug prices directly with drugmakers (in the US, laws dictate
that drug makers must "discount" their drugs for Medicare and Medicaid plans).
But according to O'Day, the drug is priced "far below the value it brings" to the
health-care system.
However, we'd argue that this actually isn't true. Remdesivir was developed by Gilead to
treat Ebola, but the drug was never approved by the FDA for this use, which caused Gilead to
shelve the drug until COVID-19 presented another opportunity. Even before the first study had
finished, the company was already pushing propaganda about the promising nature of the drug.
Meanwhile, the CDC, WHO and other organizations were raising doubts about the effectiveness of
steroid medications.
Months later, the only study on the steroid dexomethasone, a cheap steroid that costs less
than $50 for a 100-dose regimen, has shown that dexomethasone is the only drug so far that has
proven effective at lowering COVID-19 related mortality. Remdesivir, despite the fact that it
has been tested in several high quality trials, has not.
So, why is the American government in partnership with Gilead still pushing this
questionable, and staggeringly expensive, medication on the public?
Nine News Perth
Nine News Perth
47.1K subscribers
Subscribe
Healthy West Aussies are being warned against
using face masks to protect themselves against coronavirus. A safety video is going viral shows how
ineffective some can be. Subscribe here:
https://bit.ly/2ojPZ6G
More Perth News
here:
https://bit.ly/36dullR
I am not an ORSA (I can talk from my BS studies, and a few electives at grad level)
occasionally I used the USAF version usually A&AS contractors and/or FFRDC of you guys.
I would not talk models unless they showed the 'pedigree'.
I do not know your model, nor do I know how CDC or WHO validates or accredits a model
for CoV SAR-2 when there is little agreed to on CoV SAR 1 from 2003. Post Docs in
Universities.......?
NY metro, my home town and of 1/2 my grandkids', is "enjoying" very low new cases and
for a number of weeks has seen steeply declining hospitalizations and ICU demand. The dead
for NY state is well over 1500 per million, consider that during most of the shelter in
place the center of NY state cases was the NY metro area (say 12 million souls) more than
half NYS population in the shelter in place regime, you may disagree but I put dead for
million in NY metro closer to 2700 than NY states' 1500 in round numbers. Sweden is around
10 million.
NY metro failed at 'lock down', mass transit continued to operate, unlike Wuhan which
shut it all down. "Essential" workers travelled, came home often to multigenerational
homes, crowding and general breaking of the curfews denied most of the 'benefits' seen in
Peoples Republic of China and Taiwan, where if one tested positive you were put in a "Covid
hotel" totally out of 'circulation'.
Some ideas:
Estimates are that 20% of NY metro residents now have anti bodies, that is large number
of cases with none to minimal symptoms. That is the (not so) hardest observation to explain
what is happening in NY metro.
Another theory comes out of Italy is with social distancing many 'subjects' get a small
exposure to the virus and the subjects develop immunity. Another theory is 50 or so percent
of the population has sturdy T cell response and beats the virus. I think Italy's, along
with France and Spain, turn in the pandemic is a miracle! Thanks to Pope Francis.
Son with PhD theories, his words:
"Cell paper suggesting 40-60% of people have innate immunity ranging from cellular
response (lysozyme, TLR pathway, etc.) to cross-reactive T-cells. A pet theory of mine is
ACE2 receptor polymorphism as a possible factor; I saw an early Chinese paper suggesting
east Asians carried an ACE2 membrane domain very similar to that of bats, though have not
found much follow-up to that. Like with SARS-1, there will be many years of study and still
no good answers."
The above is from a dialog with his childhood friend, now an ER MD in a Massachusetts
hot spot, I used to take them to Boy Scouts 30 years ago.
I disagree with my son, the recent "success" in NY metro is a miracle: NY metro changed
nothing; kept the subways running but 'turned the corner' in a big way!
The Corruption of Science. The Hydroxychloroquine Lancet Study Scandal. Who Was Behind
It? Anthony Fauci's Intent To Block HCQ on Behalf of Big Pharma By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global
Research, June 10, 2020 Global Research Region: USA Theme: Media Disinformation ,
Science and
Medicine
The Guardian has revealed the scandal behind the hydroxychloroquine study which was intent
on blocking HCQ as a cure for COVID-19. "Dozens of scientific papers co-authored by the chief
executive of the US tech company behind the Lancet hydroxychloroquine study scandal are now
being audited, including one that a scientific integrity expert claims contains images that
appear to have been digitally manipulated. The audit follows a Guardian investigation that
found the company, Surgisphere , used suspect data in major
scientific studies that were published and then retracted by world-leading medical journals,
including the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine. .
several concerns were raised with respect to the veracity of the data and analyses
conducted by Surgisphere Corporation and its founder and our co-author, Sapan Desai, in our
publication. We launched an independent third-party peer review of Surgisphere As such, our
reviewers were not able to conduct an independent and private peer review and therefore
notified us of their withdrawal from the peer-review process
The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19
between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals Worldwide. The database, according
to the Guardian could not be verified. It was false.
"I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use. For
that, and for all the disruptions – both directly and indirectly – I am truly
sorry."
CEO Dr. Sapan Desai took the blame. Who was behind him?
The Surgisphere Scientific Scam. Who was behind it? Who "commissioned" this Report?
Was the pharmaceutical industry and vaccine lobby group behind this initiative? The Lancet
acknowledges that the study received funding from the William Harvey Distinguished Chair in
Advanced Cardiovascular Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital which is held by Dr. Mandeep
Mehra. In this regard, it is worth noting that Brigham Health has a major contract with Big
Pharma's Gilead Sciences Inc , related to
the development of the Remdesivir drug for the treatment of COVID-19.
The Gilead-Brigham Health project was initiated in March 2020 .
Was the Surgisphere
study intended to provide a justification to block the use of HCQ, as recommended by Dr.
Anthony Fauci, advisor to president Trump? Upon reading the study (prior to its retraction),
"Dr Fauci, grinned as he told CNN that "the data shows hydroxychloroquine
is not an effective treatment "Referring to the Surgisphere report: "The scientific data is
really quite evident now about the lack of efficacy for it [HCQ]," said Dr. Fauci. (quoted by
CNN ).
Here is the CNN's authoritative assessment of Surgisphere's
report (prior to The Lancet's Retraction):
"Seriously ill Covid-19 patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine
were more likely to die or develop dangerous irregular heart rhythms, according to a large
observational study [by Surgisphere] published Friday [May 22, 2020] in the medical journal
The
Lancet .
Dr. Anthony Fauci who is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases (NIAID) , has from the very outset led the campaign against hydroxychloroquine
(largely on behalf of Big Pharma) invoking similar "scientific arguments" against HCQ, saying
categorically there was no cure to COVID-19, and the only solution was the vaccine.
The campaign to destroy hydroxychloroquine has been waged relentlessly, both by competitor
pharmaceutical companies and those who want to destroy the US economy to advance their
political agenda. It is shocking that it has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and billions
of taxpayer dollars. But although the corruption of science for political and/ or financial
gain has become a defining characteristic of our age, it is not a new story.
The publication of the Surgisphere study had an immediate impact: According to
the Guardian , "Surgisphere data led to global trials of hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
being halted in May, because it appeared to show the drug increased deaths in Covid-19
patients".
"Higher Risks of Death" if you take HCQ, according to the study. In the days following the
fake Surgisphere Lancet report on May 22, several countries including Belgium, France, Italy,
acted to halt the use of hydroxychloroquine. The study had concluded patients taking the
anti-malaria drug had a higher risk of death than those who were not taking the medication
It is worth noting that prior to the conduct of the Surgisphere study, Dr. Fauci
stated categorically that the use of HCQ had not been studied in relation to the coronavirus.
"No proven drug": "Not Enough Known" . Nonsensical and false statements.
What Fauci failed to mention is that Chloroquine had been "studied" and tested fifteen years
ago by the CDC as a drug to be used against coronavirus infections. Chloroquine was used in
2002 and tested against SARS-1 coronavirus in a study under the auspices of the CDC published
in 2005 in the peer reviewed Virology Journal. The main conclusion of the article was that:
Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread. It was used in the
SARS-1 outbreak in 2002. It had the endorsement of the CDC.
The main author Dr. Martin J. Vincent together with several of his colleagues were
affiliated with the Special Pathogens Branch of the Atlanta based CDC together with co-authors
from a Montreal based partner research institution. The main conclusions of this study are that
Chloroquine is a tested drug and can be used for SARS-corona virus infections.
Dr. Anthony
Fauci has not put forth a treatment which could be applied against COVID-19. What he is saying
is that there is no treatment. And then he endorses the fake scientific study by Surgisphere
which was subsequently retracted by The Lancet. Lancet: the article was retracted
Dr. Anthony Fauci has been deliberately blocking a drug which was endorsed by the CDC 15
years ago for treatment of SARS-1 Coronavirus. More recently, it has been used extensively in a
number of countries in relation to the Coronavirus or SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak. Whose
interests is he serving?
"The primary function of a mask is not to protect the person who wears it, but to protect the
other persons who are around.
Theaters are closed rooms in which people sit together for a longer time in often somewhat
sticky air. Like churches they are prime location for potential super-spreader events. One
infected person who does not wear a mask in a theater can infect many other attendants, even
if they do wear masks."
I am a bit more understanding of mandatory mask wearing on public transportation or retail
outlets. People don't have many choices to travel or shop so I go along with it.
However, going to a movie theater is a choice. I am a big believer in Freedom of Choice.
If you choose to attend a theater knowing in advance masks are not mandatory, thats your
choice. For a healthy person under 55 the risk of death or hospitalization from this virus is
not any greater than flu. Those are facts from CDC. If you want to protect your eyes from
viruses wear goggles.
I personally cant wear a mask for long periods because i feel oxygen deprived. Real or
imaginary I cant say, but I saw one study with surgeons where prolonged wearing of
surgical
Masks significantly reduced lung oxygen levels. Some medical conditions make mask wearing
dangerous. Oxygen is necessary to clear infection in the lungs and nasal passages so I am not
confident prolonged mask wearing might not increase the risk of infection or worsen an
existing infection. Sadly there are few useful studies. I guess not enough of a profit motive
to fund them.
Kay Fabe, "I am a bit more understanding of mandatory mask wearing on public transportation
or retail outlets...Masks significantly reduced lung oxygen levels."
Masks just need to stop droplets can be cloth based, they don't have to be super
impermeable but still only you can say what you consider comfortable. A movie is about 2 - 3
hrs of non-strenuous activity, I don't see how it is so different from wearing it on an
airplane, or long bus / train trip.
I heard a doctor make an interesting claim that contrary to popular belief, the air on a
passenger jet is very pure, highly filtered and blows downward and therefore very safe. It
makes me wonder about the air system in a theater, if it is good then AMC should lead with
that.
...Of course, if someone directly coughs in your face, then presumably you get hit with a
full load. That's why we maintain distance. But even the, the primary route will be through
the nose and mouth. It's also likely that a far bigger load goes through the nose and mouth
than the eyes, and it is speculated that the likelihood of infection depends on the viral
load.
In any event, I wear glasses, which likely provides a fair amount of protection from
random airborne virus particles.
...For the most part, however, the vast majority of persons who caught it appear to have
gotten it directly from being near an infectious person for at least ten minutes, inhaling
their breathing/talking/singing/yelling air, with a much smaller percentage getting it from
touching an infected surface (estimated at only ten percent of cases.) So getting it from
food is likely an even more distant probability.
That said, as I've said before, getting this thing is a crapshoot. It's a matter of
greater or lesser probabilities. As they say, "to play the odds, you have to know the odds."
So I take steps that would minimize my risk, but in the end there's only so much you can do.
I assume some people have caught it by wildly improbable methods.
It reminds me of the Marty Feldman skit decades ago. He goes to visit an insurance agent
and proceeds to drive the agent crazy by asking if the insurance being offered would protect
me from insanely unlikely events, such as "being struck by a meteorite whilst sunbathing at
the beach" or "falling into a pit filled with hedgehogs whilst playing cricket." Eventually
he asks if he is protected against an enraged insurance agent, whereupon the agent says,
"No!" and proceeds to strangle him.
That's not entirely true, we just do not believe in fraudulent agenda driven traitors like
you!
Fauci's estimates were so off that the only 2 conclusions can be formed, gross negligence
or intentional deception, either way he has zero credibility left!
Locker up , 1 hour ago
I remember when the pandemic started Fauci said "Masks don't protect you and the front
line health workers need the masks for their protection". I think that statement caused him
to lose all credibility with the public. Fauci still sounds like he's drowning in mucus. They
should get a healthy honest scientist to talk to the public.
MsCreant , 1 hour ago
This guy should just step down.
He is now saying masks are good. They were not good when there was a shortage of them.
If he can't see the logic of why he is not trusted, he is incompetent. lay_arrow
Dumpster Elite , 1 hour ago
"How DARE you serfs and peasants question the authority and wisdom of your masters!!!
INSOLENCE!!!!"
Max UK , 1 hour ago
Yeah Fauci, nobody has done as much to destroy trust actually, as YOU!
NumberNone , 1 hour ago
There are 57 genders...is that the science we don't believe in? Asking for a friend.
Lt. Frank Drebin , 1 hour ago
What a jerk. This dude has Napoleon syndrome, i.e. only he is right, everyone else is
stupid.
Tarzan , 38 minutes ago
Fauci TEST ified that, although they are TEST ing more, there has been more positive TEST
s then before they were TEST ing more, and We're all crazy science deniers for recognizing
his inconsistent TEST imony.
Fauci clearly is a charlatan, a researcher who long ago became a politician and now cheats
like Pompeo. His mask wearng fiacto characterize him as a person who is unable to admin that he
was wrong. and admin the he lied in order to cover the shortage of masks for medical personnel
and complete unpreparedness of the country to the epidemic.
He also look like a boy who cried "wolf,wolf" way to many time, when no wolf was around.
This guy did absolutely nothing to understand and prepare for the epidemic from January to
Late March and then pushed for excessive measures like total quarantine. he should be fired for
incompetence. He is implicitly guilty for Ciumo idiotism in NY (horror hospital beds are running
out we need million of ventilators) and similar idiotism in NJ and other parts of the country,
which unnecessary closed businesses where wearing masks would suffice.
This charlatan never admitted his role in promotion of "gain of function" experiments and
financing them in Wuhan biolab.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the polarising director of the National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases, slammed everyday Americans for refusing to go along with 'authority' on
medical matters, and accused people of 'amazing denial' when it comes to 'truth'.
Speaking on a podcast called Learning Curve , produced by the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), Fauci charged that "unfortunately, there is a combination of an anti-science
bias that people are -- for reasons that sometimes are, you know, inconceivable and not
understandable -- they just don't believe science and they don't believe authority."
"So when they see someone up in the White House, which has an air of authority to it,
who's talking about science, that there are some people who just don't believe that -- and
that's unfortunate because, you know, science is truth, " Fauci asserted.
"It's amazing sometimes the denial there is, it's the same thing that gets people who are
anti-vaxxers , who don't want people to get vaccinated, even though the data clearly indicate
the safety of vaccines," Fauci proclaimed, adding "That's really a problem."
Fauci also has a long history of being the front man for a network of powerful Big Pharma
and Big Medicine interests, pushing vaccines
and medicines in a clear conflict of interest.
* * *
Following Fauci's blame-scaping the anti-science bias of (implicitly ignorant) Americans,
Thiel Capital MD Eric Weinstein unleashed a barrage of uncomfortable truths on Twitter
How dare this man.
Do you want to know why they are learning to hate scientists for real Dr Fauci?
Because your group lies about science & your ilk drove the truth telling scientists
out of their rightful places inside the institutions calling bullshit on your lying about
masks. pic.twitter.com/VJLTGT0GOe
Scientists like me who don't go along with cowards & crowds cannot disrupt your
group's lies because we are outside. Imagine if I was tweeting from the National Science
Foundation or MIT. It would be a national news story about how your cabal lies and degrades
faith in science: https://t.co/leYsCerG3o
"But you prattle on. We will one day find out later that you suspected all along that the
Wuhan BS-L 4 virology lab might well be involved, but that you didn't say so for this or that
political reason.
Because you aren't a scientist. You play one. You are an MD turned actor.
Even when I agree with the conclusions of your institutional pseudo science cabal, you
cheat to get to our shared conclusions on vaccines, viruses, climate, etc.
So you want people to believe in science again? Ok. Call-yourself-out. Admit that your
crowd **lied** about our masks.
And not to put too fine a point on it: your group is sitting in chairs reserved for people
who don't do what your cabal just did.
You just don't have what it takes sir. I'm sorry. But science isn't acting. It's not a
beauty pagent. It's not politics.
Science requires courage ."
y_arrow 1
Whoa Dammit , 2 minutes ago
Like the other many things that Mr.Fauci has gotten wrong, he fails to recognize the truth
that Americans don't believe him
Boing_Snap , 6 minutes ago
People don't believe Fauci, never been in the real world, vaccine patent holder,
TruthHunter , 6 minutes ago
Fauci, you're not a scientist. You're a politician...stop whining when you're treated like
one
JoePorkChop , 6 minutes ago
Are scientists and authority some incorruptible special breed? A very skeptical eye
towards any power structure is very neccesary, always.
artytom , 6 minutes ago
Good man Weinstein.
HowardBeale , 7 minutes ago
Is he phucking joking? Fauci has no idea what Fauci will say tomorrow...
SuperareDolo , 8 minutes ago
I don't know if it would surprise Fauci to know that the majority of epidemiologists are
among those he says, "Don't believe in science, or authority."
Combining those two terms is very telling. Science is skeptical empiricism, not belief.
It's kind of self-contradictory to believe in conclusions, since he's not talking about
belief in the validity of skeptical empiricism. He's talking about his authority, which he
wants people to believe in, because he's a scientist. That's technocracy, and nobody should
accept that.
diogi23 , 9 minutes ago
Fauci is the John Bolton of science. Why does Trump keep him around??
aelfheld , 6 minutes ago
Science is a process, not 'revealed wisdom'.
I d----d sure don't put much faith in scientists who try to speak ex cathedra .
ze_vodka , 11 minutes ago
I require evidence based reasoning to be presented for Science...
and
I require that those who seek to be called an "Authority" demonstrate the ability to lead
well with kindness and humility.
So...
I firmly reject arbitrary Totalitarianism... which is exactly what Fauci espouses and
proclaims.
Demystified , 12 minutes ago
Fauci is a medical MEATBALL, his credibility is in the toilet. A Flush is needed
urgently.
ze_vodka , 11 minutes ago
I require evidence based reasoning to be presented for Science...
and
I require that those who seek to be called an "Authority" demonstrate the ability to lead
well with kindness and humility.
So...
I firmly reject arbitrary Totalitarianism... which is exactly what Fauci espouses and
proclaims.
Demystified , 12 minutes ago
Fauci is a medical MEATBALL, his credibility is in the toilet. A Flush is needed
urgently.
YouThePeople , 13 minutes ago
Fauxi is a corrupted paid stooge...and a bad actor.
Slayer666 , 14 minutes ago
Old School Americans aren't very fond of blindly following authority. They/We have a
rebellious streak. That's why the globalists/NWO want to import a new, more docile
population. But if America falls, don't expect the rest of the world to remain the same. Yeah
I know a lot of people would welcome that, but don't be too sure that what comes into that
power vacuum wouldn't be way worse.
hugin-o-munin , 6 minutes ago
There is a big difference in allowing the US economy to fail and having the US fail. Two
different things. In fact I think the best remedy to the current hyper corrupt system is to
let the dollar implode. That removes these fvckers' power in a clean sweep move and then
something more genuine and honest can take its place.
Distant_Star , 15 minutes ago
What ********. I believe in Newton's laws of motion. I believe in the laws of
thermodynamics and many other scientific rules. I believe in the periodic table. I believe in
Avogadro's number and Boyle's Law.
I don't believe in the "China model" that Fauchi, the corrupt WHO, the inept CDC with
their flawed Chinese test kits and the progressive politicians worshipped from day 1. I don't
believe it was necessary to lock down whole populations. I don't believe in the political
jihad against hydroxychloriquine because Trump said it might have value, mounds of anecdotal
evidence supported its use, and many physicians endorse it.
I don't subscribe to the globalist horesehit from the Gates Foundation with his push for
undeveloped vaccines and quantum dots, and statements that, "we have to vaccinate 6 billion
people." I have contempt for craven people who demand that everyone else be locked down for
their benefit, and whine about how "We can never go back to the way it was. Boo-hoo."
I question the ever changing, often contradictory narrative on this virus. I heap scorn on
their wildly inaccurate models that caused this economic and social disaster. I call
horse**** on the "scientists" and progressive authoritarians who joyfully locked down
populations and businesses when it was not necessary. These same fools then remained totally
silent when thugs, demonstrators, looters, arsonists, anarchists and mobs filled the street
for a "higher cause." I condemn those such as the "hero" Andrew Cuomo who put infected people
into nursing homes where old and vulnerable people died by the thousands for no reason. I
guess that makes me and millions of others science "deniers." On the other hand, maybe
ordinary people know a ship of floundering fools when they see one, and express genuine
concern. You don't need scientific method to see a disaster in motion. Screw Fauchi.
theboxseat , 12 minutes ago
I believe in:
Fool me once shame on you...
Darn who can remember Dubya's version of this
LA_Goldbug , 11 minutes ago
He's busy looking for WMD with Colon Powell in Iraq. He'll be back in 50 yrs. because it
is there and he will not stop looking.
ken , 9 minutes ago
Lies, just remember the lies, and that stupid look on his face while he tells them.
hugin-o-munin , 5 minutes ago
“There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in
Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you
can't get fooled again.”
Rocbottom , 15 minutes ago
SCIENCE doesn’t say jack ****. SCIENTISTS do. And this “scientist” is a
PROPAGANDIST not a doctor. THAT IS WHY no one believes what he says. He’s a paid
liar.
SteveNYC , 18 minutes ago
Joke of the day "American don't believe authority"
Tony, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT? When you've been lied to, on a massive scale since 2001,
additional lies of which were put on steroids starting in 2016 - you'd be a FOOL to believe
"authority" or "EXPERTS" like you pal.
It's over.
k3g , 11 minutes ago
Lives Matter.
hugin-o-munin , 10 minutes ago
You must be a racist. :)
ken , 3 minutes ago
...not so much according to the Georgia Guidestones, the BMGF, U.S. Foreign Policy, and
the sacrificial babies used in blackmail to force it, by Israel.
sun tzu , 21 minutes ago
What science told the states in the northeast to send thousands of infected patients into
nursing homes?
Trezrek500 , 22 minutes ago
Science isn't about blind ideology.
B52Minot , 23 minutes ago
Faucci is nothing but a spoiled brat....and now he has a tantrum because Americans could
care less about what he says....why?? he wonders....Because Faucci has shown us the dark side
of science....how it can ruin you if you make the wrong decision about its true validity. If
we knew that the original estimate of deaths from COVID was a fraud Trump would never had
declared an emergency and agreed with a shut down....This entire COVID response has been one
big disaster....and a fraud with Faucci out there thinking he runs the place...
Time after time HE HAS BEEN WRONG..and his trust in the WHO and CHINA too has been
corrupted if not a fraud too...SO WHY IS HE STILL TRYING TO TELL US WHAT TO DO....Because he
thinks he is some sort of expert yet so flawed it oozes out of every pore...and NO ONE should
listen to him on anything. Just another crying kid having a tantrum....GO HOME and retire
Faucci...you really are worthless...and shut the hell up.
sun tzu , 24 minutes ago
Science is the truth, but scientists can and do lie.
BAMCIS , 24 minutes ago
Science has a PR problem. Mainly due to it only being accountable to itself and the fact
that for all it lofty aspirations, Science has not been able to achieve escape volatility
from the bounds of corruption that only Big Money can impose.
Plus Americans are culturally hard wired to view Science as an enemy. Luke, a dumb hick
farmer who used his faith and tenacity to destroy the crown jewel of the evil technocrats,
namely the Death Star. In most (if not all) James Bond movies the villains are mad scientists
or industrialists using science for "evil". In "The Hunger Games", Katniss Everdean is again
a bumpkin who wages war against the fancy people with their shiny tech in their decadent
cities. Its the Urban/Rural dichotomy. Same as it ever was.
bh2 , 27 minutes ago
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." -- Feynman
vampirekiller , 29 minutes ago
No one believes a queertard that attempted to attribute a 100% preventable queer disease
confined to the queer population to the majority heterosexual population. No one believes a
queertard when current empirical data refutes his fearmongering.
Lux , 29 minutes ago
I'm still wondering why Fauci is even alive. Then again, the entire Pentagon is populated
by traitors with offshore bank accounts, so..
smacker , 33 minutes ago
Someone needs to tell Fauci the reason why people don't believe the science is because it
keeps changing and contradicts itself.
There is no centre of competence on this virus and conflicting advice, including from
him.
Voice-of-Reason , 35 minutes ago
Science originally said we didn't need masks and now we do. The problem I have with Mr
Fauci's form of science is that it is too easily manipulated by politics.
adr , 38 minutes ago
Hey Fauchole, is this science?
Upwards of 60% of people have natural immunity to Covid due to antibodies produced from
four or more common coronaviruses.
I reject your "science" and replace it with real research.
Well, yeah Dr. Fausti. We certainly did believe you. We didn't want to. But we are playing
along. You know like at work. And like living like free citizens in a supposedly free
country. By obliging you with shut-ins and shutdowns. And you terrorizing and bankrupting
millions. Yeah I think we played along. And had faith in government and science. Cuz you said
so. And would jail or punish those who did not. Take kids away. Send swat. Stuff like that.
Had bills to pay. Those bills just keep on coming. And the nerve of those people wanting to
like pay them! On time!
Government is only effective with the consent of the governed. You should know that. You
should also say something about how that was shown to be very selective enforcement. Cuz
riots or something. Do or don't matter? Confusing. They apparently can live of a billion
dollars from bank of America and starkbucks and Wal-Mart. Or just not pay their bills at all.
Or work. At a job. Where you have to show up on time, wear a mask and not burn **** down.
Stuff like that.
You are throwing a tantrum. Because everyone, not quite everyone. Still doesn't obey you.
Enough. To willingly line up for your vaccine. When it is ready. Of course. Seeing a little
scary times ahead for your authority. Who do you answer to Dr. Fausti? Are they getting a
little hot under your collar? Cuz science, right? Is what you most believe in. Not like
something else. And as long as we are here. Why do you work for Trump? Or more to the point.
Why does he employ you? Very confusing. Since he wants to maga. Supposedly.
Hal n back , 41 minutes ago
I wonder how he treats his subordinates who have different views
R2U2 , 40 minutes ago
Webster’s Dictionary, 1828:
JES'UITISM, noun
1. Cunning, deceit; hypocrisy; prevarication; deceptive practices to effect a purpose
"Two cankers are biting the very entrails of the United States today: the Romish and the
Mormon priests. Both are quietly at work to form a people of the most abject, ignorant and
fanatical slaves, who will recognize no other authority but their supreme pontiffs. Both are
aiming at the destruction of our schools, to raise themselves upon our ruins. Both shelter
themselves under our grand and holy principles of liberty of conscience, to destroy that very
liberty of conscience, and bind the world before their heavy and ignominious yoke.
The Mormon and the Jesuit priests are equally the uncompromising enemies of our
constitution and our laws; but the more dangerous of the two is the Jesuit—the Romish
priest, for he knows better how to conceal his hatred under the mask of friendship and public
good; he is better trained to commit the most cruel and diabolical deeds for the glory of
God.”
--Abraham Lincoln, 1864; "Fifty Years in the Church of Rome,” Charles Chiniquy,
1888.
The CIA is roughly half Mormon and half Roman Catholic.
Stan Smith , 43 minutes ago
The reason people don't trust institutions is because they fail us time and time
again.
All why sucking up resources for research (good) and making sure people inside the system
are taken care of (less good).
The more Fauci talks the more he sounds like Al Gore. Not a good thing.
Lying about masks was bad. But lying about HC + Zinc is worse, at least in my mind.
To be fair to Fauci, that industry isnt the only one filled with dishonest schiesters.
They are everywhere.
Institutions aren't trusted because they've earned the distrust over decades. It's well
earned.
Sid Davis , 46 minutes ago
Fauci is a complete fraud.
He graduated from medical school and then spent 2 years working in hospitals. That is the
extent of his medical experience. For the last 50 years he has been a bureaucrat. He
obviously has a conflict of interest because of his ties to the Gates Foundation, Big Pharma,
and the Wuhan Lab where this mess started.
This guy belongs at the end of a rope, not at the top of the response team to this
scamdemic.
He is a sociopathic conman, and not even very good at that.
Stillontheroad , 50 minutes ago
Hey Fucci. How much money to you stand to gain from all your patents, all granted when you
worked for the Federal Government but because you had friends in Congress a law was passed
giving you the proceeds from those patents when in the real world said patents belong to the
USA
Voice-of-Reason , 52 minutes ago
Mr. Fauci,
We believe science. We just don't believe governmental controlled shutdowns are the answer
to this pandemic and that it ultimately does more damage to the economy than it protects
people from Covid19. And yes, we do not believe authority because they lie constantly, are
corrupt and generally are incompetent.
Krink26 , 53 minutes ago
When authorities weaponized everything including science, for political gain, people will
not trust your authority.
VideoEng_NC , 53 minutes ago
"Speaking on a podcast..."
This is the level of media Fauci seems to be relegated to plus his ever-welcoming friends
for interviews with the MSM. Would appear Hungarian Pengos here on ZH was correct on his
05/21 post regarding the ulterior motives behind the announcement of Pence staffers getting
the Wuhan virus making Fauci self isolate...for good. He doesn't even get to bake tree
cookies.
Longdriver , 1 hour ago
Fauci's true colors are being shown now. He's getting testy because he is watching his
future personal profits go up in smoke in controlled vaccines.
DoctorFix , 1 hour ago
"Dont believe science"? Sure, Dr. Falsey! I believe in the "science" you represent. The
science of lies and criminal deception. The science of propaganda and manipulation. The kind
of sciences that you wholeheartedly embrace.
k3g , 1 hour ago
Fauci's turn came, and he proved himself to be incompetent, a bureaucrat, a fraud.
**** you Tony. You flat out suck.
What is The Hedge , 1 hour ago
What Fauci is really saying is that Americans are no longer accepting the false narratives
promoted by those in charge. Maybe there's hope.
Lumberjack , 1 hour ago
Mr. Fauci;
I’m your age and have a pretty strong background in engineering, science and some
other practical skills.
Over the last 30 years science has been bastardized by politicization and liberalism has
finally reached the point of teaching kids 2+3= anything they want.
Political science is based on fraud and bull$hit and now the real deal is as contaminated
as Fukushima.
Your comment about “authotity” screams of idiocracy. Try watering your crops
with gatorade and fertilizing with MDMA.
I know and knew real Phd’s who were real scientists and that’s when science
was based on theory, tests, duplication and verification.
That is no longer the case. It’s idiots like you, book smart field stupid (
I’m being kind with book smart), The only thing you a$$wipes are looking for is 10
minutes of fame, a bunch of money and molesting your interns and students with big boobs that
need a passing grade.
When as usual your astrological prognotications are bad (which are 99% of the time), you
find convenient parties to blame.
It’s time to put real science into both science and leadership.
I have high hopes that this will happen sooner rather than later.
Kid’s take note and see how many times they claimed eggs are bad for you and then
they said eggs are good for you. That goes for many other items and issues too.
Yesireebob, You screwed the pooch Mr. Fauci and I’m calling PETA right now.
Lj
NotAGenius , 1 hour ago
Why the hell does ZH give Fauci the incredibly dishonest cruel idiot any venue. He's a
liar and is the cause of the destruction of the USA by telling Trump we'd have a million
covid-19 deaths unless it was shut down and everyone stayed home. So Trump wiped out the
country and all of our lives on Fauci's b.s. That is what Fauci is, at best. Do not give him
any public platform to lie even more yet to the cowardly stupid clueless Americans. Fauci
does not deserve any recognition or platform for lies anywhere in the USA. But he's given the
stage because the government apparently supports his lies. They are all guilty of treason and
mass destruction of civilization. I want both executed at best, or at least humiliated with
public avoidance.
brian91145 , 1 hour ago
he is owned by the Rockefllers and Gates. That's a fact
radical-extremist , 1 hour ago
Scientists that can never bring themselves to say "I don't know." , are not
scientists...they're blathering charlatans pumping their brand and feeding their egos. Fauci
is much like Paul Krugman. He speaks with such confidence and certainty about everything,
that surely he must be right. And when proven wrong will do it again with the opposing view,
ignoring the fact he ever said it to begin with...as if there's no internet.
SurfingUSA , 1 hour ago
Yes true scientists are extremely humble and cautious, bec. they know how much they don't
know.
FragNasty , 1 hour ago
Hee hee, greatings to all.
Science is meant to be based on evidence rather than faith. Maybe Fauci himself doesn't
believe in science with his inclination to the contrary. "Americans don't believe ..." The
man is a maniac! Maybe he is accidentally confessing to the state of "science" as a
counterpart to religion in it's role as an ideological control mechanism within the state of
politics today, more precisely the breakdown of such a control mechanism.
Often is man's best wisdom to be silent , 1 hour ago
Marionettes can easily be transformed into hanged persons. The ropes are already
there.
Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
BaNNeD oN THe RuN , 1 hour ago
He is right...
Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political
and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is
just as good as your knowledge.
~ Isaac Asimov
But he is also one of the reasons that the anti-intellectual movement can maintain
momentum. Too many of the "authoritative voices" in positions of power are total
charlatans.
Itchy and Scratchy , 1 hour ago
This yap flappin’ freak show in on the board of Gates controlled WHO & various
other big pharma boards! His crooked snoot is buried so far into the cash flow trough it
ain’t even funny! Embezzlement poster child!
Handful of Dust , 1 hour ago
"Fauci the Fraud" will go down in history who will not remember him kindly.
Totally_Disillusioned , 1 hour ago
Fauci doesn't seem to understand WE DON'T BELIEVE HIM ANY LONGER!
SuperareDolo , 6 minutes ago
You never should have believed him. He was behind the attempt to steal credit for the
discovery of HIV by his underling, Gallo. There's a long story there.
Yog Soggoth , 1 hour ago
I believe Fauci gave the Wuhan lab $3.7 million.
We_The_People , 1 hour ago
That’s not entirely true, we just believe fraudulent agenda driven traitors like
you!
Fauci’s estimates were so off that the only 2 conclusions can be formed, gross
negligence or intentional deception, either way he has zero credibility left!
We do still need to worry about the coronavirus's spread. But how can we when the experts
have completely forsaken our trust? Dr. Anthony Fauci (L), director of the National Institute
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases speaks next to Response coordinator for White House
Coronavirus Task Force Deborah Birx, during a meeting with US President Donald Trump and
Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards D-LA in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington,
DC on April 29, 2020. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)
Since the pandemic began, I've been described as a so-called "COVID warrior," which makes
some sense. After all, I've defended the shutdowns of large gatherings. I've insisted that it's
wise to temporarily close churches and postpone funerals and other ceremonies. I've argued that
extreme caution is necessary -- that to do anything else would be to blatantly and selfishly
ignore the
scientific information at our disposal. I've held the opinion that, although it has caused
irrevocable harm to the economy and caused millions of people to suffer, business owners
who close up shop for fear of spreading contagion are in the right.
Now I feel like a fool.
By no means am I a coronavirus denier -- more than 100,000
and counting have died from the COVID. But with conflicting reports about everything from
wearing masks to the
spread of the virus through surfaces coming out of the World Health Organization and the
CDC almost weekly, my head is spinning. Nothing seems to make sense anymore.
For fear of spreading the virus, health experts have consistently recommended shutting down
and avoiding public spaces, including
schools ,
playgrounds ,
public pools , and
public transportation . They've also advocated for
limiting large gatherings and closing anything that might draw crowds. It's advice that's
been repeated for months -- to the point that those ignoring it have been
reviled and accused of experimenting with "
human sacrifice ."
That's because asymptomatic carriers of the virus, though they may feel all right
themselves, can become
mass spreaders of the deadly contagion, especially in large groups. This is why Michigan
residents
protesting their state's lockdown in Lansing were deserving of shame -- they likely
caused mass immiseration and sickness, right?
Wrong. Turns out, health officials didn't really believe any of that.
Just last week, the WHO
announced that it's extremely rare for asymptomatic spreading of the coronavirus to occur.
If you feel fine, then you're probably not a grave threat to anyone, especially if you're
wearing a mask and gloves. Then the WHO backtracked on that statement, ultimately arriving at
the completely unhelpful determination that "
this is a major unknown ." Health experts simply don't know to what extent the disease is
transmitted by asymptomatic carriers -- yet they
still feel confident that the risks of the coronavirus shouldn't impact our protesting of
police brutality.
One rightly wonders how, within a span of weeks, we went from shaming people for being out
in the streets to shaming those who won't join the
crowd .
What's more,
contact with infected animals and surfaces is
unlikely to cause COVID-19 to spread, and
chlorine kills the virus upon contact, so clean pools are also safe. But of course, many
schools, playgrounds, pools, and businesses were forced to close.
Livelihoods have been destroyed, children are paying a
high price through a loss of time and key social-educational development, and mental health
across the country is on
the decline .
And now some journalists from prominent publications -- the same ones that have been
demanding oh-so-extreme caution -- are performing breathtaking gymnastics in an effort to
backtrack,
explaining that there's no evidence of outdoor coronavirus spread. Now, it's "prolonged
indoor close contact" that we have to worry about.
They may be right. Maybe protesters really shouldn't worry (though they probably
should ). But that doesn't excuse what seems to be a disgusting hypocrisy that trampled on
the livelihoods of more than
30 million Americans. Understandably, many are outraged and have
lost all faith in the experts.
Health advice can't shift with politics -- COVID-19, cancer, and the flu don't know party
lines. The virus is either unmanageable or manageable. That's it.
Now, with Trump
aiming to restart his so-called "MAGA rallies," we'll inevitably have -- and
already have had -- another round of tut-tutting from the media about how horribly
irresponsible it is to gather in crowds. But who can possibly blame those who shrug these
warnings off? MAGA rallies very well could spread COVID-19, but in the event they do, the
George Floyd protests will be equally culpable. Expert credibility has been lost.
Maybe we should, as many of my more classically liberal friends have been saying all along,
allow people to make their own choices, take their own risks, open their own businesses back
up, hold their own protests against injustice.
Whatever the case, given the whiplash the public has experienced over these past few weeks,
we certainly won't be running to health experts as readily as before. Certainly, social
distancing practices have
helped flatten the curve, but living your life based on the inconsistent messaging of the
WHO and the CDC is a recipe for disaster. If a second wave does appear, it will be cautious
individuals and community innovation that provides the solutions -- not those who have done
nothing to earn our trust.
Anthony DiMauro is a freelance writer based in New York City. His work has appeared
in The National Interest , Real Clear Media, and elsewhere. You can follow him on
Twitter @AnthonyMDiMauro.
Absolutely nothing about how the US has responded to the Corona Virus could be mistaken for being based on data. I mean getting
into the "spike" people are talking about, in Alabama where I live this is no spike, this is a continuation of the trend we've
been seeing since March. Cases never significantly declined, and instead we've just seen steady growth in deaths, active cases,
and new cases.
The increases we've seen have followed 2 weeks after what was basically the final wave to reopening (Which, really
isn't, but public perception was that life could go back to normal based on statements from the state), almost perfectly. I am
sure we'll see trends continue as protesters who were exposed start getting sick. It will just compound with the day to day effect
that can easily be directed at the miscommunication of what the threat is to the public.
Make no mistake, Saagar is right to be
annoyed but there is Nothing here that has been handled remotely well. Nobody communicated this well, nobody planned well, nobody
reopened well. Front to back, top to bottom this has been an embarrassing failure for the US.
Glenn Greenwald's video on the intercept about this was excellent. The medical and public health establishment need to be neutral,
people aren't going to trust them again.
Dave Chappelle pointed out in his latest standup that those we depend upon for information lie to us. CNN, Fox News and the
like are all meant to polarize the citizens. Obviously it has been working!
I had this discussion with my best friend in March. I was questioning how is it the masks can be useless for those trying to
prevent infections, but was efficient for those that had infection. Yet medical workers were using surgical masks while working
around covid patients. It was easy to conclude that it was to prevent panic buying. Even if the MSM was truthful (I do not condone
them lying), IMO people would have still bought out all of the masks. Just as they did with all the toilet paper and hand sanitizer.
The origin of this panic seems to have been a report from CNN on January 26 of an
alleged statement by China's health minister Ma Xiaowei that people who are (supposedly)
infected by the virus can infect others without themselves showing any symptoms of illness.
If that were true then you could be infected just by walking down the street -- clearly a
reason to panic. Ma didn't explain why he thought the virus can be spread before someone
has symptoms, but that didn't stop Dr. William Schaffner, a longtime adviser to the CDC,
from taking this claim seriously -- in effect endorsing it. Other CDC officials took up the
theme. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases picked up the ball and ran with it. Dr. Fauci is quoted as saying, "the Chinese
did not tell U.S. health authorities that the virus could spread before someone is
symptomatic", thus implicitly suggesting that indeed that was the case. This was denied by
epidemiologist Dr. Michael Osterholm, who stated, "I know of no evidence in 17 years of
working with coronaviruses ... where anyone has been found to be infectious during their
incubation period." On January 30 the New England Journal of Medicine published a
letter from 16 German doctors claiming that a symptomless Chinese woman (arriving from
China) had infected a German man in Munich, but when they got around to actually asking
her, she said that while in Munich she had in fact shown symptoms, which worsened on her
return to China. Thanks to CNN, Dr. Fauci,and the German doctors, the rumor of symptomless
transition morphed into "fact" among government officials and the general public. From then
on the MSM issued increasingly alarming reports of deaths due to this (allegedly) new
illness, ignoring the fact that people were (as usual) dying of the (not reported) seasonal
flu.
John Nolte: Dr.
Fauci Is Either a Liar or a Fraud And for a devastating exposé of the 36-year
career of this vile quack doctor see the final article in William Engdahl's Covid article
compilation
here .
In February, as Italy began reporting infections, Prof. Neil Ferguson, Head of the
Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at Imperial College London, dusted off a
computer program he had written 15 years ago implementing a model for infectious disease
spreading. Using data available from Italy he concluded (following his history of vastly
over-estimating deaths in previous epidemics) that 510,000 people (2.5 million in the U.S.)
could die if the U.K. government didn't abandon its strategy at that time of allowing the
disease to spread. On February 23 in Italy the first lockdowns and compulsory "social
distancing" began. Early in March Britain also imposed lockdowns, later extended to the
entire U.K., despite the fact that Prof. Ferguson had revised his death toll estimate from
510,000 down to 20,000.
The term "lockdown" normally means keeping prisoners locked down in their cells,
typically following a riot. It was also used in the MSM following the Boston Marathon
Bombing in 2013 (likely a false flag) to confine people to their homes until given
permission to come out -- a trial run?
On March 7 one Dr. James Lawler (U. of University Medical Center) misinformed the world
(to the delight of the MSM) that about 96 million Americans could become infected with
coronavirus, of whom about half a million would die. On March 11 the WHO, after much delay,
declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. On March 15 New York mayor Bill de Blasio declared
(with no evidence) that the virus can spread rapidly through "close interactions," and
issued an order (which was soon after repeated by governors of many other states) to close
restaurants, bars and cafes. On March 16 most European countries imposed lockdowns and
border closures. On March 20 New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (along with governors of many
other states) shut down all "non-essential businesses", thereby depriving millions of
people of their jobs and their livelihoods, leading to bankruptcies and suicides. By March
30 approximately 265 million Americans were under indefinite lockdown and martial law in
all but name.
In late April a 'revised' version of the computer code written by Ferguson to predict
510,000 deaths in the U.K. was released to the GitHub code repository. It was examined
by an anonymous ex-Google software engineer, who found numerous flaws and bugs, in
particular that, from the same input data the program would produce very different outputs.
This makes it useless for scientific purposes, and also worse than useless as a basis for
political decisions (and consequently as a justification for government orders). Further
details at
Computer model that locked down the world turns out to be sh*tcode.
A
comment (by Frito) on Zero Hedge about Ferguson's shoddy code:
The thing that really has me pissed off, is that my government [the U.K.] (and many
others around the world), jumped in and spent hundreds of billions of dollars and
suspended the civil liberties of millions of people indefinitely and destroyed the
livelihoods of countless small business people based on just one unverified source [that
is, Ferguson]. There was ZERO due diligence done. The first thing that should have been
done was to require the production of the full source code for the simulation software
(as it was run, not this "cleaned up" stuff), and all input data so that it could be
verified. If they didn't want to provide it, then the simulation results should have been
discarded.
Ferguson's "scientific" advice was bogus, and Boris Johnson was criminally negligent in
accepting it and ordering the lockdown of the entire U.K. But will they ever see jail time
for wrecking the U.K. economy and ruining the lives of millions of people? No way.
The mask problem in the USA has a much simpler origin: the USA simply don't have the means to
give masks for everyone anymore. It is heavily deindustrialized.
The CDC actually advised against wearing masks until April 6, even though there were studies
showing that some types of home-made masks were 70% effective against molecules the size of
Corona. N95 were found to be 95% effective.
Wearing a mask helps with protecting oneself but even more importantly helps to protect
others. One might be carrying and spreading the disease without knowing it. We all release
fine droplets when we speak, sneeze or cough. Masks prevent one's droplets from spreading
out.
There was and still is a lot of cultural resistance in 'western' societies to wearing
masks even as it seem obvious that masks help to prevent infections. But while there was
evidence that masks work in certain situation there was no scientific research that
showed the effects general mask wearing would have on the growth of the epidemic. We did not
know how much general mask wearing would 'flatten the curve'.
We now have a sound answer. There is now a study that compares a city which ordered everyone to
wear masks with a similar city that had no 'mask-up' order during the same period of the
epidemic.
On April 6 the German city of Jena with a population of 110,000 people ordered everyone to
wear a mask in all public settings. The announcement of the order was made
a week earlier and was followed by a local awareness campaign - "Jena wears mask!"
No other city in Germany did this at the time. The states of Germany only ordered
mandatory mask wearing between April 22 and 26.
For 20 days Jena was different than the rest of the country but experienced the same
epidemic. That made it possible to test the effect the mask order had on the number of new
cases in Jena.
To be able to make a one to one comparison with Jena researchers from the University of
Mainz constructed a 'synthetic city' of the same size and demographic characteristics as Jena
from the weighted data of six other German cities (selected from a bigger pool). They then
compared the Covid-19 case data from Jena with the case data from the synthetic city.
At the beginning of the pandemic in Germany the synthetic city and Jena had similar
developments. But ten days after the announcement of the order and four days after its
mandatory implementation the case numbers in Jena dropped away from those of the comparison
city.
The people in Jena started to wear masks before other German cities did so. It nearly
immediately paid off.
At the time of the announcement of the mask campaign Jena and the synthetic control city
each had 93 cases. On April 6 Jena had 142 registered cases compared to 143 cases in the
synthetic control city. On April 26 Jena counted 158 cases and the synthetic control city had
205 cases. It shows a significant reduction in the growth of the epidemic.
The authors conclude:
We believe that the reduction in the growth rates of infections by 40% to 60% is our best
estimate of the effects of face masks.
...
We should also stress that 40 to 60% might still be a lower bound. The daily growth rates
in the number of infections when face masks were introduced was around 2 to 3%. These are
very low growth rates compared to the early days of the epidemic in Germany, where daily
growth rates also lay above 50%. One might therefore conjecture that the effects might have
been even greater if masks had been introduced earlier.
Japan and South Korea both brought the epidemic under control without ordering harsh
lockdowns. The people there all wore masks from very early on even without being ordered to
do so. The two countries also did extensive testing and contact tracing for each new case.
Together these measures were enough to stop the outbreak.
Why didn't we copy them?
It was 'western' arrogance that prevented our societies from learning from China and other
Asian societies. We should have used the time China had given us .
The economic and human price for not having done so is very high. No doubt the masks help in
preventing the spread when used properly, as well as gloves and distancing, but I wouldn't
put too much faith in any studies.
The lockdown approaches themselves may have done more, but even those vary in method from
one state to the next. Additionally, closing of borders to potential carriers from other
countries seems important, as well as the virulence of the particular strain. Then there
seems to be a massive divergence in counting and testing for the virus and recording virus
deaths.
There are a lot of variables to control for an reliable study. And I seriously doubt any
study has done so, particularly given the politicization of the crisis and the venal
opportunism of Big Pharma and its bought and paid for medical journals.
Western arrogance, sure, but is that the most important factor?
Since US peons live in a democracy, let's review the meeting minutes and memos and emails
of our dear leaders to see what their thinking was. Oh wait. There are no meeting minutes.
Everything is secret and opaque so as to not worry the pretty little heads of peons.
Guess we are once again reduced to speculation and gossip. Let the rumors begin.
I don't think the mask problem has anything to do with Western arrogance. Not at all.
The mask problem has a much simpler origin: the Western nations simply don't have the
means to give masks for everyone anymore. It is heavily deindustrialized.
Had they had mask manufacturing sectors at home, you bet your soul the Western governments
would be buying them at inflated prices (to enrich the local capitalist) and enforce their
use with an enthusiasm never seen before. A cultural shift towards daily mask use would
sprout overnight and no westerner would complain.
I know this because we have countless examples in History. The substitution of alcoholic
beverages for tea in industrial England. The creation of the leisure and entertainment
industries during the rise of Fordism. The invention of the concepts of infancy and
adolescence. Etc. etc. etc.
We observed the lack of masks crisis in the West immediately. The USA begun to intercept
ships loaded with masks (and ventilators) from China in Malaysia. Spain and France begun to
resort to Aliexpress test kits to have the quantity necessary and lost the money with subpar
masks and kits. Healthcare workers are without adequate PPE in the UK, USA and probably many
other Western countries (at least, I've never seen any Western doctor or nurse with nearly
the equipment of their Chinese counterparts).
The West's problem is called deindustrialization. Culture is always fixable - survival
generally being the best teacher. But lack of resources cannot be solved just with sheer
will.
Ergo amongst other things, your royal "we" also believed they could pin the deaths and
economic pain on Trump alone and then ride that all the way to an election victory on
November 3.
And now it has backfired/not gone as planned.
If journalists are worried about Covid-19 all over again, why don't they ask their beloved
Fauci why he didn't tell the rioters and looters to wear a face mask or "social distance"
during last week when they were all outside running amok and spreading Covid-19?
But he suddenly pops up this week and the fear mongering starts again... and the feeble
fall in line again lol
Anyway. Maybe Dr Fauci will give a press conference next week dressed in Kente
clothing....
I swear 2020 is like we are living in a simulation lol
The CDC actually advised against wearing masks until April 6, even though there were studies
showing that some types of home-made masks were 70% effective against molecules the size of
Corona. N95 were found to be 95% effective.
What stupidity!!! Who in his right mind would counsel against using a 75% effective mask,
when it was the only readily available option?!?
It's like counseling against wearing condoms because they're not 100% effective.
The virus has peaked in Germany a long time ago and in fact before the lockdown. By now, herd
immunity is reached, achieved by about half, or more, of the population not being susceptible
to this type of coronavirus. A fair amount, perhaps 60%, never were due to background
immunity from prior conoravirus infections, others have built it since, most of those without
realising as symptoms or rare and if occurring, mostly mild. The authorities can find as many
"cases" as they want, at any day they want, by adjusting testing activity. It's the most
easily manipulated number. Seeing our host trust precisely that number (and base a story on
it) from a government that has been persistently lying about this winter's flu, and has
broken the constitution multiple times to ram through the measures, is surprising.
Deaths from delayed surgeries and medical treatments are estimated up to 125,000 - in
Germany alone, suicides are already spiking. Abuse of children and women at home is at
alarming levels, doctors report injuries so severe as usually seen in car crashs.
The measures are nothing short of carefully planned (Event 201), premeditated mass
murder.
What about masks? Here a snapshot of the science on it:
On the effectiveness of masks
Regardless of the comparatively low lethality of Covid19 in the general population (see
above), there is still no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of masks in healthy and
asymptomatic people in everyday life.
A cross-country study by the University of East Anglia came to the conclusion that a mask
requirement was of no benefit and could even increase the risk of infection.
Two US professors and experts in respiratory and infection protection from the University
of Illinois explain in an essay that respiratory masks have no effect in everyday life,
neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). The
widespread use of masks didn't prevent the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan, either.
A study from April 2020 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine came to the conclusion
that neither fabric masks nor surgical masks can prevent the spread of the Covid19 virus by
coughing.
An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 also comes to the
conclusion that respiratory masks offer little or no protection in everyday life. The call
for a mask requirement is described as an "irrational fear reflex".
A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the U.S. CDC also found that
respirators had no effect.
The WHO moreover declared in June that truly "asymptomatic transmission" is in fact "very
rare", as data from numerous countries showed. Some of the few confirmed cases were due to
direct body contact, i.e. shaking hands or kissing.
In Austria, the mask requirement in retail and catering will be lifted again from
mid-June. A mask requirement was never introduced in Sweden because it "does not offer
additional protection for the population", as the health authority explained.
And we must remember what Nassim Taleb pointed out...even if your mask is only 30% effective,
if the person you're interacting with also has a mask which is only 30% effective, the
multiplicative properties of probability means the actual probability of neither of you
getting infected is much greater than 30%.
I ordered my first batch of ten masks from Aliexpress on April 4, followed by an order of
five more (expensive ones at $7 each) from LA Police Gear on April 6 and five more from LAPG
on April 14. So I have enough masks to rotate them daily for two weeks. So I don't have to
worry about washing them or whatever, per the advice of the guy who invented the filter who
said leaving a mask unused for at least 4-5 days should be sufficient to to enable any
collected virus particles to die.
As for the study, I'm not sure it is reliable, given the possible factors surrounding
entire cities. A "simulated city" just might not be accurate enough, especially when
referring to relatively low numbers of cases per city. It would be more persuasive if there
was a country that wore masks and one that didn't. But then we've already seen that: the US
versus any Asian country.
In my observations, most people are wearing masks, but they seem to be doing so rather
haphazardly. A lot of people wear them for a bit, then let them hang around their necks when
they get tired of the heat buildup inside the mask. I had to stop yesterday during a supply
run when my nose started running and I had to shift the mask off partly in order to deal with
that. That made me concerned coming close to my nose with a tissue, not knowing whether there
might be any virus particles on the plastic gloves covering my hands. Normally I don't touch
my face when out of my room, and once back in the room I immediately wash my hands, remove
the mask, then apply hand sanitizer. Interrupting that process did not make me happy.
A lot of people, especially blacks and the homeless, aren't wearing masks at all. The
homeless obviously have little ability to acquire them (at least manufactured ones), and a
certain number of lower-class blacks are seemingly oblivious to the risk, despite blacks
being hit harder than whites by the virus.
In fact, the nationwide decline in "the curve" of daily new cases, from a peak of 35,000 in
early April to around 20,000 in recent weeks, has been obfuscated by the fact that four
states with 40% of the nationwide case total -- New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and
Illinois -- experienced significant declines.
"That is hiding the fact that the majority of other states are either increasing their
numbers or fluctuating in fits and starts around a peak," says Mark Cameron, PhD, an
immunologist and medical researcher in the School of Medicine at Case Western Reserve
University in Ohio. "Our victory lap has started too quickly."
The nationwide curve was flattened thanks to stay-at-home orders and other preventive
measures, Cameron says. But rather than continuing to bend the curve down, as many other
countries have done, ours is on a "disappointing plateau," he says, a "slow burn" that's
putting seeds of the virus in every nook and cranny of the country.
That means the current wave of infections could be far from over, Cameron says. It might
simply persist at current daily case levels, or even possibly swell this summer and then,
if it recedes at all, roar back as a larger wave this fall.
..but: Despite this evidence, a group called "masks4all", which was founded by a "young
leader" of the World Economic Forum (WEF) Davos, is advocating worldwide mask requirements.
Several governments and the WHO appear to be responding to this campaign.
While for medical purposes it's a waste of time and resources (might even lead to
additional health problems), the masks are more likely to have a psychological or political
function ("muzzle" or "visible sign of obedience") and that wearing them frequently.
A few days ago, I was talking to someone for work, and they started ranting about how the
"whole coronavirus thing" is a conspiracy. How it's blown out of proportion and isn't any
worse than the seasonal flu. I inwardly rolled my eyes. Later that day, I mocked him while
talking to my wife.
But not so long ago, I was that guy. Sure, he's got to have his fact-resistance turned
up to a nine or ten to still be in denial at this point. But it would be hypocritical of me
to get too self-congratulatory.
(MSM actually reflects advice not too badly; plus, it is what the public saw.)
April 6. WHO publishes 'interim guidance.' PDF.
excerpt.
"Studies of human coronaviruses provide evidence that the use of a medical mask can
prevent the spread of infectious droplets from an infected person to someone else and
potential contamination of the environment by these droplets. There is limited evidence that
wearing a medical mask by healthy individuals in the households or among contacts of a sick
patient, or among attendees of mass gatherings may be beneficial as a preventive measure.
However, there is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types)
by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can
prevent them from infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19. .. Medical masks
should be reserved for health care workers. .The use of medical masks in the community may
create a false sense of security "
"synthetic control city": total bullshit. So many arbitrary parameters you can get any result
you like. Why not do a real comparison?
And: Japan had no "extensive testing and contact tracing" at all. In fact Japan had the
LEAST testing of all industrial countries. No testing, no panic, no problems.
Wuhan is using way more masks than Japan (also due to air pollution). How did that stop
the outbreak?? Not at all.
MoA has been consistently wrong with every aspect of this pandemic. Even worse, it totally
failed to recognize the huge political dimension.
Many states do not have the contact tracing capacity needed to reopen safely. At the
beginning of May, NPR created a map of states whose contact tracing forces met the need
estimated by public health officials, and the vast majority did not meet them. Some states
are working to increase their contact tracing capacity, but some experts interviewed by
STAT news cautioned that it's not enough.
Bottom line: The US botched the initial response by being too slow, and it is not botching
the re-opening. We can assume it will botch the second wave. Trump has already said there
will be no lockdown even for a second wave (not that it matters what he says now.)
It's like the old line: "Cheer up, things could be worse. So I cheered up, and sure
enough, things got worse." Well, I didn't bother "cheering up" in the first place. My
procedures to deal with this remain in place and will remain in place until there is 1) a
vaccine, or 2) an effective treatment that prevents death and severe long-term effects of
infection.
Thanks b! The study proves the obvious, IMO. The behavior exhibited by those inhabiting
Western nations proves the degree with which they care for themselves, their families, and
their neighbors in the most damning manner. Clearly collectivist societies will perform
better than individualist societies, all other things being equal.
Trailer Trash @2--
I beg to differ as there're two very good timelines documenting TrumpCo actions in the run
up to the outbreak that proves beyond reasonable doubt that the policy employed was a
Treasonous Do Nothing Policy that runs totally against the rationale for the Constitution and
the government it established--the very instrument Trump swore to obey and uphold. I've
incorporated both into the essay I'm currently writing.
This one compiled by Raw Story is the more detailed of the two as this example
shows:
"On February 1, 2018, the Washington Post reported that 'CDC to cut by 80 percent efforts
to prevent global disease outbreak' (6): 'The global health section of the CDC was so
drastically cut in 2018 that much of its staff was laid off (7) and the number of countries
it was working in was reduced from 49 to merely 10. (8) Meanwhile, throughout 2018, the U.S.
Agency for International Development and its director, Mark Green, came repeatedly under fire
from both the White House and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. (9) And though Congress has so
far managed to block Trump administration plans to cut the U.S. Public Health Service
Commissioned Corps by 40 percent (10), the disease-fighting cadres have steadily eroded as
retiring officers go unreplaced.'"
And as you see from the date, that was just the beginning of the dismantling of what was
erected to "provide for the common defence."
Posted by: poor moa | Jun 11 2020 20:47 utc | 14 Wuhan is using way more masks than Japan
(also due to air pollution). How did that stop the outbreak?? Not at all.
When the outbreak started, Wuhan hospitals were not using KN95 - they were using surgical
masks. Thousands of medical personnel were infected.
When the Chinese government brought in scores of thousands of additional medical
personnel, they wore KN95 masks. None were infected.
Actually, the "study" you cite (it's not published anyway) refutes itself right away. They
say all German cities introduced masks between April 20 and 29. Then why did cases not drop
to zero as they claim for Jena? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Germany
Cases in Arizona are up 240% in last two weeks and hospitalizations are up 77% this past
month, 31% this week alone. The positive rate for Covid-19 testing is increasing. That's
not a great combination.
The largest hospital system in the state has been ringing the alarm. That they are
running short of ICU capacity. Loudly.
Meanwhile, other states and Puerto Rico have had their largest number of daily cases since
this started, according to the Washington Post.
Yet we still have idiots proclaiming their bullshit here. b is going to have to do a lot
of "cleansing" today.
Maria Van Kerkhove, PhD, the World Health Organization's technical lead for the coronavirus
response and head of the emerging diseases and zoonoses unit, clarified that when she said
asymptomatic spread was "very rare" on Monday, that she was answering a question asked in a
presser, and not sharing an official WHO policy or statement.
She added that some modeling groups have estimated that 40% of transmission may be due
to asymptomatic spread, but that is a mathematical modeling estimate and a definitive
answer is still unknown, in part because data from contact tracing studies remains
limited.
It's important to note that asymptomatic people who never exhibit signs of Covid-19 are
different from pre-symptomatic people who initially don't have symptoms but develop them
later. It's difficult, from a research standpoint, to tease these two groups apart.
Masks are fine. They build confidence when people are threatened with an awful death and
where 'experts' give conficting advice. They are personaly empowering. Wear one now.
The WHO is not looking good.
The Lancet and NEJM are trashed.
The China response was a brilliant example to the world.
The mask is a mighty useful response.
Sunlight is wonderful.
Alright, on page 28 in annex C they compare the effect of masks in other German cities, and
found no effect. In some cities infections got even worse after introducing masks. It is
clear Jena is a special case, perhaps they stopped testing or people stopped interacting or
whatever.
The study is another fraud, and Moa once again fell for it. What a shame. I'm sure he
didn't even read until page 28.
I hope you won't delete my comments, everybody should decide for themselves if this study
has any merit.
The WHO stated the obvious: the vast majority of people remain asymptomatic, and asymptomatic
people don't spread the virus (which is why children don't spread the virus). Pre-symptomatic
is possible if you get really close, but this is true for common cold as well.
So what paranoid folks like you really need to show is if mandatory mask is any better
than masks only for sick people or sick people simply staying home. Hint: it isn't.
Quote from the "study": "In addition to Jena, we test for treatment effects in Nordhausen,
Rottweil, Main-Kinzig-Kreis, and Wolfsburg (compare Figure 1). --- As the figure shows, the
result is 2:1:1. Rottweil and Wolfsburg display a positive effect of mandatory mask wearing,
just as Jena. The results in Nordhausen are very small or unclear. In the region of
Main-Kinzig, it even seems to be the case that masks increased the number of cases relative
to the synthetic control group. " (page 28)
So obviously, masks aren't important at all. Other factors are at play.
I blame it on the communists - Jena is in what was formerly East Germany and the inhabitants
of Jena are still oppressed by their communist upbringing. Communism in Jena must be rooted
out and the German citizens of Jena must be free to die from COVID-19 just like the
freedom-loving morons in the good old U S of A, y'all. Yee haw. USA! USA! USA! Would you go
all the way for the U.S.A?
If journalists are worried about Covid-19 all over again, why don't they ask their beloved
Fauci why he didn't tell the rioters and looters to wear a face mask or "social distance"
during last week when they were all outside running amok and spreading Covid-19?
But he suddenly pops up this week and the fear mongering starts again... and the feeble
fall in line again lol
Anyway. Maybe Dr Fauci will give a press conference next week dressed in Kente
clothing....
I swear 2020 is like we are living in a simulation lol
He intentionally broke the moratorium on the gain of function research studies and then
paid 3.7 million to china's virology lab in Wuhan to continue it. Where did this pandemic
start from again? He is guilty and should be thrown into a pit.
And Dr. Faucci is still lieing when he says that he didn't realize that it was so
transmittable early on because he was heavily invested in the Wuhan Lab for a long time
before the outbreak! And heavily invested in the WHO at the same time!
The only issue that I see is that Dr. Fauci wasn't lied too by the W.H.O. He was in full
know of what was going on and because of his role in the research in China, he went along
with the the guidelines the W.H.O. Its all a cover up and Dr. Fauci needs to be investigated
as well.
He was told in USA to stop developing covid 19 in the USA So.... he paid to send the
unfinished virus to China And they finished the job. Research & let me know if this isn't
the truth . If it is true find out why he did & then before you cut off his head for
treason inject him with vaccines he developed & leave for 1 year & watch results
Fauci is entirely too elderly (and out of experience) to be making judgement calls for the
entire country. One man alone should not be making decisions as he is doing.
"... The purpose of the mask is that if the wearer has the virus and is a carrier, the mask protects others from that carrier. The person infected wearing a mask coughs, splutters, sneezes into the mask which captures most of virus and reduces its spread to other people. ..."
The thing about masks is not that it protects the wearer, of
course, it does not protect the wearer, especially with the extra fiddling that Fauci
alludes to.
The purpose of the mask is that if the wearer has the virus and is a carrier, the mask
protects others from that carrier. The person infected wearing a mask coughs, splutters,
sneezes into the mask which captures most of virus and reduces its spread to other
people.
Hospital staff have traditionally worn masks to protect patients, who may have a poor
immune system, from any illness that the doctor/nurse may be carrying.
I have done lots of travelling over the past few months, and
have not seen one person coughing or sneezing. Fauci said very clearly that people should
not be wearing masks. If someone thinks they are infected with a virus, they should not
being going out in public.
Reply
Because I completely blocked out mainstream media when the
quarantine started, this is actually the first time I've heard Fauci speak he reminds me of
Mel Brooks or of some bad actor in a bad sit-com he doesn't seem that smart is he smart?
Big news in CA is that "Grinning" Gavin Newsom is on the verge of being sued by the
PROFESSIONAL BEAUTY FEDERATION OF CA a coalition of tens of thousands of nail salons who
feel that Newsom is treating them unfairly on top of that, 80% of CA nail salons are
operated by Vietnamese immigrants, who are among the most patriotic individuals in America
the groundswell against Newsom is finally palpable
"The top teams rushing to develop coronavirus vaccines are alerting governments, health
officials and shareholders that they may have a big problem : The outbreaks in their countries
may be getting too small to quickly determine whether vaccines work
A leader of the Oxford University group, one of the furthest ahead with human trials, admits
the reality is paradoxical, even "bizarre," but said the declining numbers of new infections
this summer could be one of the big hurdles vaccine developers face in the global race to beat
down the virus.
Even as new cases are growing worldwide, transmission rates are falling in Britain, China
and many of the hardest-hit regions in the United States -- the three countries that have
experimental vaccines ready to move into large-scale human testing in June, July and August."
Washpost
---------------
Well, pilgrims it would seem that the Post staff does not see the irony in their own
writing, or perhaps they do. There have been scattered evidences of rationality there lately.
Even as Democrat governors and mayors across the country drag their feet on the re-opening of
the American economy, infection rates are falling. In the Faucibirxist view of things
everything depends on vaccine development (or herd immunity post holocaust). But, alas there
just aren't enough new, vibrant infections to make development of the vaccines convenient. What
will happen to the flow of government money to these projects if this phenomenon becomes
general knowledge. Someone at the Post should be disciplined for this indiscretion. pl
"What will happen to the flow of government money to these projects if this phenomenon
becomes general knowledge."
Well Fauci is almost 80 so I think he's set for life. I hear the left wants lots of
redevelopment funds and jobs programs, with the attendant opportunities for graft that comes
with them, for thier cities which we are all assured had neither rioting nor looting.
Thank you Col. Lang for all the posts on novel coronavirus.
For shining light on this, this utter failure by the medical community and their various
and sundry enablers in government and in business.
On these liars and charlatans and killers and criminals.
The video below is about an hour long. It is a nurse, who worked in NYC hospital, the
alleged epi center of epi centers.
She basically says, without saying directly, but points to the fact that doctors were
murdering patients there, it seems.
She paints a picture of doctors not as scientists but as zealots, as neo neanderthals, as
craven monsters, who care not about life, the elderly, the sick, the least among us.
As Nurse Ratchets
Towards the end of video, she recounts her last day at this hospital, discussing a patient
she had nursed for many days, and who was doing fine, making progress, . . . and how she was
removed from his bed on direct orders, sent to the ER where she was not assigned, and 20
minutes later, the man she was caring for is dead.
These sorts of stories abound; this rage is not going away anytime soon. This is the rage,
and what caused it, that our "lords and masters" who censor us and tell us black is white,
and want to destroy our country. . . this is the rage they don't want to see expressed and
exposed. Will they get their way?
Well...they can always test their vaccines in the USA. We seem not to be faring as well and
can help out. (I believe this is a glass half-full moment.)
Trump needs to stop the $600 a week federal bonus to the unemployed. My neighbor told me
about how his daughter-in-law worked one day a week as a barmaid before the virus shut the
bar down and made a little over a hundred a week. Oregon unemployment pays her 150 a week and
with the added 600 she now makes over 7 times what she did working. How many protesters and
rioters are just as flush getting paid to party in the street? Most i'd say. That makes these
government funded protests a powerful voice and recruitment tool for the Democratic Party.
Ending the federal subsidy to the unemployed would reduce, if not stop, the demonstrations
and mau-mauing of the country.
Absolutely. There were howls of protests before Minneapolis when Georgia, Florida and
Texas started tellling people that if they recieved a recall to work notice from an employer
and refused to go they would be considered a voluntary quit and no longer eligable for
unemployment insurance payments. They'll howl again when they figure out this is all taxable
income.
Take everything the WaPo claims with a grain of salt. There is no real worry over lower covid
infections. What made Covid decrease was the lockdowns. Remove the lockdowns and covid
infection rates will climb, as we are seeing in the already reopened states.
Then when fall rolls around, and people are stuck indoors again, rates will skyrocket.
There will be plenty of test subjects for a vaccine.
With the spread rate of the coronavirus, any outbreak of the infection will peter out once
the total immunity rate of the population approaches 65-70 percent.
In Bergamo (Italy), 57 percent a population sample have tested positive for coronavirus
antibodies, which means that they must have had the infection before and are now most likely
immune.
If you are a Karen, then don't listen to me, but take it from the German government's very
own propaganda outlet, Deutsche Welle:
"Out of nearly 10,000 Bergamo residents who had their blood tested between April 23 and
June 3, 57% had antibodies, indicating they had come into contact with the virus and
developed an immune response.
Health authorities said the sample size was 'sufficiently broad' to be a reliable
indicator of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 among Bergamo province's population."
So we had two major pandemic exercises last year projecting almost exactly what did happen
with the corona virus. First was Crimson Contagion Jan thru Aug 2019
Then Event 201 the international war gaming of a global pandemic almost exactly like what
happened which took place only months before the real pandemic on October 2019
Another prediction from Fauci. This "Black Lives Matter" vs coronavirus puzzle will unfold in
14 days from now. In any case quarantine was send into the dust bin.
Some protesters might pay the price for Dem Party sponsored protests
Fauci, who sits on the White House Coronavirus Task Force, says he finds the protests across
the nation "very concerning" and a "perfect recipe" for a surge in Covid-19
cases.
"... The British scientist known as Professor Lockdown has undermined the draconian policy he unleashed on the world by confessing that Britain hasn't fared any better in tackling the disease than the laid-back Scandis. Professor Neil Ferguson probably woke up this morning breathing a massive sigh of relief because he hadn't been ripped to shreds again in the British newspapers for this second time in just under a month – this time over his startling admission that there has been no significant difference in the levels of Covid-19 suppression when comparing the UK and Sweden. ..."
"... In other words, in the type of roundabout waffling way you'd expect from a bumbling boffin, the scientist – dubbed 'Professor Lockdown' after he cajoled Boris Johnson into bringing the British economy to a screeching halt – reckons Sweden has essentially coped very well without being forced into any draconian lockdown, thank you very much. ..."
"... At the moment, the biggest accusation they could face is needlessly making a hames (for those of you who aren't Irish, this means a 'big mess') of the economy. Even Sweden's state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell has since said that, while he regrets not implanting stricter measures to stop the spread of Covid-19, he "still would not have gone as far as other European countries did." ..."
"... He might've been dubbed "Dr Strangelove" after that embarrassing slip up – but now he just comes across as a nutty professor after his latest confession. These strong words might just come back to haunt BoJo when he next goes before the electorate. With a crippled economy thanks to the draconian measures, he's going to find the next election will be all about his mishandling of Covid-19, and specifically, "the economy, stupid." ..."
The British scientist known as Professor Lockdown has undermined the draconian policy he unleashed on
the world by confessing that Britain hasn't fared any better in tackling the disease than the
laid-back Scandis.
Professor Neil Ferguson probably woke up this morning breathing a massive sigh of relief because he
hadn't been ripped to shreds again in the British newspapers for this second time in just under a
month – this time over his startling admission that there has been no significant difference in the
levels of Covid-19 suppression when comparing the UK and Sweden.
During his
evidence
to the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee on Tuesday, he said:
"They
[Swedish scientists] came to a different policy conclusion based really on quite similar science. I
don't agree with it but scientifically they're not far from scientists in any part of the world."
He then acknowledged that the Swedish authorities had
"got a long way to the same effect"
without a full lockdown.
In other words, in the type of roundabout waffling way you'd expect from a bumbling boffin, the
scientist – dubbed 'Professor Lockdown' after he cajoled Boris Johnson into bringing the British
economy to a screeching halt – reckons Sweden has essentially coped very well without being forced
into any draconian lockdown, thank you very much.
So where was the indignation about how his recommendations f**ked up the economy and made people
prisoners in their own homes? It certainly wasn't to be seen splashed across any British front pages.
Indeed, it was hard enough to find much, if any, coverage of this very significant news story on
Wednesday.
It was buried inside the Daily Telegraph on page seven, running across a third of a page or less,
with a very accurate subheading
stating
in clear black and white:
"Professor admits radical Scandinavian policy worked as well
as British policy of shutting down."
The
evidence
from the two countries' differing approaches has left the professor with little escape
route. UK (full lockdown/businesses shut down): 579 Covid-19 deaths per million of population. Sweden
(softer restrictions/businesses kept open): 442 deaths per million.
But why make such a startling confession now, when he could have wriggled away by saying it's too
early to assess the data as the disease is still running its course? The cynic in me wonders if Dr
Ferguson's matter-of-fact admission that a full lockdown probably didn't make a blind bit of
difference was fueled by ulterior motives. Seeing as his own reputation is already in tatters, was it
a warped act of revenge against Boris Johnson for being forced to fall on his sword after being caught
breaking lockdown with his married lover?
Or here's one for conspiracy theorists: instead of wanting to throw BoJo under the bus, could it
have been a case of wanting to hide something else that's about to come down the track? With America
now burning in the wake of the atrocious murder of George Floyd, the confession at this juncture
reminds me somewhat of how a British government spin doctor sent out a memo only 30 minutes after the
second plane hit the Twin Towers on 9/11 with the cynical recommendation
that
"it's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury."
At the moment, the biggest accusation they could face is needlessly making a hames (for those of
you who aren't Irish, this means a 'big mess') of the economy. Even Sweden's state epidemiologist
Anders Tegnell has since
said
that, while he regrets not implanting stricter measures to stop the spread of Covid-19, he
"still would not have gone as far as other European countries did."
But the Swede being plagued with self-doubt sounds much more like someone racked with guilt about
"what ifs?"
like an Oskar Schindler type of character who was pictured crying at the end of
the Spielberg
film
because he was convinced he could've done better.
According to Aric Dromi, CEO of the Sweden-based Tempus Motu Think Tank, both the UK and Sweden's
response to Covid-19 is
"ego driven and lacking in strategy."
He told me:
"Differences in
the social structure between the UK and Sweden should have made a bigger impact between the numbers
infected. The Swedish economy, for example, far from being protected by remaining open, has still been
badly damaged as it relies heavily on exports, despite the lack of a lockdown. For both countries, it
represents a human sacrifice on the altar of economics, and it is wholly unacceptable."
It all reminds me of when John Cleese in the 'Gourmet Night' episode of 'Fawlty Towers'
told
guests that there were only three different types of duck on the menu that night – with
orange, with cherries or
"surprise,"
which turned out to be
"duck without oranges or
cherries."
And if you don't like duck? As Basil Fawlty
quipped
,
"Ah, well, if you don't like duck, uhhh, you're rather stuck."
At the end of the day, it might still be too early to fully know which was the right way to go,
which begs the question: Why did Prof. Ferguson jump the gun and heap such fulsome praise – no pun
intended here – on the Swedish model? Whatever way you spin it here, he has, once again,
"
undermined
"
the lockdown just like he did
"
after
violating quarantine he designed to meet married lover."
He might've been dubbed
"Dr Strangelove"
after that embarrassing slip up – but now he just
comes across as a nutty professor after his latest confession. These strong words might just come back
to haunt BoJo when he next goes before the electorate. With a crippled economy thanks to the draconian
measures, he's going to find the next election will be all
about
his mishandling of Covid-19, and specifically,
"the economy, stupid."
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Jason O'Toole
has
worked as a senior feature writer for the Irish Daily Mail, a columnist with the Irish Sunday Mirror
and senior editor of Hot Press magazine. He's also the author of several best-selling books.
CDC consist of overpaid idiots. On 20 January, the first confirmed case in South Korea was
identified as a 35-year-old Chinese woman. The first South Korean national to be infected
occurred three days later was a 55-year-old man who worked in Wuhan and returned for a checkup
with flu symptoms. The two infection reports were publicly released on 24 January.
[1] At
this point team of CDC researchers should already be in South Korea. But nothing was done.
The technology was old, the data poor, the bureaucracy slow, the guidance confusing, the
administration not in agreement. The coronavirus shook the world's premier health
agency , creating a loss of confidence and hampering the U.S. response to the crisis
"World's premier health agency"?
I think the illusion the C.D.C. was the "world's premier health agency" comes from the
fact that the USA has, by far, the largest and most powerful pharmaceutical sector in the
world (which Americans call "Big Pharma"). If you have the biggest pharma, you will have the
most sheer volume of human trials and new drug patents. This, by osmosis, puts your country's
C.D.C. at the forefront of most drug regulation - which the rest of the world's C.D.C.s will
simply copy and paste for obvious reasons (i.e. they won't do the same work twice). That
doesn't mean your C.D.C. is "the premier". For instance, it could simply be the most corrupt,
the C.D.C. which is at the right place, the right time. An example for this is the USA's
airplane equivalent to the C.D.C., which sold itself off to Boeing, resulting in the 737 MAX
fiasco.
"... The failure of the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) against COVID-19, with nearly four times the annual budget of the WHO, is visible to the world. The CDC failed to provide a successful test for SARS-CoV-2 in the critical months of February and March , while ignoring the WHO's successful test kits that were distributed to 120 countries. ..."
"... Trump has yet to hold his administration and the CDC responsible for this criminal bungling. This, more than any other failure , is the reason that the U.S. numbers for COVID-19 are now more than 1.5 million and about a third of all global infections. Contrast this with China, the first to face an unknown epidemic, stopping it at 82,000 infections, and the amazing results that countries such as Vietnam and South Korea have produced. ..."
"... Taiwan was the first to inform the WHO of human-to-human transmissions in December, but was completely ignored. ..."
"... "Just how evil does this situation become? Is the general leadership of the American political economy trying to be evil just for the fun of it?" ..."
"... And at what point does the general indifference to this state of affairs that still, incredibly, obtains, turn over into mass outrage and condemnation? Skrelli, Bayer, and all the rest are frelling evil. Extortion writ large, with easily preventable death and suffering. ..."
"... As you note it's about profits. One of the disturbing condemnations of the now fading American Century, which most USians remain contentedly oblivious to is that during their watch as global hegemon, the US, in what can be seen, in the best light, as bad faith, worked to undermine the democratic functionality of international cooperative organizations like the WHO, the UN, etc. ..."
"... The intention of granting copyrights and patents was noble, to provide a limited monopoly on an invention or literary work for a limited period. IP has been distorted and twisted, extended to insane time limits to protect works that for any common sense thinkers have already become public domain (see, e.g. the Happy Birthday song, Mickey Mouse or re-formulation of a drug that's gone out of patent). Software should have had its own IP regime but that ship has sailed (thanks Bill G.). ..."
Donald Trump launched a new vaccine war in May, but not against the virus. It was against
the world. The United States and the UK
were the only
two holdouts in the World Health Assembly from the declaration that vaccines and medicines
for COVID-19
should be available as public goods , and not under exclusive patent rights. The
United States explicitly disassociated itself from the patent pool call, talking instead of
"the critical role that intellectual property plays" -- in other words, patents for vaccines
and medicines. Having badly botched his COVID-19 response, Trump is trying to redeem his
electoral fortunes in the November elections this year by promising an early vaccine. The 2020
version of Trump's "Make America Great Again" slogan is shaping up to be, essentially, "
vaccines for us" -- but the rest of the world will have to queue up and pay what big pharma
asks, as they will hold the patents.
Trump has yet to hold his administration and the CDC responsible for this criminal
bungling. This, more than any
other failure , is the reason that the U.S. numbers for COVID-19 are now more than 1.5
million and about a third of all global infections. Contrast this with China, the first to face
an unknown epidemic, stopping it at 82,000 infections, and the amazing results that countries
such as Vietnam and
South Korea have produced.
One issue is now looming large over the COVID-19 pandemic. If we do not address the
intellectual property rights issue in this pandemic, we are likely to see a repeat of the AIDS tragedy . People
died for 10 years (1994-2004) as patented AIDS medicine was priced at $10,000 to $15,000
for a year's supply, far beyond their reach. Finally, patent
laws in India allowed people to get AIDS medicine at less than a dollar a day , or $350 for a year's supply.
Today, 80
percent of the world's AIDS medicine comes from India. For big pharma, profits trumped
lives, and they will continue to do so, COVID or no COVID, unless we change the world.
Most countries have compulsory licensing provisions that will allow them to break patents in
case of epidemics or health emergencies. Even the WTO, after a bitter fight, accepted in its
Doha Declaration (2001) that countries, in a health emergency, have the right to allow any
company to manufacture a patented drug without the patent holder's permission, and even import
it from other countries.
Why is it, then, that countries are unable to break patents, even if there are provisions in
their laws and in the TRIPS Agreement? The answer is their fear of U.S. sanctions against them.
Every year, the U.S. Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) issues a Special
301 Report that it has used to threaten trade sanctions against any country that tries to
compulsorily license any patented product.
India figures prominently in this report year after year, for daring to
issue a compulsory license in 2012 to Natco for nexavar, a cancer drug Bayer was selling
for
more than $65,000 a year . Marijn Dekkers, the CEO of Bayer, was quoted widely that this
was "theft," and "We did not develop
this medicine for Indians We developed it for Western patients who can afford it."
This leaves unanswered how many people even in the affluent West can afford a $65,000 bill
for an illness. But there is no question that a bill of this magnitude is a death sentence for
anybody but the super-rich in countries like India. Though a number of other drugs were under
also consideration for compulsory licensing at that time, India has not exercised this
provision again after receiving U.S. threats.
It is the fear that countries can break patents using their compulsory licensing powers that
led to proposals for patent pooling. The argument was that since many of these diseases do not
affect rich countries, big pharma should either let go of their patents to such patent pools,
or philanthropic capital should fund the development of new drugs for this pool. Facing the
pandemic of COVID-19, it is this idea of patent pooling that emerged in the recent World Health
Assembly , WHA-73. All countries supported this proposal, barring the
United States and its loyal camp follower, the UK . The
United States also entered its disagreement on the final WHA resolution, being the
lone objector to patent pooling of COVID-19 medicines and vaccines, noting "the critical
role that intellectual property plays in incentivizing the development of new and improved
health products."
While patent pooling is welcome if no other measure is available, it also makes it appear as
if countries have no other recourse apart from the charity of big capital. What this hides, as
charity always does, is that people and countries have legitimate rights even under TRIPS to
break patents under conditions of an epidemic or a health emergency.
The United States, which screams murder if a compulsory license is issued by any country,
has no such compunction when its own interests are threatened. During the anthrax scare in
2001, the U.S. Secretary of Health issued a threat to
Bayer under "eminent domain for patents" for licensing the anthrax-treatment drug
ciprofloxacin to other manufacturers. Bayer folded, and agreed to supply the quantity at a
price that the U.S. government had set. And without a whimper. Yes, this is the same Bayer that
considers India as a "thief" for issuing a compulsory license!
The vaccination for COVID-19 might need to be repeated each year, as we still do not know
the duration of its protection. It is unlikely that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 will
provide a lifetime
immunity like the smallpox vaccine. Unlike AIDS, where the patient numbers were smaller and
were unfortunately stigmatized in different ways, COVID-19 is a visible threat for everyone.
Any attempt to hold people and governments to ransom on COVID-19 vaccines or medicines could
see the collapse of the entire patent edifice of TRIPS that big pharma backed by the United
States and major EU countries have built. That is why the more clever in the capitalist world
have moved toward a voluntary
patent pool for potential COVID-19 medicines and vaccines. A voluntary patent pool means
that companies or institutions holding patents on medicines -- such as remdesivir -- or
vaccines would voluntarily hand them over to such a pool. The terms and conditions of such a
handover, meaning at concessional rates, or for only for certain regions, are still not clear
-- leading to criticism that a voluntary patent pool is not a substitute for declaring that all
such medicines and vaccines should be declared global public goods during the COVID-19
pandemic.
Unlike clever capital, Trump's response to the COVID-19 vaccine is to thuggishly bully his
way through. He believes that with the unlimited money that the United States is now willing to
put into the vaccine efforts, it will either beat everybody else to the winning post, or
buy the company that is
successful . If this strategy succeeds, he can then use "his" COVID-19 vaccine as a new
instrument of global power. It is the United States that will then decide which countries get
the vaccine (and for how much), and which ones don't.
Trump's little problem is that the days of the United States being a sole global hegemon
passed decades ago. The United States has shown itself as a
fumbling giant and its epidemic response
shambolic . It has been unable to provide virus tests to its people in time, and failed to
stop the epidemic through containment/mitigation measures, which a number of other countries
have done.
China and the
EU have already agreed that any vaccine developed by them will be regarded as a public
good. Even without that, once a medicine or a vaccine is known to be successful, any country
with a reasonable scientific infrastructure can replicate the medicine or the vaccine, and
manufacture it locally. India in particular has one of the largest
generic drug and vaccine manufacturing capacities in the world. What prevents India, or any
country for that matter, from manufacturing COVID-19 vaccines or drugs once they are developed
-- only the empty threat of a failed hegemon on breaking patents?
Clearly the Trump and Johnson administrations are completely wrong in not supporting that
all COVID vaccines and medications be declared as public goods. This is an unprecedented
global threat requiring unprecedented global response.
But as a Canadian I have to reluctantly admit, there are legimate reasons to oppose the
WHO. Trump like a broken clock can be correct twice a day, even if he is wrong the other 1438
times a day.
The worst offence is that the WHO (World Health Organisation) is suppose to represent the
world, and yet it deliberately excludes Taiwan, which it a known part of the world with 24
million people.
Taiwan was the first to inform the WHO of human-to-human transmissions in December, but
was completely ignored. And Taiwan has best handled its response to the pandemic.
Personally I think that all countries should stop supporting the WHO until it restores
Taiwan's observer status it previous had until 2016. The only other reasonable option would
be to create an alternative health organisation to the WHO which does not exclude any part of
the world.
The WHO also has other failings, including corruption, exorbitant travel expenses, and an
unqualified president beholden to the CCP. But these failings pale in comparison to Taiwan's
exclusion, and hopefully the other failings can be fixed within the organisation.
"Just how evil does this situation become? Is the general leadership of the American
political economy trying to be evil just for the fun of it?"
And at what point does the general indifference to this state of affairs that still,
incredibly, obtains, turn over into mass outrage and condemnation?
Skrelli, Bayer, and all the rest are frelling evil. Extortion writ large, with easily preventable death and suffering.
it did NOT begin with trump.It's been there for most of my life. What will it take for ordinary people to get mad enough about it all to do something about
it?
Even in this article, the unspoken assumption is that our hands are somehow tied that these
corps have agency far beyond anyone else's but those corps can be seized, and exist only at
the pleasure of governments in the places they pretend to exist in.
They are a human creation an Egregore, set tottering about as if it were willful and
alive
but even Lefties treat them as untouchable godlike entities "oh, well lets appeal to
"Benevolent Capital, instead "
"Behold, I show you the last man.
'What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star?' thus asks the last man,
and blinks.
The earth has become small, and on it hops the last man, who makes everything small. His race
is as ineradicable as the flea; the last man lives longest.
'We have invented happiness,'say the last men, and they blink. They have left the regions
where it was hard to live, for one needs warmth. One still loves one's neighbor and rubs
against him, for one needs warmth
One still works, for work is a form of entertainment. But one is careful lest the
entertainment be too harrowing. One no longer becomes poor or rich: both require too much
exertion. Who still wants to rule? Who obey? Both require too much exertion.
No shepherd and one herd! Everybody wants the same, everybody is the same: whoever feels
different goes voluntarily into a madhouse.
'Formerly, all the world was mad,' say the most refined, and they blink
One has one's little pleasure for the day and one's little pleasure for the night: but one
has a regard for health.
'We have invented happiness,' say the last men, and they blink.""
As you note it's about profits. One of the disturbing condemnations of the now fading
American Century, which most USians remain contentedly oblivious to is that during their
watch as global hegemon, the US, in what can be seen, in the best light, as bad faith, worked
to undermine the democratic functionality of international cooperative organizations like the
WHO, the UN, etc.
Thus when emergencies arise such as international diplomatic crisis or pandemics, it is
found these organisations have been rendered untrustworthy, corrupted and unreliable;
unsuited to purpose. American exceptionalism?
It is clear now that the USA will not fund a national public health system to fight the
coronavirus epidemic. The only conclusion is the reason is to allow Pharmaceutical
Corporations to make huge profits by marketing patented drugs and vaccines to treat the
illness; if and when, they become available sometime in the future.
Due to incompetence, lack of money and bad messengering; the economic reopening of the USA
could kill close to a million Americans. To Republicans and Libertarians, this is of no
concern. Democrats may acknowledge the deaths but say they are unavoidable.
For the Elite keeping their wealth is more important than spending a portion to prevent
the huge costs in lives and treasure that will come once the Wuhan Coronavirus is established
across North America like the related common cold.
This is a teachable moment on the immorality of all "intellectual property". I am pleased to see that so many countries – other than the US and the UK –
can get together on the common decency of allowing everyone to live, and set that above the
"justice" of paying off intellectual property assignees. But these countries still have some
ways to go in understanding that this applies to all information. That the creation of
information can never be a living – in contrast to a living based on the creation of
essential goods and services, about which we are learning so much right now! – and that
information can never be owned.
They do not yet fully comprehend that all claims to own and extract rent from information
are in fact crimes against humanity.
The intention of granting copyrights and patents was noble, to provide a limited monopoly
on an invention or literary work for a limited period. IP has been distorted and twisted,
extended to insane time limits to protect works that for any common sense thinkers have
already become public domain (see, e.g. the Happy Birthday song, Mickey Mouse or
re-formulation of a drug that's gone out of patent). Software should have had its own IP
regime but that ship has sailed (thanks Bill G.).
Either a giant reform is due or people will ignore the law and infringe the IP. Chinese
companies do it with impunity. Maybe they're right to do so.
Patent applications for the top 20 offices, 2018
Rank Country Patent applications
1 China 1,542,002
2 U.S. 597,141
3 Japan 313,567
4 South Korea 209,992
If one sums up USA patent applications vs Asia (China, Japan, SK), it is USA 597K vs Asia
2066K.
So Asia is putting in patent applications, vs the USA, at a 3.46 multiple vs the USA.
It will be interesting to see if the USA attitude about the sanctity of intellectual
property changes when important key patents are held by the rest of the world.
Teachable moments. This could get really interesting if China or a non US & associated puppets develops
an effect Covid treatment first.
I will dream of something like this: China develops vaccine, offers it free to US on condition it reduce it's Dept of War &
Aggression by 80% and honor all existing and recently existing arms control agreement, and
withdraws it's Naval forces though out the world and confines them to the North Atlantic and
California coast.
I wonder if a geopolitically powerful nation/bloc of nations such as China/India/etc might
announce that they disregard pharma IP, & announce that they will adhere to the economist
Dr Dean Baker-type policy of open source pharma R&D/recipe publication, any private
manufacturer may manufacture & sell the resultant pharma SKU. I am referring to any type
of pharma or medical device (such as ventilators), not just a COVID-19 vaccine. I would
guesstimate that the "soft power" & goodwill generated by such a policy would be
extremely beneficial to those nation(s). Furthermore, the US if it tried to retaliate via
sanctions or other threats would get a corresponding additional decrease in soft power.
To be honest, in some instances Indian govt practices on pharma are quite bad. It is
extremely hard in some instances to recoup investments at prices they ask for.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has stealthily attempted to rewrite history, deleting his
controversial order requiring nursing homes to admit Covid-19 patients from the state health
website and blaming facilities for obeying it. After being lambasted in the press for the March
25 executive order that forced New York elder care facilities to accept patients infected with
the highly contagious virus, Cuomo attempted to blame the nursing homes for not disobeying his
orders during a Wednesday press conference.
" The obligation is on the nursing home to say, 'I can't take a Covid-positive
person,' " the governor insisted. " If they said 'I can't take the person,' they can't
take the person! So that's how it works ."
The coronavirus has cut a devastating swath through New York's nursing homes, killing more
than 5,800 people in long-term care facilities since the pandemic began - nearly a fifth of the
state's Covid-19 deaths so far, according to AP statistics compiled on Thursday. The policy
ultimately sent over 4,500 recovering coronavirus patients to nursing homes, which Cuomo
himself called " the optimum feeding ground for this virus ."
But the executive order itself leaves little room for disobedience, reading (in underlined
text, no less), " No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the [Nursing
Home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19 ." Elsewhere in the
document, facilities are advised they " must comply with the expedited receipt of residents
returning from hospitals " so long as they've been deemed medically stable - no excuses
allowed. Facilities aren't even permitted to test incoming patients.
But that same order, titled " Advisory: Hospital Discharges and Admissions to Nursing
Homes ," was apparently removed from the New York healthcare website early this month,
according to Fox News, which discovered its absence on Tuesday. Unfortunately for Cuomo's
revisionism, it's still available in the
Wayback Machine . The governor issued a revised directive on May 10, barring hospitals from
sending patients back to nursing homes unless they tested negative for the virus. However, his
communications director denied the more recent order represented a " reversal " of the
old one so much as " build[ing] on " it.
By Saturday, however, Cuomo was blaming the Trump administration for the ill-advised
Covid-19 mandate, declaring New York was merely " following the president's agencies'
guidance " and " follow[ing] what the Republican Administration said to do. "
While the governor's office claimed he was referring to a March
directive from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, that order merely required
nursing homes to " admit any individuals that they would normally admit to their facility,
including...from hospitals where a case of Covid-19 was present " and even advised setting
aside a unit to quarantine patients returning from hospitals - a safety measure notably missing
from Cuomo's executive order.
Governments throughout the world and across the US justified extreme, draconian,
undemocratic, and unconstitutional (in most US states) "lockdown" and stay-at-home orders on
the grounds that the COVID-19 virus was exceptionally fatal.
In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) was claiming that the fatality rate was a
very
high 3.4 percent .
Yet as time went on, it became increasingly clear that such high estimates were essentially
meaningless because researchers had no idea how many people were actually infected with the
disease. Tests were largely being conducted on those with symptoms serious enough to end up in
emergency rooms or doctor's offices.
By late April, many researchers were publishing new studies showing that the number of
people with the disease was actually much higher than was previously thought. Thus, it became
clear that the percentage of people with the disease who died from it suddenly became much
smaller.
Now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released new estimates
suggesting that the real fatality rate is around 0.26 percent.
Specifically, the report concludes that the "symptomatic case fatality ratio" is 0.4
percent. But that's just symptomatic cases. In the same report, the CDC also claims that 35
percent of all cases are asymptomatic.
Or, as the Washington Post reported this week:
The agency offered a "current best estimate" of 0.4 percent. The agency also gave a best
estimate that 35 percent of people infected never develop symptoms. Those numbers when put
together would produce an infection fatality rate of 0.26, which is lower than many of the
estimates produced by scientists and modelers to date."
Of course, not all scientists have been wrong on this. Back in March, Stanford scientist
John Ioannidis was much, much closer to the CDC's estimate than the WHO. The Wall Street
Journal noted in
April :
In a March article for Stat News, Dr. Ioannidis argued that Covid-19 is far less deadly
than modelers were assuming. He considered the experience of the Diamond Princess cruise
ship, which was quarantined Feb. 4 in Japan. Nine of 700 infected passengers and crew died.
Based on the demographics of the ship's population, Dr. Ioannidis estimated that the U.S.
fatality rate could be as low as 0.025% to 0.625% and put the upper bound at 0.05% to 1% --
comparable to that of seasonal flu.
Not that this will settle the matter.
Proponents of destroying human rights and the rule of law in order to carry out lockdowns
will continue to insist that "we didn't know" what the fatality rate was back in March. The
lack of evidence, however, didn't stop proponents of lockdowns from implementing policies that
destroyed the ability of families to earn a living, and which also created social conditions
that caused child
abuse and
suicides to spike.
But for more sane people, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Those who
have claimed that lockdowns are "the only option" had virtually no evidence at all to support
their position. Indeed, such extreme over-the-top measures such as the general lockdowns
required an extreme level of high-quality, nearly irrefutable evidence that lockdowns would
work and were necessary in the face of a disease with an extremely high fatality rate. But the
only "data" the prolockdown people could offer was speculation and hyperbolic predictions of
bodies piling up in the streets.
But that became politically unimportant.
The people who wanted lockdowns had gained the obeisance of powerful people in government
institutions and in the media . So actual data, science, or respect for human rights suddenly
became meaningless. All that mattered was getting those lockdowns. So the lockdown crowd
destroyed the lives of millions in the developed world -- and
more than a hundred million in the developing world -- to satisfy the hunches of a tiny
handful of politicians and technocrats.
According to
the Telegraph , Michael Levitt correctly predicted the initial trajectory of the pandemic,
but was ignored by now-disgraced Imperial College epidemiologist Niall Ferguson, whose warnings
were embraced by the UK government as justification for the lockdown, despite the fact that the
projections proved to be extremely flawed and dramatically overestimated the virus's potential
for devastation. As early as march, Levitt warned that Ferguson's projections had
over-estimated the potential death toll by "10 or 12 times".
Instead of helping the situation, Fergusons' projections created an unnecessary "panic
virus" which spread among global political leaders, Prof Levitt told the Telegraph.
Prof Levitt, a British-American-Israeli who shared the Nobel prize for chemistry in 2013
for the "development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems", has said for two
months that the planet will beat coronavirus faster than most other experts predict.
"I think lockdown saved no lives," said the scientist, who added that the Government
should have encouraged Britons to wear masks and adhere to other forms of social
distancing.
"I think it may have cost lives. It will have saved a few road accident lives - things
like that - but social damage - domestic abuse, divorces, alcoholism - has been extreme. And
then you have those who were not treated for other conditions."
Data from various studies has offered a mixed picture about the effectiveness of the
lockdowns. The number of cases and deaths has undoubtedly plunged in the US and across Europe
since strict lockdowns were almost universally enacted, but many wonder whether governments are
being overly cautious, perhaps to a dangerous degree.
Though his models have been vindicated by the passage of time, Levitt said his initial
concerns about Ferguson's models were largely ignored due to what he calls the "panic virus",
despite the fact that there's recent precedent for epidemiological models over-estimating the
impact of other outbreaks, including H1N1 and Ebola.
Having assessed the initial outbreak in China and from the infected Diamond Princess
cruise ship, he predicted by March 14 that the UK would lose around 50,000 lives. Prof
Ferguson's modelling that same week estimated up to 500,000 deaths without social distancing
measures.
"I think that the real virus was the panic virus," Prof Levitt told the Telegraph. "For
reasons that were not clear to me, I think the leaders panicked and the people panicked and I
think there was a huge lack of discussion..
The 73-year-old has no background as an epidemiologist, but he assessed the outbreak in
China and prepared a paper based on his own calculations. Most countries, he predicted, would
suffer a Covid-19 death rate worth around an extra month in excess deaths over the calendar
year.
"In Europe, I don't think that anything actually stopped the virus other than some kind of
burnout," he added. " There's a huge number of people who are asymptomatic so I would
seriously imagine that by the time lockdown was finally introduced in the UK the virus was
already widely spread. They could have just stayed open like Sweden by that stage and nothing
would have happened."
Professor Levitt has now analysed the data from 78 nations with more than 50 reported
cases of coronavirus. His investigations proved the virus was never going to achieve the type
of exponential growth that the researchers at Imperial were predicting at the same time.
At this point, Levitt believes the virus has reached a point of saturation across Europe and
parts of the US making lockdowns much less effective. At this point, they're probably causing
far more harm than benefit.
The virus "has saturated", he believes, across Europe. "I think the lockdown will cause
much more damage than the deaths saved," he added. "When I saw the briefing (from Prof
Ferguson) I was shocked. I had a run-in with him when I actually saw that Ferguson's death
rate was a year's worth - doubling the normal death rate. I saw that and said immediately
that's completely wrong. I think Ferguson over-estimated 10 or 12 times. We should have seen
from China that a virus never grows exponentially. From the very first case you see,
exponential growth actually slows down very dramatically.
"The problem with epidemiologists is that they feel their job is to frighten people into
lockdown, social distancing. So you say 'there's going to be a million deaths' and when there
are only 25,000 you say 'it's good you listened to my advice'. This happened with Ebola and
bird flu. It's just part of the madness."
Prof Levitt says the global evidence shows the virus fades in dry heat and in much of the
western world "there seems to be some kind of immunity". "The main worry I would have would
be in China," he said when asked about the prospect of a second outbreak. "I am 73 and I feel
very young," he added. "I don't care about the risk at all. As you get old the risk of dying
from disease is so high that this is the time to buy a motorcycle, go skiing!"
Even as the NYT and WaPo search for every shred of evidence to support the view that the
reopening in the US will lead to a second wave, they're finding that there's not nearly as much
as they'd hoped - which is why projections are their new favorite tool.
"... "According to CDC, the disease of obesity affects about 78 million Americans 1 and the ASMBS estimates about 24 million have severe or morbid obesity." ..."
And the government botching of this crisis continues...
'How Could the CDC Make That Mistake?' The government's disease-fighting agency is
conflating viral and antibody tests, compromising a few crucial metrics that governors depend
on to reopen their economies. Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas, and other states are doing the
same. https://tinyurl.com/y92ea59f
Nearly half of US states haven't contained their coronavirus outbreaks, a new study
finds https://tinyurl.com/yc72pd8t
And no, Sweden is not doing better...
Just 7.3% of Stockholm had Covid-19 antibodies by end of April, study shows
Official findings add to concerns about Sweden's laissez-faire strategy towards the
pandemic https://tinyurl.com/yahnmb3a
Finally, a large scale study on HCQ - 86,000 patients, with 15,000 receiving HCQ...
Blacks are *twice* as likely to get it as whites and Latinos. American Indians are *five
times* more likely to get it. They conclude the best indicator is poverty.
From The Lancet, a study of New York patients... Epidemiology, clinical course, and
outcomes of critically ill adults with COVID-19 in New York City: a prospective cohort study
https://tinyurl.com/yblmszsx
Between March 2 and April 1, 2020, 1150 adults were admitted to both hospitals with
laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, of which 257 (22%) were critically ill.
The median age of patients was 62 years (IQR 51–72), 171 (67%) were men. 212 (82%)
patients had at least one chronic illness, the most common of which were hypertension (162
[63%]) and diabetes (92 [36%]).
119 (46%) patients had obesity.
As of April 28, 2020, 101 (39%) patients had died and 94 (37%) remained
hospitalised.
203 (79%) patients received invasive mechanical ventilation for a median of 18 days (IQR
9–28), 170 (66%) of 257 patients received vasopressors and 79 (31%) received renal
replacement therapy.
The median time to in-hospital deterioration was 3 days (IQR 1–6).
In the multivariable Cox model, older age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1·31
[1·09–1·57] per 10-year increase), chronic cardiac disease (aHR
1·76 [1·08–2·86]), chronic pulmonary disease (aHR 2·94
[1·48–5·84]), higher concentrations of interleukin-6 (aHR 1·11
[95%CI 1·02–1·20] per decile increase), and higher concentrations of
D-dimer (aHR 1·10 [1·01–1·19] per decile increase) were
independently associated with in-hospital mortality.
Note: 36% had diabetes; 46% were fat. Like I've said before, "diabetes" is a code word for
"fat." And how many people in the US are fat and thus at risk? "According to CDC, the
disease of obesity affects about 78 million Americans 1 and the ASMBS estimates about 24
million have severe or morbid obesity."
So much for "let's just isolate the elderly"...so we can attend our baseball games this
summer and stuff ourselves with crap food...
Millennial Millie investigates the deep conflicts of interest and connections Bill Gates has
with the coronavirus and his proposed 'vaccine' to cure the pandemic.
"Grandma Killer" Cuomo Sent 4,300 Patients Back To Nursing Homes Despite Positive
COVID-19 Tests by Tyler Durden Fri, 05/22/2020 - 17:25 Earlier
this month, a reporter at one of NY Gov Andrew Cuomo's daily press briefings asked the governor
about reports that the state issued guidance calling for hospitals to return thousands of
patients who had tested positive for COVID-19 to nursing homes or long-term care facilities
where they lived.
Somehow, despite the horrifying notion that Cuomo deliberately sent patients back to nursing
homes where they unleashed some of the deadliest outbreaks in the country, the governor readily
owned up to the decision, and insisted public health officials believed this to be the best
option to prevent the patients from just hanging around the hospital.
With the benefit of hindsight, we now see that the hospital bed shortages that the US had
prepared for never came to pass. So, not only did this decision lead to thousands of deaths, it
was also totally unnecessary.
Because as the Associated Press reported Friday morning, an investigation discovered that
more than 4,000 nursing home patients who had tested positive for COVID-19 were returned to
their care facilities due to this state order.
More than 4,300 recovering coronavirus patients were sent to New York's already vulnerable
nursing homes under a controversial state directive that was ultimately scrapped amid
criticisms it was accelerating the nation's deadliest outbreaks, according to a count by The
Associated Press.
AP compiled its own tally to find out how many COVID-19 patients were discharged from
hospitals to nursing homes under the March 25 directive after New York's Health Department
declined to release its internal survey conducted two weeks ago. It says it is still
verifying data that was incomplete.
The issue has become a huge problem for Cuomo, who has been labeled "the grandma killer" by
critics. When confronted with the data by the AP, the state health department declined to
comment. One individual quoted by the AP called it "the single dumbest decision" made during
the response to the pandemic.
And guess what - this decision had nothing to do with President Trump. While Cuomo of course
tried to deflected criticism to the Trump administration by claiming that the decision stemmed
from federal guidance, the AP pointed out that "few states went as far as New York and
neighboring New Jersey, which has the second-most care home deaths, in discharging hospitalized
coronavirus patients to nursing homes. California followed suit but loosened its requirement
following intense criticism."
Whatever the full number, nursing home administrators, residents' advocates and relatives
say i t has added up to a big and indefensible problem for facilities that even Gov. Andrew
Cuomo -- the main proponent of the policy -- called "the optimum feeding ground for this
virus."
"It was the single dumbest decision anyone could make if they wanted to kill people,"
Daniel Arbeeny said of the directive, which prompted him to pull his 88-year-old father out
of a Brooklyn nursing home where more than 50 people have died. His father later died of
COVID-19 at home.
"This isn't rocket science," Arbeeny said. "We knew the most vulnerable - the elderly and
compromised - are in nursing homes and rehab centers."
Told of the AP's tally, the Health Department said late Thursday it "can't comment on data
we haven't had a chance to review, particularly while we're still validating our own
comprehensive survey of nursing homes admission and re-admission data in the middle of
responding to this global pandemic."
Cuomo didn't reverse the order until May 10. According to the directive, nursing homes could
"refuse" to take in the patients if they weren't "equipped" to handle them. But unsurprisingly,
no nursing homes did so - since this would be tantamount to admitting that the facilities
weren't safe .
Cuomo, a Democrat, on May 10 reversed the directive, which had been intended to help free
up hospital beds for the sickest patients as cases surged. But he continued to defend it this
week , saying he didn't believe it contributed to the more than 5,800 nursing and adult care
facility deaths in New York -- more than in any other state -- and that homes should have
spoken up if it was a problem.
"Any nursing home could just say, 'I can't handle a COVID person in my facility,'" he
said, although the March 25 order didn't specify how homes could refuse, saying that "no
resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the (nursing home) solely based" on
confirmed or suspected COVID-19.
Over a month later, on April 29, the Health Department clarified that homes should not
take any new residents if they were unable to meet their needs, including a checklist of
standards for coronavirus care and prevention.
And according to the AP, even the most well-equipped nursing homes in the state saw the
trickle of COVID patients turn into a flood that quickly overwhelmed their ability to cope.
Across the country, thousands of nursing home residents and staff have succumbed to the
illness.
Gurwin Jewish, a 460-bed home on Long Island, seemed well-prepared for the coronavirus in
early March, with movable walls to seal off hallways for the infected. But after the state
order, a trickle of recovering COVID-19 patients from local hospitals turned into a flood of
58 people.
More walls were put up, but other residents nonetheless began falling sick and dying. In
the end, 47 Gurwin residents died of confirmed or suspected COVID-19.
The state order "put staff and residents at great risk," CEO Stuart Almer said. "We can't
draw a straight line from bringing in someone positive to someone catching the disease, but
we're talking about elderly, fragile and vulnerable residents."
Nationally, over 35,500 people have died from coronavirus outbreaks at nursing homes and
long-term care facilities, about a third of the overall death toll, according to the AP's
running tally.
Bottom line: Irony of ironies, the most sanctimonious blue-state governors, who used every
conceivable pretext to bash President Trump, also allowed the largest numbers of vulnerable
patients to die because of what amounts to sheer bureaucratic idiocy.
The scandal has earned Cuomo a new nickname that has been heavily suppressed by the likes of
Google, Facebook and Twitter: The "Grandma Killer".
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is facing new criticism after the Associated Press reported Friday that a
state directive led to over 4,300 still recovering coronavirus patients being sent to New
York's "already vulnerable nursing homes."
"It was a death sentence," tweeted Daniel Choi, a doctor at
the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell. He called the directive
a "horrendous idea" and "definitely not something any doctor taking care of nursing home
patients would have signed off on."
The state health department
directive (pdf), issued March 25, barred nursing homes from requiring patients deemed
"medically stable" from being tested for Covid-19 prior to admission. Cuomo, a Democrat,
rescinded the order May 10, but not before thousands of infected patients likely entered
nursing homes and contributed to the coronavirus's spread.
The estimated number tallied by the AP amounts to what would have been a "big and
indefensible problem for facilities," the outlet reported.
From the AP :
"It was the single dumbest decision anyone could make if they wanted to kill people,"
Daniel Arbeeny said of the directive, which prompted him to pull his 88-year-old father out
of a Brooklyn nursing home where more than 50 people have died. His father later died of
Covid-19 at home.
"This isn't rocket science," Arbeeny said. "We knew the most vulnerable -- the elderly and
compromised -- are in nursing homes and rehab centers."
CBS New York reported
Friday that the conoravirus has taken the lives of almost 5% of nursing home residents in the
state, and this week the Cuomo tried to deflect blame for the directive.
"Why did the state do that with Covid patients in nursing homes?" asked Cuomo. "It's because
the state followed President Trump's CDC guidelines. So they should ask President Trump."
In an
op-ed at the Guardian on Wednesday questioning the recent accolades heaped on the New York
governor -- including suggestions that Cuomo run for president -- journalists Lyta Gold and
Nathan Robinson of Current Affairs magazine write that "Cuomo should be one of the most loathed
officials in America right now. "
Gold and Robinson argue that blame for New York's high death toll from the virus should sit
largely with Cuomo.
"Federal failures played a role, of course, but this tragedy was absolutely due, in part, to
decisions by the governor," they wrote, citing as examples his failure to take swift action,
delays in imposing social distancing measures, Medicaid cuts both before and after the start of
the pandemic, and his partnership with Silicon Valley billionaires to "reimagine
education."
"This is the problem: for too long, Democrats have measured their politicians by 'whether
they are better than Republicans,' wrote Gold and Robinson. "This sets the bar very low indeed,
and means that Democrats end up settling for incompetent and amoral leaders who betray
progressive values again and again."
Andrew Cuomo may be the most popular
politician in the country. ... All of which is bizarre, because Cuomo should be one of the
most loathed officials in America right now. ProPublica
recently released a report outlining catastrophic missteps by Cuomo and the New York City
mayor, Bill de Blasio, which probably resulted in many thousands of needless coronavirus cases.
ProPublica offers some appalling numbers contrasting what happened in New York with the
outbreak in California. By mid-May, New York City alone had almost 20,000 deaths, while in San
Francisco there had been only 35, and New York state as a whole suffered 10 times as many
deaths as California.
Federal failures played a role, of course, but this tragedy was absolutely due, in part, to
decisions by the governor. Cuomo initially "reacted to De Blasio's idea for closing down New
York City with derision", saying it "was dangerous" and "served only to scare people". He said
the "seasonal flu was a graver worry". A spokesperson for Cuomo "refused to say if the governor
had ever read the state's pandemic plan". Later, Cuomo would blame the press, including the New
York Times for failing to say "Be careful, there's a virus in China that may be in the United
States?" even though the Times wrote nearly 500 stories on the
virus before the state acted. Experts told ProPublica that "had New York imposed its extreme
social distancing measures a week or two earlier, the death toll might have been cut by half or
more".
But delay was not the only screw-up. Elderly prisoners
have died of coronavirus because New York has failed to act on their medical parole
requests. As Business Insider documented:
"Testing was
slow . Nonprofit social-service agencies that serve the most vulnerable
couldn't get answers either . And medical experts like the former CDC director Tom Frieden
said 'so many deaths could have been prevented' had New York issued its stay-at-home order
just 'days earlier' than it did. On March 19, when New York's schools had already been
closed, Cuomo said 'in many ways, the fear is more dangerous than the virus.'"
The governor has failed to take responsibility for the obvious failures, consistently
blaming others and at one point even saying " governors
don't do pandemics ". (Actually, some governors just don't read their state's pandemic
plans.) But much of the press has ignored this, focusing instead on Cuomo's aesthetic
presentation: his poise during press conferences, his dramatic statements about "taking
responsibility" (even when he obviously hasn't), and his invisible good looks. ...
There's something disturbing about Cuomo being hailed as the hero of the pandemic when he
should rightly be one of the villains. As Business Insider notes, he is now only able to attain
praise for his actions because his earlier failures made those actions necessary. He's lauded
for addressing a problem that he himself partly caused. Of course, part of this is because
Donald Trump has
bungled the coronavirus response even more badly , so that Cuomo – by not being a
complete buffoon – looks like a capable statesman by contrast. But this is the problem:
for too long, Democrats have measured their politicians by "whether they are better than
Republicans". This sets the bar very low indeed, and means that Democrats end up settling for
incompetent and amoral leaders who betray progressive values again and again.
The Argument Against the Argument Against Facemasks
Resistance rooted in liberty clashes with the unalienable right of life https://tinyurl.com/yctjydmx
Masks help stop the spread of coronavirus – the science is simple and I'm one of 100
experts urging governors to require public mask-wearing https://tinyurl.com/yah8orzo
More than 80% of Americans support closing non-essential businesses. Support for limiting
restaurants, closing schools, canceling sporting and entertainment events, and group
gatherings exceeds 90%. A total of 94% strongly or somewhat approve asking people to stay
home and avoid gathering in groups; 92% support canceling major sports and entertainment
events; 91% approve closing K-12 schools; 91% approve limiting restaurants to carry-out
only; 83% approve closing businesses other than grocery stores and pharmacies. There are
some partisan differences on these items -- Republicans are somewhat less supportive, but
even among Republicans large majorities support all of these measures; and, as summarized
below, support is largely consistent across every state.
A bipartisan consensus opposes a rapid "reopening" of the economy. Only 7% support
immediate reopening of the economy, and the median respondent supports waiting four to six
weeks. There is a bipartisan consensus on waiting (89% of Republicans as compared to 96% of
Democrats opposed immediate re-opening), and Republicans support a somewhat faster
re-opening of the economy than Democrats, where the median Republican supports waiting two
to four weeks versus median Democrat six to eight weeks. As discussed below, even in those
Republican-led states which are moving toward re-opening, few people support reopening
immediately
Generally, Americans report adhering to social distancing, indicating that they had minimal
social interactions with people outside of their households. That said, 56% reported
encountering at least one person from outside of their home in the preceding 24 hours (and
7% reported encountering 10 or more persons); the survey did not contain information on the
circumstances of those encounters (e.g., was it at grocery stores? were the individuals
wearing masks?). Generally, there were not large differences with respect to age, gender,
race, income, partisanship or education. An exception was that Asian Americans were
substantially less likely to encounter other individuals, and more likely to avoid contact
with other people. There were significant racial differences reported in wearing face masks
outside of the home, with 51% of whites reporting following recommendations very closely,
along with 62% of Hispanics, 64% of African Americans, and 68% of Asian Americans. There
was also an age gradient in this regard, ranging from 50% face mask wearing for 18-24 year
olds to 60% of those aged 65 or higher. There were also partisan differences: 51% of
Republicans, compared to 64% for Democrats, reported wearing face masks outside the home.
I find the racial differences interesting, especially since in my observation fewer blacks
are wearing masks. However, since I was specifically looking at blacks (due to the
disproportionate number of blacks dying) in my walks, I may have under counted the number of
whites not wearing masks. Also I suspect it varies between cities, states and more suburban
or rural areas.
In any event, not enough people are wearing masks to re-open the economy - and we damn
sure don't have enough testing, tracing and isolating capability and probably won't until
September, according to one report I read.
A number of other interesting results. Check it out.
One of the key things to understand in thinking about the value of masks is the concept of
the viral dose. While it seem logical that a single viral particle hitting a person's
mouth, nose or eye could cause an infection, strong laboratory and empirical evidence says
that this is not the case -- it takes a big dose of virus to launch a case of Covid. This
happy fact means that masks for everyday use don't need to block 100% of pathogens in order
to prevent the disease from spreading. (Even the medical grade N95 masks don't block every
viral particle, but they block enough to protect the user, even when caring for patients
with known Covid-19.)
A simulation by De Kai and colleagues makes the case that masks are most effective if at
least 80% of people are using them. The figure below maps the rate of transmission with the
expected deaths from Covid-19 in a nation the size of the UK. According to the simulation,
social distancing alone without masking would lead to 1.16 million deaths by May 31st.
However, with 50% of the population masking, the projected death figure drops to 240,000.
With 80% masking, there are 60,000 deaths. If Professor De Kai's mind-blowing video (below)
doesn't convince you of the virtue of mask wearing, I just don't know what to tell you.
Video referenced above:
Visual simulations show why we all need to wear masks now #UniversalMasking #masks4all
#COVID19
42,341 views •Apr 26, 2020 https://tinyurl.com/yc89vf9c
Fauci jumped the gun with the Moderna vaccine promotion.
Notable quotes:
"... Former Harvard Medical School professor and founder of the university's cancer and HIV/AIDS research departments, William Haseltine dared to speak out today about the high level of bullshit and damage that is being done to "trust" in "scientists" and even dared to break the one holy writ that shall go un-mentioned, throwing some shade a Dr.Fauci. ..."
"... But, but, but... the CNBC anchorette blubbered, "are you questioning Dr. Fauci who also said that this was encouraging news?" ..."
"... "Whether [Fauci] shaded what should should have been done, I think is an important question. He's obviously under enormous pressure for positive results but it was not the right thing to do if you can't see the data." ..."
"... The most recent example is Moderna's claim Monday of favorable results in its vaccine trial, which it announced without revealing any of the underlying data. The announcement added billions of dollars to the value of the company, with its shares jumping almost 20 percent. Many analysts believe it contributed to a 900-point gain in the Dow Jones industrial average. ..."
"... The Moderna announcement described a safety trial of its vaccine based on eight healthy participants. The claim was that in all eight people, the vaccine raised the levels of neutralizing antibodies equivalent to those found in convalescent serum of those who recovered from covid-19. What to make of that claim? Hard to say, because we have no sense of what those levels were. This is the equivalent of a chief executive of a public company announcing a favorable earnings report without supplying supporting financial data, which the Securities and Exchange Commission would never allow. ..."
"... There is a legitimate question regarding what Moderna's unsupported assertion means. The scientific and medical literature reports that some people who have recovered have little to no detectable neutralizing antibodies . There is even existing scientific literature that suggests it is possible neutralizing antibodies may not protect animals or humans from infection or reinfection by coronaviruses. ..."
"... The National Institutes of Health announced last month that the drug remdesivir offered a clear benefit to covid-19 patients with moderate disease, shortening the length of their hospital stay by several days. But did it really? Twenty days after the announcement, the supporting data has still not been published. Without the data, no doctor treating a patient can be sure they are doing the right thing. ..."
"... Another paper , published the same day, found that remdesivir had no measurable effect on patient survival or the amount of virus detectable in nasopharynx and lung secretions. What then should a practicing physician do? Follow the unsupported advice of a news announcement or a medical report published in a leading scientific journal? This is not an idle question: The NIH announcement triggered a global stampede for limited supplies of the drug. ..."
"... The media also bears responsibility. Asking experts to opine on unsubstantiated claims is not useful. Medicine and science are not matters of majority opinion; they are matters of fact supported by transparent data. This is the backbone of scientific progress and our only hope to end this pandemic. We can't give up on our standards now. ..."
At a moment in time when narrative-following "scientists" are lauded
like unquestionably omniscient supreme beings enabling dumb-as-a-rock-partisan-politicians to
play omnipotent overlords without fear of blowback, the world needs more people like William
Haseltine.
The last two weeks have seen markets and politicians jump exuberantly at the hope of every
press release from a biotech firm that proclaims one of their pet rabbits didn't die when they
fed it their latest DNA-reshaping test material (oh that is except if anyone dares say anything
positive about hydroxychloroquine but that is a topic for another discussion) as the fate of
global citizenry rests on a vaccine (and definitely not herd immunity, don't even mention
it).
Barstool Sports' Dave Portnoy said it right - when did we shift from "flatten the curve,
flatten the curve, flatten the curve" to "we have to fund a cure or everyone's going to
die."
And so, that is where we find ourselves... Every talking head proclaiming the same malarkey
- we will re-open carefully, with PPE, and social distancing, and whetever else is mandated
from on-high "until we find a vaccine in 12-18 months" at which point the world will be made
whole again and Kumbaya...
All of which brings us back to the man of the day in our humble opinion.
Former Harvard Medical School professor and founder of the university's cancer and HIV/AIDS
research departments, William Haseltine dared to speak out today about the high level of
bullshit and damage that is being done to "trust" in "scientists" and even dared to break the
one holy writ that shall go un-mentioned, throwing some shade a Dr.Fauci.
Reflecting on Moderna's press release this week (which was immediately followed by massive
equity raises across numerous biotech firms and upgrades from the underwriters, surprise),
Haseltine said:
"If a CFO had tried to get away with such an opaque and data-less statement it would have
bee treated with derision and possibly an investigation."
The CNBC anchor desperately tried to guilt him into the official narrative of clinging to
any hope as long as it lifts stocks - no matter its utter bullshittiness - but Haseltine
destroyed her naive party line:
"we all know its an emergency, and in an emergency it's even more important to be clear on
what you know and what you do not know."
Moderna did not follow the process:
"you don't know what happened, we don't know what happened, there is no data."
But, but, but... the CNBC anchorette blubbered, "are you questioning Dr. Fauci who also said
that this was encouraging news?"
"Whether [Fauci] shaded what should should have been done, I think is an important
question. He's obviously under enormous pressure for positive results but it was not the
right thing to do if you can't see the data."
The full interview below is a must-watch by all who care about their freedom being
controlled by a narrative directed by fearmongering elites in the name of "science" when the
"science" is a) being ignored, b) being bastardized to meet a political need, c) being treated
as if handed down on high from the man himself, or d) being manipulated explicitly.
Faith in medicine and science is based on trust. But today, in the rush to share scientific
progress in combating covid-19, that trust is being undermined.
Private companies, governments and research institutes are holding news conferences to
report potential breakthroughs that cannot be verified. The results are always favorable, but
the full data on which the announcements are based are not immediately available for critical
review. This is "publication by press release," and it's damaging trust in the fundamental
methods of science and medicine at a time when we need it most.
The most recent example is Moderna's
claim Monday of favorable results in its vaccine trial, which it announced without
revealing any of the underlying data. The announcement added billions of dollars to the value
of the company, with its
shares jumping almost 20 percent. Many analysts believe it contributed to a
900-point gain in the Dow Jones industrial average.
The Moderna announcement described a safety trial of its vaccine based on eight healthy
participants. The claim was that in all eight people, the vaccine raised the levels of
neutralizing antibodies equivalent to those found in convalescent serum of those who recovered
from covid-19. What to make of that claim? Hard to say, because we have no sense of what those
levels were. This is the equivalent of a chief executive of a public company announcing a
favorable earnings report without supplying supporting financial data, which the Securities and
Exchange Commission would never allow.
There is a legitimate question regarding what Moderna's unsupported assertion means. The
scientific and medical literature reports that some people who have recovered have little to no
detectable neutralizing antibodies . There is even existing scientific literature that
suggests it is possible neutralizing antibodies may not protect animals or
humans from infection or reinfection by coronaviruses.
Such "publication by press release" seems to be a standard practice lately.
The National Institutes of Health
announced last month that the drug remdesivir offered a clear benefit to covid-19 patients
with moderate disease, shortening the length of their hospital stay by several days. But did it
really? Twenty days after the announcement, the supporting data has still not been published.
Without the data, no doctor treating a patient can be sure they are doing the right thing.
Another paper
, published the same day, found that remdesivir had no measurable effect on patient survival or
the amount of virus detectable in nasopharynx and lung secretions. What then should a
practicing physician do? Follow the unsupported advice of a news announcement or a medical
report published in a leading scientific journal? This is not an idle question: The NIH
announcement triggered a global stampede for
limited supplies of the drug.
The case is more nuanced for the vaccine developed by the Jenner Institute at Oxford
University, though the mileposts remain the same: It started with a public
pronouncement of favorable results from an early study, this time in monkeys, well before
any data was publicly released. An NIH scientist working on a trial of the Oxford vaccine gave
an interview to the New
York Times , claiming the drug was a success.
But the data, released as a prepublication version more than two weeks after the story ran,
didn't quite live up to the early claim. All of the vaccinated monkeys became infected when
introduced to the virus. Though there was some reduction in the amount of viral RNA detected in
the lungs, there was no reduction in the nasal secretions in the vaccinated monkeys. So the
positive result reported by the Oxford group turned out not to be protection from infection at
all, something most would agree is what a successful vaccine would do. Instead, it lowered only
the amount of virus recoverable from the vaccinated monkey's lung.
To the Jenner Institute's credit, it does warn visitors to its website
that there have been many false reports about the progress of its vaccine trial. Still, having
a scientist working on the trial paint preliminary results in such a positive manner without
having yet released the full data is cause for concern.
We all understand the need to share scientific and medical data as rapidly as possible in
this time of crisis. But a media announcement alone is not enough. There are ways to share the
data quickly and transparently: posting manuscripts before review or acceptance on publicly
available websites or working with journals to allow an early view. Publishing in this manner
allows doctors and scientists to reach their own conclusion, based on the evidence
available.
The media also bears responsibility. Asking experts to opine on unsubstantiated claims is
not useful. Medicine and science are not matters of majority opinion; they are matters of fact
supported by transparent data. This is the backbone of scientific progress and our only hope to
end this pandemic. We can't give up on our standards now.
* * *
So, by all means, trust in "science" but choose your "scientist" well...
Pure Evil, 13 minutes ago
It seems the more this hoax is exposed. The more Gates/Fauci appear as money grubbing
opportunist vaccine pushers the more the MSM and the government double down on the whole
false narrative.
hanekhw, 13 minutes ago
Look around at the moral climate and ask yourself if lying about everything for profit was
not required for success how can we stop it without pain, suffering and violence? There
really IS no free lunch and there never has been nor ever will be. We pay one way or another
but we ALL pay.
Enraged, 15 minutes ago
Fake media, fake Big Pharma, fake banksters, fake government, fake breasts, fake stock
"market", fake medical agencies, fake wars.
Assume they are 100% wrong unless there is substantial evidence they are correct, which
will be on very rare occasions.
Stochastic" is simply defined as "randomly determined; having a random probability
distribution or pattern that may be analyzed statistically but may not be predicted precisely."
In other words, they begin with a presumption, and therein lies the FIRST error. Ferguson's
assumption was wrong, to begin with. Then this mode is so old, they recommend that it be run
only on a single CORE processor as if we were dealing with an old IBM XT.
Effectively, you start the program with what is called a "seed" number which is then used to
produce a random number. Most children's games begin this way. In fact, this is a version of
what you would be similar to the game SimCity where you create a city starting from scratch and
it simulates what might happen based upon the beginning presumption. There are numerous bugs in
the code and the documentation suggests to run it several times and take the average. This is
just unthinkable! A program should produce the same result with the same data from which it
begins. Therefore, there is no possible way this model would ever produce the same results. In
reality, this model produces completely different results even when beginning with the very
same starting seeds and parameters because of the attempt to also make the seed random. This is
not even as sophisticated as SimCity, which is really questionable. This is where the Imperial
College claims that the errors will vanish if you run it on an old system in the
single-threaded mode as if you were using a 1980s XT.
In programming, you run what is known as a regression-test, which is re-running a functional
and non-functional test to ensure that previously developed and tested software still performs
after a change. In market terminology, its called back-testing. In the most unprofessional
manner imaginable, the Imperial College code does not even have a regression-test structure.
They apparently attempted to but the extent of the random behavior caused by bugs in the code
to prevent that check? On April 4th, 2020, Imperial College noted:
" However, we haven't had the time to work out a scalable and maintainable way of running
the regression test in a way that allows a small amount of variation, but doesn't let the
figures drift over time."
This Ferguson Model is such a joke it is either an outright fraud, or it is the most inept
piece of programming I may have ever seen in my life. There is no valid test to warrant any
funding of Imperial College for providing ANY forecast based upon this model. This is the most
UNPROFESSIONAL operation perhaps in computer science. The entire team should be disbanded and
an independent team put in place to review the world of Neil Ferguson and he should NOT be
allowed to oversee any review of this model.
The only REASONABLE conclusion I can reach is that this has been deliberately used to
justify bogus forecasts intent for political activism, or I must accept that these academics
are totally incapable of even creating a theoretical model no less coding it as a programmer.
There seems to have been no independent review of Ferguson's work which is unimaginable!
A 15,000 line program is nothing. I will be glad to write a model like this in two weeks and
will only charge $1 million instead of $79 million. If you really want one to work globally, no
problem. It will take a bit more time and the price will be at a discount – only $50
million on sale – refunds not accepted as is the deal with Imperial College.
So just one more narrative about how the virus was so horrific, used to justify the
lockdowns, is shown to be utter bullshit. Remember "the immunity doesn't last, you can get
reinfected, the next time it's lethal"?
So, contrary to that, lots of people have immunity before they even get exposed to it.
From the common cold. So the idea that the corona immunity is a short term and unreliable
thing was just a bunch of uninformed blather, or worse, targeted and manipulative
narrative.
Fearmongering bullshit that is 95% wrong needs to get called out constantly.
Even in New York there was not the "catastrophic death count" that I see people writing
about as if it were true.
Hey! Let's talk about duct tape and plastic sheeting! Remember that idiotic bullshit scare
narrative?
"We have met the moment and we have prevailed," said President Donald Trump Monday, as he
supported the opening of the U.S. economy before the shutdown plunges us into a deep and
lasting depression.
Tuesday, Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation's leading expert on infectious diseases, made
clear to a Senate committee his contradictory views.
"If states reopen their economies too soon, there is a real risk that you may trigger an
outbreak that you may not be able to control," said Fauci. "My concern is that we will start to
see little spikes that might turn into outbreaks of the disease (and) the inevitable return of
infections."
Fauci is talking of the real possibility of a second and even more severe wave of the
pandemic this summer and fall, if we open too soon.
There is evidence to justify the fears of Fauci and Dr. Robert Redfield of the Centers for
Disease Control, who told the same Senate committee, "We are not out of the woods yet."
Yet, there is a case to be made for the risks that Trump and red state governors are taking
in opening up sooner.
The Washington Post daily graph of new deaths nationally has been showing a curve sloping
downward for a month from April's more than 2,000 a day. On no day yet this week did the U.S.
record 2,000 dead from the virus. On some days, there were fewer than 1,000.
The graph for new coronavirus cases, which was showing more than 30,000 a day in April, is
now closer to 25,000.
Also, hospitalizations and ICU occupancies are not as high as they were. Hospitals put up in
Central Park and the Javits Center seem not to have been needed. There was and is no shortage
of ventilators. The Navy hospital ships Comfort and Mercy are returning to their home
ports.
Also, not all states are suffering equally, nor are all communities in the hardest-hit
states. There have been three times as many COVID-19 cases in New Jersey as in Texas, though
New Jersey is a fraction of the size and has a fraction of the population of Texas.
There are twice as many cases in Massachusetts as in Florida, the nation's third-most
populous state with one of its highest percentages of retirees and elderly. There have been
five times as many cases in New York as in California.
It is the nursing homes filled with the elderly and ill that have proven to be the real
killing fields of this virus. According to The New York Times, one-third of all deaths from
COVID-19 have come among residents and staff of nursing homes. Beyond these are the meatpacking
plants and the prisons where social distancing is almost nonexistent.
Moreover, while Fauci and Redfield are specialists in epidemics, Trump's portfolio goes far
beyond that.
He is chief of state, head of government and commander in chief, responsible for the
security and defense of the nation. His portfolio is broader and deeper than those of Fauci and
Redfield.
ORDER IT NOW
In the first hours of the Normandy invasion, General Eisenhower must have been rightly
alarmed about the high U.S. casualties on Omaha Beach. But he also had to concern himself with
the failure to capture the Port of Caen to bring ashore the armor to stop any German
counterattack that might turn D-Day into another Anzio.
Ike could not worry about casualties alone.
According to The Washington Post, economists already project that 100,000 small businesses
have shuttered, never to reopen.
"(D)eeper and longer recessions can leave behind lasting damage to the productive capacity
of the economy," warned Federal Reserve Board Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday. "Avoidable
household and business insolvencies can weigh on growth for years to come."
Ultimately, Fauci is not "The Decider" here. Trump is.
It is he who is accountable to the nation for weighing the losses, both human and material,
due to his decisions.
Fauci may be the best at what he does, but he is still only an adviser. As John F. Kennedy
said after the Bay of Pigs, it is the president who ultimately bears responsibility for what he
does and fails to do, while "the advisers may move on to new advice."
Believing he can do no more than his White House is now doing to contain the incidence of
cases, hospitalizations and deaths, Trump has decided his primary job is to prevent the nation
from a catastrophic economic collapse from which it might take years to recover.
The country is slowly moving in Trump's direction, slowly opening. And he will be
responsible for whether the policy succeeds or opens the floodgates to a second and worse wave,
should it come.
As Abraham Lincoln put his situation: "I mean to keep going. If the end brings me out all
right, then what is said against me won't matter. If I'm wrong, ten angels swearing I was right
won't make a difference."
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and
Broke a President and Divided America Forever."
Fauci says that, "My concern is that we will start to see little spikes that might turn
into outbreaks of the disease "
The problem with his statement is the first two words. A science advisor is supposed to
provide advice based knowledge and science. It is not part of his job description to voice
his feelings.
In this case, it doesn't matter who is "right" only one of them is POTUS! I get it that
Trumps perch on his seat is tenuous and exactly how much real control he has over the
government he supposedly heads is open to speculation, but at the end of the day Trump is
POTUS and this is no time to be thinking of political futures he must be focused on the
future of America.
We need not only an end to the lockdowns, but an end to the media campaign to demoralize
the country by hyping the non-event known as corona virus. It is all hype. when you get past
the spin and media blitz, there is nothing about this virus that would justify any kind of
response beyond your doctor testing you for covid along with the flu when you go to the
doctor with flu symptoms. That's it.
This is simply not the life altering virus that is being hyped. The enemy here is NOT the
virus, it is the (((elites))) who are trying to destroy us. It is time people it is time.
Gen. Flynn is the perfect example of how far these gov't agencies will go to protect a lie
and those frauds involved in the cover up/hoax. Trump was there target, the pathetic part of
all this is just how many republicans knew about the fraud before Trump did and did nothing
to protect him or Americans.
Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is not
cited anywhere as an inventor or patent owner of the drug and has not authored any research
studying remdesivir.
While Fauci has also said that early trials of remdesivir on coronavirus patients are a
positive sign, he has also cautioned against prematurely celebrating.
"I was very serious when I said this was not the total answer by any means, but it's a very
important first step," Fauci said on April 30 about the NIH study on
remdesivir.
As remdesivir is wholly owned by Gilead Sciences, Fauci is not legally entitled to any
profits from remdesivir.
Fauci was
the director of NIAID during the 2013-14 Ebola outbreak and spearheaded the department's
research and response to the virus. NIAID supported research into a range of potential Ebola
treatments, including remdesivir, as
recently as December. That said, Fauci did not directly conduct this research; neither he
nor the NIH stand to profit from its results.
The National Institutes of Health confirmed that Fauci has not authored any studies on
remdesivir and does not own stock in any biomedical or pharmaceutical companies.
Owning financial assets in pharmaceutical firms like Gilead would also be required to be
publicly disclosed per the
agency's ethics policy .
Amidst the storm of controversy raised by the lab-origin theory of COVID-19 extolled by such
figures as Nobel prize winning virologist Luc Montagnier, bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, Sri
Lankan Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith and the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, an elaborate
project was undertaken under the nominal helm of NATURE Magazine in order to refute the claim
once and for all under the report 'The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2'
.
This project was led by a team of evolutionary virologists using a line of reasoning that
"random mutation can account for anything" and was parroted loudly and repeatedly by Fauci, WHO
officials and Bill Gates in order to shut down all uncomfortable discussion of the possible
laboratory origins of COVID-19 while also pushing for a global vaccine campaign. On April 18,
Dr. Fauci (whose close ties with Bill Gates, and Big Pharma have much to do with his control of
hundreds of billions of dollars of research money),
stated :
"There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly
qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as
they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally
consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human."
I think at this moment, rife as it is with speculative arguments, confusion and
under-defined data, it is useful to remove oneself from the present and look for higher
reference points from which we can re-evaluate events now unfolding on the world stage.
"... Sara Cunial, the Member of Parliament for Rome denounced Bill Gates as a "vaccine criminal" and urged the Italian President to hand him over to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. ..."
"... In an extraordinary seven-minute speech met with wide applause, Sara Cunial, the Member of Parliament for Rome said that Italy had been subjected to a "Holy Inquisition of false science." ..."
Sara Cunial, the Member of Parliament for Rome denounced Bill Gates as a "vaccine criminal"
and urged the Italian President to hand him over to the International Criminal Court for crimes
against humanity.
She also exposed
Bill Gates' agenda in India and Africa, along with the plans to chip the human race through
the digital identification program ID2020.
In an extraordinary seven-minute speech met with wide applause, Sara Cunial, the Member of
Parliament for Rome said that Italy had been subjected to a "Holy Inquisition of false
science."
She roundly criticized the unnecessary lockdown imposed on her fellow Italians in the
service of a globalist agenda. She urged fellow political leaders to desist in any plans to
compel citizens to surrender themselves to compulsory COVID-19 vaccination at the hands of the
corrupt elite – whom she identified as the Deep State .
Below is the transcription of the full speech delivered to the Italian Parliament by Sara
Cunial, the Member of Parliament for Rome.
Hobbes said that absolute power does not come from an imposition from above but by the
choice of individuals who feel more protected renouncing to their own freedom and granting it
to a third party.
With this, you are going on anesthetizing the minds with corrupted Mass Media with
Amuchina (a brand of disinfectant promoted by Mass Media) and NLP, with words like "regime",
"to allow" and "to permit", to the point of allowing you to regulate our emotional ties and
feelings and certify our affects.
So, in this way, Phase 2 is nothing else than the persecution/continuation of Phase 1
– you just changed the name, as you did with the European Stability Mechanism (ESM). We
have understood people, for sure, don't die for the virus alone. So people will be allowed to
die and suffer, thanks to you and your laws, for misery and poverty. And, as in the "best"
regimes, the blame will be dropped only on citizens. You take away our freedom and say that
we looked for it. Divide et Impera (Divide and Rule).
It is our children who will lose more, who are 'raped souls', with the help of the
so-called "guarantor of their rights" and of CISMAI (Italian Coordination of Services against
Child Abuse). In this way, the right to school will be granted only with a bracelet to get
them used to probation, to get them used to slavery – involuntary treatment and to
virtual lager. All this in exchange for a push-scooter and a tablet. All to satisfy the
appetites of a financial capitalism whose driving force is the conflict of interest, conflict
well represented by the WHO, whose main financier is the well-known "philanthropist and
savior of the world" Bill Gates.
We all know it, now. Bill Gates, already in 2018, predicted a pandemic, simulated in
October 2019 at the "Event 201", together with Davos (Switzerland). For decades, Gates has
been working on Depopulation policy and dictatorial control plans on global politics, aiming
to obtain the primacy on agriculture, technology and energy.
Gates said, I quote exactly from his speech:
"If we do a good job on vaccines, health and reproduction, we can reduce the world
population by 10-15%. Only a genocide can save the world".
With his vaccines, Gates managed to sterilize millions of women in Africa. Gates
caused a polio epidemic that paralyzed 500,000 children in India and still today with
DTP, Gates causes more deaths than the disease itself. And he does the same with GMOs
designed by Monsanto and "generously donated" to needy populations. All this while he is
already thinking about distributing the quantum tattoo for vaccination recognition and mRNA
vaccines as tools for reprogramming our immune system. In addition, Gates also does business
with several multinationals that own 5G facilities in the USA.
On this table there is the entire Deep State in Italian sauce :
Sanofi, together with GlaxoSmithKline are friends of the Ranieri Guerra, Ricciardi, and of
the well-known virologist that we pay 2000 Euro every 10 minutes for the presentations on Rai
(Italian state TV. She's probably talking about Burioni). Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline sign
agreements with medical societies to indoctrinate future doctors, making fun of their
autonomy of judgment and their oath.
Hi-Tech multinationals, like the Roman Engineering which is friend of the noble Mantoan,
or Bending Spoons, of Pisano, which are there for control and manage our personal health
datas in agreement with the European Agenda ID2020 of electronic identification, which aims
to use mass vaccination to obtain a digital platform of digital ID. This is a continuation of
the transfer of data started by Renzi to IBM. Renzi, in 2016, gave a plus 30% to Gates Global
Fund.
On the Deep
State table there are the people of Aspen, like the Saxon Colao, who with his 4-pages
reports, paid 800 Euros/hour, with no scientific review, dictates its politics as a
Bilderberg general as he is, staying away from the battlefield. The list is long. Very long.
In the list there is also Mediatronic, by Arcuri and many more.
The Italian contribution to the International Alliance Against Coronavirus will be of 140
million Euros, of which 120 million Euros will be given to GAVI Alliance, the non-profit by
Gates Foundation. They are just a part of the 7.4 billion Euro fund by the EU to find a
vaccine against Coronavirus – vaccines which will be used as I said before.
No money, of course for serotherapy, which has the collateral effect of being super cheap.
No money for prevention, a real prevention, which includes our lifestyles, our food and our
relationship with the environment.
The real goal of all of this is total control. Absolute domination of human beings,
transformed into guinea pigs and slaves, violating sovereignty and free will. All this thanks
to tricks/hoax disguised as political compromises. While you rip up the Nuremberg code with
involuntary treatment, fines and deportation, facial recognition and intimidation, endorsed
by dogmatic scientism – protected by our "Multi-President" of the Republic who is real
cultural epidemic of this country.
We, with the people, will multiply the fires of resistance in a way that you won't be able
to repress all of us.
I ask you, President, to be the spokesperson and give an advice to our President Conte:
Dear Mr. President Conte, next time you receive a phone call from the philanthropist Bill
Gates forward it directly to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. If
you won't do this, tell us how we should define you, the "friend lawyer" who takes orders
from a criminal.
"If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what's out there now, [the scientific
evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or
deliberately manipulated," Fauci said in an interview with National Geographic
"Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that [this virus]
evolved in nature and then jumped species," the U.S. government's leading epidemiologist
added.
His statements are in line with those set forth by the World Health Organization (WHO), a
United Nations agency that ratified on Monday that the coronavirus is of animal origin. "The
coronavirus circulates ancestrally between bats.
"That is something we know based on this virus's genetic sequence. What we need to
understand is which animal... was infected by bats and transmitted it to humans," the WHO
Emerging Diseases Department Director Maria Van Kerkhove said.
Demand Trump's incompetent, unqualified son-in-law be removed from the coronavirus
response team! #care2
https://t.co/TN8jpMIw2p
Nevertheless, Trump insists that the U.S. government has evidence that the virus was created
in a laboratory in Wuhan (China), something that the Intelligence Directorate also
rejected.
Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?
On Tuesday morning, the U.S. president also reacted angrily to a video titled "Mourning In
America" produced by The Lincoln Project (LP), a conservative group opposed to Trump's
reelection which blames him for mishandling the COVID-19 pandemic.
"There's mourning in America - and under the leadership of Donald Trump, our country is
weaker, sicker, and poorer," the LP video points out and adds that the United States is on the
brink of a new Great Depression.
In response to the above, Trump released his discomfort by calling the Lincoln Project
members "losers."
Should everyone be wearing face masks? It's complicated.
Why
don't masks protect the wearer? Paul Glasziou, Professor of Medicine, Bond University and Chris Del Mar, Professor of
Public Health, Bond University, AU
also endorsed by epidemiologists in UK, CAD.
[.] There are several possible reasons why masks don't offer significant protection. First,
masks may not do much without eye protection. We know from animal and laboratory
experiments that influenza or other coronaviruses can enter the eyes and travel to the nose
and into the respiratory system.
While standard and special masks provide incomplete protection, special masks combined
with goggles appear to provide complete protection in laboratory experiments. However,
there are no studies in real-world situations measuring the results of combined mask and
eyewear.
The apparent minimal impact of wearing masks might also be because people didn't use
them properly. For example, one study found less than half of the participants wore them
"most of the time". People may also wear masks inappropriately, or touch a contaminated
part of the mask when removing it and transfer the virus to their hand, then their eyes and
thus to the nose.
Masks may also provide a false sense of security, meaning wearers might do riskier
things such as going into crowded spaces and places.[.]
Got goggles or a Visor? Eye protection is essential.
"... > How about we follow WHO's rule zero: test, test and test? ..."
"... Why the USA did not implemented entry/exist temperature checks (even at airports) I do not understand. The richest nation in the world has the government which is probably the most inept and disfunctional ..."
"... It looks like this is mainly the disease of megacities and industries with closely packed people (ships, meatpacking plants, Amazon warepuses) . And a large part of large cities infrastructure such as subways and air-conditioned building, hotels and shops are ideal environment for spreading of the virus. ..."
"... Another interesting feature of this virus is that it simply revealed how unhealthy the USA population generally is. For example, the epidemic of obesity now is tightly intermixed with the epidemic of COVID-19. Within the limits of the neoliberal social system very little can be done about it: for profit medicine makes is more fragile and create multiple avenue of abusing people. ..."
Do you understand that the current polymerase tests have 20-30% of false positives?
So if everybody in the USA is tested around 60-80 million people in the USA would be
deemed infected. I suspect that a very large percentage of "asymptomatics" are in reality
false positives.
We need to distinguish between the necessary measures and fearmongering. I suspect that in
the case of polymerase test the mantra "test, test, test" is close to the latter. This is s
rather expensive test and money probably can be better spend distributing masks to the
population. That would instantly give a larger effect. The simple measure that in the USA was
not done. Just for that Fauci should be fired and probably tried, IMHO.
The same is probably true with the distribution of oxymeters too: people with lows reading
need oxygen. As simple as that. That probably will cut hospitalizations in half.
My impression is that temperature and oxymeter testing might be a proxy for polymerase
testing and much cheaper: if oxygen saturation is less then 90% the person need to be
isolated/treated with oxygen
Why the USA did not implemented entry/exist temperature checks (even at airports) I do
not understand. The richest nation in the world has the government which is probably the most
inept and disfunctional
It looks like this is mainly the disease of megacities and industries with closely
packed people (ships, meatpacking plants, Amazon warepuses) . And a large part of large
cities infrastructure such as subways and air-conditioned building, hotels and shops are
ideal environment for spreading of the virus.
Even reasonable prophylactic measures do not work that well in large cities. Slums and
homeless are and will be hotspots.
Even at work enforcing prophylactic measures is non trivial. You need to change mask each
2 hours when you are working inside. How many people will do that ?
I think there is not way out other then clench your teeth and go forward adapting the
behavior as new information about the virus emerge.
For example individual supply of air in planes, trains and buses (which existed in old
planes and some buses ) might be an important psychological (and with better filters medical)
measure required.
Also Cruise ships "experiments" suggest that only around 20% of population is susceptible
to the virus. Even among Wuhan medics who started working with coronavirus patients without
wearing protective equipment only around half got the disease. The simplistic assumption that
100% of people is susceptible is just a myth propagated by fearmongers for fun and
profit.
Another interesting feature of this virus is that it simply revealed how unhealthy the USA
population generally is. For example, the epidemic of obesity now is tightly intermixed with
the epidemic of COVID-19. Within the limits of the neoliberal social system very little can
be done about it: for profit medicine makes is more fragile and create multiple avenue of
abusing people.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will be checking
passengers' temperatures at select airports next week.
People familiar with the matter told The
Wall Street Journal that additional details would be unveiled in the near term. The program
is expected to roll out at 12 airports next week and will cost $20 million to implement.
Thermal check fees will be waived for travelers and likely expensed to the federal
government.
The first message is that covid19 is terrifying, unique, an existential threat to the human
race.
This message is never sourced to much fact, because the facts about the virus don't really
support it. If it cites anything solid it's the appallingly sloppy and discredited Imperial
computer model, or some generic research into the pathology of severe infections or rare viral
syndromes, which it tries to spin as being unique to covid19, even though it is not. But mostly
it doesn't cite anything at all. Or really claim anything at all.
It just tells people to be afraid. Very afraid. Of death, of uncertainty, of the 'virus', of
other people, of 'fake news'.
The fear being encouraged is not rooted in facts, and is therefore impervious to
them.
2. 'THERE IS NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF '
The second message is that covid19 is actually pretty harmless and no big deal.
This message is rooted in a great deal of fact, because, as we have been pointing out since
day one, pretty much all the data coming out about this virus supports exactly this
conclusion.
No official body has ever denied this, and most of them readily admit it. Regularly and
unambiguously.
Here and here
and here and here .
Chris Whitty above is only one of many and this is not even his first go (see here ) at
explaining clearly that covid19 is only dangerous to a very very small minority of people, and
that most who get it will be just fine.
• Over the whole epidemic, even if there is no vaccine, a high proportion
will not get it.
• Of those who do, a significant proportion (exact number not yet clear)
have no symptoms.
• Of the symptomatic cases, the great majority (around 80%) a mild-
moderate disease.
• A minority have to go to hospital, most need only oxygen. The great
majority of these survive.
• A minority of those need ventilation.
• A minority of every agegroup sadly die with current treatment, but even
of the oldest group most do not.
[T]he great majority of people will not die from this and I'll just repeat something I
said right at the beginning because I think it's worth reinforcing :
Most people, a significant proportion of people, will not get this virus at all, at any
point of the epidemic which is going to go on for a long period of time.
Of those who do, some of them will get the virus without even knowing it, they will have
the virus with no symptoms at all, asymptomatic carriage, and we know that happens.
Of those who get symptoms, the great majority, probably 80%, will have a mild or
moderate disease. Might be bad enough for them to have to go to bed for a few days, not bad
enough for them to have to go to the doctor.
An unfortunate minority will have to go as far as hospital, but the majority of those
will just need oxygen and will then leave hospital.
And then a minority of those will end up having to go to severe end critical care and
some of those sadly will die.
But that's a minority, it's 1% or possibly even less than 1% overall.
And even in the highest risk group this is significantly less than 20%, ie. the great
majority of people, even the very highest groups, if they catch this virus, will not
die.
And I really wanted to make that point really clearly
Yes, Ken Garoo @26, the fearmongers have blood on their hands, not just in the UK, and this
is a massive life-and-death crisis. More evidence, from another unimpeachable source various
MoA stalwarts will now have to claim is a hack:
"...According to a stark report published in Lancet Global Health journal on Wednesday,
almost 1.2 million children could die in the next six months due to the disruption to health
services and food supplies caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
"The modelling, by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and
Unicef, found that child mortality rates could rise by as much as 45 per cent due to
coronavirus-related disruptions, while maternal deaths could increase by almost 39 per
cent.
"Dr [Stefan Peterson, chief of health at UNICEF] said these figures were in part a
reflection of stringent restrictions in much of the world that prevent people leaving their
homes without documentation, preventing them from accessing essential health care services.
...
"...Covid is not a children's disease. Yes there are rare instances and we see them
publicised across the media. But pneumonia, diarrhoea, measles, death in childbirth, these
are the reasons we will see deaths rise."
Hurrah! I have my blogroll back! I'm just starting to build it. At some point in the frequent
rollouts of new WordPress features, they added a 'WP Admin' button, which gives access to the
'Links' page and allowed me to eliminate those irritating default links, as well as add new
ones. So, I'm just getting started, but among the must-sees I stumbled across while starting
out with links I knew I wanted to add right away are one discussing the coronavirus (haven't
even read all of it myself yet) at Club Orlov;
and a great article, very much on point with this post, at Irrussianality, detailing the
absolutely flabbergasting Joint Statement on the Anniversary of the End of the Second World
War, on the USA's State Department website. The Nazis get one mention – the rest is
non-stop Russia is evil.
https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2020/05/08/joint-statement-on-the-75th-anniversary-of-the-end-of-the-second-world-war/
I'm not sure what Dmitry Orlov does for a living, but if he is exclusively a writer when he's
not sailing around, I suppose he is entitled to charge a fee for his product, and I have
found it consistently excellent and well-sourced, much like John Helmer's work (although that
is still free). Orlov's blog is only $2.50 a month at the basic level of subscriber, and
that's cheap enough for me. I encourage readers to subscribe at the same level, because it's
an excellent resource. In this case, I had just skipped over it very quickly, because I
wanted to add it to the blogroll. I read the first couple of paragraphs, divined that it was
not only about the coronavirus, but vindicated many of my own beliefs, and went elsewhere to
add another site. I did not notice until I came back to it that it was now
subscription-only.
So I'll copy a few salient points for everyone, and they can judge for themselves if they
are willing to pay a couple of bucks for that kind of content. It was not all about the
coronavirus – it started out about that, and sort of segued into the precarious
position the USA is now in economically. So that's why it may look like two different posts;
I am just excerpting at random: the entire post is much too long to copy. Presuming you have
read as much of the post as was already included as a teaser before it became
subscriber-only
"First, let's handle the question of vaccination. There is a measles vaccine, yet it
kills 140,000 a year. There is a pneumococcus vaccine, yet it kills between 2 and 2.5 million
a year. There is a hepatitis B vaccine, yet it kills 140,000. There is a tetanus vaccine, yet
it kills 89,000 annually. There is a rotavirus vaccine, yet it kills 800,000. There is a HPV
vaccine, yet it kills 250,000. There is a tuberculosis vaccine, yet it kills 1.5 million.
There is an influenza vaccine, yet it kills 650,000 to 1 million a year. None of these are
considered pandemics, cause entire economies to be shut down, or call for any extraordinary
measures at all.
And then there is the novel coronavirus which has killed 218,187 people to date (the
vast majority of them very old and/or very sick) -- and this is considered to be a problem to
be solved with all possible haste. Some infectious disease experts have suggested that the
entire populace may be required to shelter in place until a vaccine becomes available.
Meanwhile, deaths from the novel coronavirus largely fit within the usual mortality of the
flu season. The northern hemisphere winter was warmer than usual, and some of the elderly and
sick people who would have been killed off by any of the usual influenza viruses (including
other coronaviruses) during any of the previous three flu seasons were claimed by the novel
coronavirus.
But even this is uncertain because it is unclear whether these 218,187 deaths were
actually caused by the coronavirus or whether the coronavirus just happened to be present in
their bodies at the time of death. Furthermore, a lot of people were diagnosed as suffering
from this coronavirus based on symptoms which are not too different from those caused by
other viral agents. Lastly, the vast majority of those who have died from it had what are
called comorbidities. Elderly immunocompromised morbidly obese diabetics with high blood
pressure, cancer and other potential fatal ailments have been particularly susceptible. If
you discard all fatal cases with comorbidities and only consider young healthy people, then
the number of deaths where the new coronavirus is obviously the root cause may turn out to be
as low as zero.
Confirmed novel coronavirus cases number less than 3,147,626 worldwide, which is 0.04%
of the world's population. This barely adds up to a cough and a sneeze. As this virus has
spread throughout the world the increase in cases has slowed, but the number of confirmed
cases could yet double or even triple, adding up to as much as three coughs and three
sneezes. But then the World Health Organization enters the fray. The WHO makes gratuitous use
of appellations such as "world" and "health" but is actually a semi-private entity lavishly
financed by Bill Gates and Big Pharma, which is owned by a handful of highly inbred
oligarchic entities that include Vanguard, BlackRock, Capital Group, Morgan Stanley, Goldman
Sachs, Northern Trust and State Street, which in turn own each other in various convoluted
ways. WHO's main function is to scare people into getting vaccinated and accepting expensive
drug regimens (barely half of which do any good at all), thus funneling resources toward Big
Pharma.
The World Health Organization establishes thresholds to determine whether to declare an
influenza epidemic that range between 2.5% and 5%. The novel coronavirus misses the mark by a
thousand-fold, yet the WHO has declared it to be the cause of a global pandemic. If this
seems like an extreme overreaction, that is because this is an extreme overreaction. Some
conspiratorially-minded people may surmise that this is a conspiracy, but it isn't. It is yet
another blatant attempt to confiscate a chunk of the world's wealth by requiring it to buy
something worthless, just like this same set of medical/financial interests did with the
relatively worthless Tamiflu antiviral medication during the H1N1 swine flu pandemic of
2009-10 which caused a mere 18,036 deaths worldwide. This is a specific group pursuing its
own group interests."
Then he went into how the Chinese and the Russians are respectively manipulating the
coronavirus in their own countries for their own ends
"The Chinese have taken the novel coronavirus outbreak as a chance to train for
repelling a biological warfare attack. To argue that this coronavirus is indeed the agent of
a biowarfare attack is to argue for something extremely stupid because it just isn't
effective as a biowarfare agent. It's almost as bad as Novichok, which was touted as being
able to wipe out entire armies but only managed to sicken five people and kill just one of
them. It doesn't matter whether this coronavirus leaked out of a dead bat or a biowarfare
lab, or both -- it just isn't any good as a weapon. But the Chinese government imposed
extreme, unprecedented controls over much of the population and the economy. The Russians
followed suit, with the difference that while the Chinese saw these extreme measures as
temporary, setting up makeshift hospitals, the Russians seized on them as a chance to
fundamentally upgrade the entire health care system, setting it up to effectively handle any
future biological warfare attacks.
In doing so, the Chinese and the Russians pursued different goals. The Chinese need to
find a way to stop shipping actual physical manufactured goods to the US in exchange for
pieces of paper or promises to pay, all of which are about to become worthless, without
triggering a dangerous escalation. The need to do so with all necessary haste became obvious
in mid-August of 2019, when it turned out that banks were no longer willing to accept US
Treasury debt instruments as collateral for overnight loans. These were supposedly the safest
investments in the world that made up the world's largest and most liquid financial market --
until it turned out that they weren't that at all."
And on the American economy
"There are two important global processes which, while they will affect the US
particularly severely, go far beyond its geographic confines. One is the still relatively
gradual process of dethroning the US dollar from its position of dominance. Until the
coronavirus pandemic disrupted much of the global economy, most of its participants were
interested in preserving some measure of stability to the dollar system. But now that trade
has already been disrupted, an opening has been created to dump the dollar without
necessarily causing economic damage significantly worse than already exists. The actions of
the Federal Reserve, which is in the process of monetizing a large proportion of existing US
government debt and virtually all of the new debt being issued to cover the ever-growing
budget deficit, are undermining the dollar as well. Although the term "debt monetization" is
being used to describe what's happening, issuing currency with which to buy up worthless
promissory notes stretches the definition of "debt" beyond any reasonable limit, while
"monetization" is far too dignified a term for such a desperate delaying tactic. As a
consequence, some analysts do not see US dollar-based global financial system holding up too
far beyond this year.
The other process is the rapid transition of the US from the world's largest producer
of oil to one of the smallest, because the fracking bonanza has largely run its course. It
has never really made any money, since fracked oil is, for technological reasons, always too
expensive to sustain economic growth. And now, with an economic depression setting in,
economies at a standstill and oil futures trading in the negative territory (where market
participants are willing to pay producers to get out of having take delivery of the oil when
the contract matures) the fracking industry is going bankrupt, production is falling, and in
less than a year it is likely to be down by as much as 70%. At that point, any attempt at
economic recovery in the US will involve having to start importing large quantities of oil
from a world supply that, with the exception of fracked oil from the US, hasn't expanded much
since 2005."
My view is that despite this being all highly disruptive, it will prepare us all for the
inevitable outbreak of a truly deadly virus that will also kill the young and healthy too
(hopefully not cats). The world is becoming ever more globalized, transmission chains and
time seriously shortened. There will be no escape even on the periphery. A biological version
of Neville Shute's On the Beach.
Handling this well (in future) is eminently doable without even losing a (metaphorical)
bollock. It is basic stuff and really shouldn't be 'a thing.' The WHO is a redirection
nothing burger for those who are responsible for the abrogation of national competence.
Decisions are still taken at the national level, no? The WHO is a spokesbody and therein it
does have a role to play. It is neither free from political inteference or influence just
like every other international organization.
Fortunately, Asia has shown the common-sense that we in the old world have lost through
our own arrogance and self-importance. We should be humiliated, but we are not. We're too
busy blaming others.
This CoVid-19 outbreak has provided everyone with a crystal clear warning of precisely how
incompetent many nation states are over basic provision of health and pandemic planning in
the 21st Century. This isn't 1918. Things are supposed to have moved on a bit but it has
exposed the ideology of cuts, penny-pinching and not-give-a-f/kery over common-sense by those
elected (by us) to provide responsible government. They've been warned multiple times about
the risks, not to mention the series of other outbreaks in this century. Still, they're
rather more interested in squeaking out ever leaner efficiencies to maximize
profit.
I'm not worried about the planet, we'll knock ourselves off first.
My initial feeling was that the initial reaction of Putin, Trump and Johnson was to let the
thing burn itself out and maybe put the effort into looking after the most at risk. The
Imperial College thing seems to be the reason why Trump and Johnson went to lockdown and that
left me puzzled why Putin did. Orlov's piece gave me the idea that maybe, after talking to
Xi, Putin decided to use it as a test of Russia's ability to handle a bioattack. Notice that
Russia is actually building specialised hospitals around the country rather than just (as in
the West) temporarily re-purposing large facilities. We'll probably never know but it's a
thought I will keep in the Maybe File.
Agreed; I could think of no good reason for it, and consequently Orlov's speculation came as
a revelation. Again, it's only speculation on his part, but it does make sense and fits with
the Sino-Russian concept of every experience being a teachable moment, to be wrung for such
lessons as it may yield.
It is fairly well-known that Johnson's initial plan was to go for herd immunity and just
say bollocks to social distancing, but something caused him to abruptly reverse himself after
the UK had already started a pretty respectable infection curve. I'm not familiar with the
'Imperial College thing'; could you enlighten me? I do know that impatience at being shut in
with no job is increasingly unpopular with people everywhere it prevails, and governments are
having a harder time keeping the lid on. I can only imagine it is the same for Putin's
government.
I see; thanks for that. I remember reading mentions of a study which forecast incredible
death tolls, but didn't realize that was it. Well, no way they could have done anything else,
in the face of that – 2.2 million deaths in the US, and more than half a million in the
UK.
I don't suppose they will ever be called to account for their fearmongering quackery. To
nobody's surprise, I'm sure, the Imperial College receives generous grants from the Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation, the most recent in March of this year – just shy of $80
Million, to develop a new tool for malaria control and elimination in sub-Saharan Africa.
Nor was that the only one, by a long chalk; 80 donations between 2006 and 2018. This
website does ask that a disclaimer be included that the data are preliminary; final
development is not expected to be achieved until 2022. But at first glance, it looks like the
full amount will run into quite a few decimal places.
An under-reported fact in the US is the abundance of empty ICUs and now a surplus of
ventilators. A nearby city is laying off 2,500 medical personnel for lack of work (presumably
mobilized for the pandemic).
IIRC, a local story blew the whistle on a staged waiting line for Covid-19 testing; most
of the people in line (including medical volunteers who had nothing to do) were asked to to
stand in line to provide video footage for a network news team.
Yes, that's correct: Cherry Health, in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The article points out that
Cherry Health stands to lose millions as a result of the crisis.
Ha, ha!! Dear God. Well, I hope he doesn't lose his tasty bit on the side over this –
he'll probably top himself. She looks quite yummy. But it's always the same, innit? Those who
make up the rules get a great kick out of it, but feel free to disregard them themselves as
soon as they get in the way.
Makes one wonder if the virus response is being managed at some level to cull the old and
frail to reduce health care costs. The obvious vulnerability of nursing home residents
combined with the apparent lack of resources specifically devoted to protecting those
individuals suggests high level scheming in that regard.
It was only a few months ago that we exceptional people were told that masks were useless
and unneeded (except for health care workers who desperately needed them for
self-protection). It is likely that policy lead to a rapid spread in the vulnerable
population.
It is remarkable how quickly the "masks are useless" directive has been officially
forgotten. Now, it's all about how China allowed us to mishandle the situation.
I would think not, only because no apparent effort has been made to ensure infection of the
homeless in their cardboard cities, and wipe them out. Here, as I have mentioned before,
Mayor Helps has given them a city park to use as their own squalid state, constantly refers
to them tenderly as 'our most vulnerable', and provides them no end of services, all for free
on the taxpayer. If your ambitions are modest, there is no real incentive to work.
If it were all part of a diabolical plan, you would think that plan would allow for taking
out the 'useless eaters' among the poor and helpless, as well as the old.
It certainly looks that way but such a plot requires a competence that our political elites
(at least in the UK) just don't have. Unfortunately, we're led by the shallow, ignorant and
inexperienced who responded to a serious health problem with blind panic. It's common sense
that a virus, which is particularly dangerous for the elderly, shouldn't be let out to play
in care homes; that steps should have been taken to protect the vulnerable rather than
putting everyone under house arrest while destroying their livelihoods. But common sense is a
bit like common courtesy, not actually that common when you get right down to it.
Professor Neil Ferguson (he of the 500,000 deaths forecast) and his Imperial College team
have a dire track record of forecasting in previous health crises, consistently wrong by an
order of magnitude. Yet it seems that no-one in government or our once highly competent civil
service had either the skills or time to query his forecasting model and the assumptions he
made. The fact that he broke the lockdown, introduced as a result of his forecast, in order
to dally with his mistress, does kind of suggest he doesn't believe in his own figures.
Yes, it sounds as if you are right. I suppose one reason it looks like a well-managed
conspiracy is that it was such a startlingly stupid thing to do – it's difficult to
imagine people would willingly cause such destruction without the slightest look to the
future.
Johnson is an idiot, but his first instinct – or apparently so, I suppose it might
have been just paralysis – was the correct one; proceed as normal, no reason to believe
this is the Black Death.
It's almost like the 'pandemic' is just an excuse for something, and the rest is just going
through the motions.
On relaxation of restrictions, it's mostly a game of feeling for the level of restriction
the public will tolerate, because it is so grateful for the degree of freedom allowed it. I
imagine when stores are opened, they're going to want Soviet-style lineups outside,
social-distancing 6 feet apart, because only 50 people are allowed inside at any one time. So
they can social-distance inside as well, as if that were somehow an effective
contagious-virus countermeasure, the way grocery stores are now. And 50 seems to be the magic
number no matter the size of the store, except for kiosks which are only allowed to serve one
person inside at a time.
The local pizza hotspot, Romeo's, seems to be doing a land-office business, and is
probably making money. They only serve take-out now, no inside service, so they only have to
pay the cooks and perhaps two counter-service persons; no waitresses or waiters or busboys.
And the line outside frequently is about a quarter-mile. But they still have to pay their
rent based on the size of the building, which is wasteful – look for perhaps quite a
few businesses switching to take-out only in the course of time, and renting smaller
premises. Because of course The Authorities are going to want social-distancing inside
restaurants as well as we emerge, to preserve the illusion that they knew what they were
about.
Case in point. America has a surveillance state but it refuses to use it to save lives.
Instead, it uses it to save Wall Street and protect the extractive elite from any TRUE REAL
threat. I relish the notion of this virus running rampant across America until it ravages,
and decimates actually, the Praetorian Guard Class, the managerial class if you will, that
licks the ass of the extractive elite for some bread crust, discarded steak fat and a Tesla.
I want to see them truly suffer for their sins.
After weeks cooped up at home following governors' orders to contain the coronavirus
outbreak, U.S. residents appear eager to get moving again. As more states began to relax
restrictions, about 25 million more people ventured outside their homes on an average day
last week than during the preceding six weeks, a New York Times analysis of cellphone
data found .
In nearly every part of the country, the share of people staying home dropped, in some
places by nearly 11 percentage points.
As the death toll from this pandemic rises in America with no end in sight, Wall Street,
as reflected in the DJIA, doesn't even blink and actually cheers. It doesn't get any sicker
than that. Wall Street sees the carnage as an opportunity to make more profit off of death
and the extractive elite see it as an opportunity to concentrate wealth even further and rid
the world of burdensome useless eaters. It's sick. It's sadistic. It's malevolent. It's evil.
It's our reality.
The coronavirus reminds us that the gap between what we think we know and what we
actually do know is enormous.
Dr. Deborah Birx, White House coronavirus response
coordinator, shows off charts with members of the coronavirus task force during a briefing in
response to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room at the
White House on Tuesday, March 31, 2020 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Jabin Botsford/The
Washington Post via Getty Images)
May 13, 2020
|
12:01 am
Matt
Purple St. Louis Federal Reserve watchers, rejoice! And yes, I'm talking to both of you. The St.
Louis Fed is freshly relevant this week thanks to a paper it
published back in 2007 that examined the economic effects of the 1918 Spanish flu. Drawing
on old newspaper articles, local surveys, and other studies -- national data back then was
scarce -- the report found that the damage done to businesses by the outbreak was both severe
and short-lived. The impact on the next generation, however, was longer-lasting. Those in utero
during the pandemic went on to attain less education and lower incomes than had previous
generations.
What we wouldn't give for that kind of glimpse from the future today. The coronavirus has
killed hundreds of thousands while sledgehammering the economy, leaving close to a quarter of
working-age Americans either unemployed or
underemployed. And we still have no idea how it will end. It may be that this recession is
similar to the one in 1918, cutting deeply but easing rapidly. Or it may be that we're in for
another lost decade of stubborn unemployment and stagnant growth. It may be that the virus is
seen off this summer, remembered as a frightening but ultimately brief ordeal. Or it may be
that it lurks into the autumn, whereupon it comes roaring back.
We don't know, and we hate that we don't know. Consequently a cottage industry has sprung up
around our uncertainty, hawking models, projections, expert opinions. These things have valid
scientific purposes, of course, but thrown down the rabbit hole of our popular discourse,
they've taken on a kind of hysterical clairvoyance, supposedly able to tell us what's coming
and how we should respond. With climate change, we grew accustomed to the idea that scientists
could see into the future. Now we're demanding they do the same with the coronavirus. That's
despite the fact that so far, none of these projections have demonstrated any greater
predictive ability than your average call to Miss Cleo.
Take the government's official death toll projections. Back in January, the White House was
largely complacent over the coronavirus, with President Trump comparing it to the seasonal flu
and his health secretary
saying that Americans need "not worry for their own safety." Then in late March, the
pendulum swung towards apocalypse. Actually, the White House said,
200,000 Americans could die. Two weeks later, the death toll projection fell
to a far rosier 60,000 , and the country breathed a sigh of relief ahead of Easter weekend.
Then the projections ticked upwards yet again. Today, IHME, the White House's principal
modeler, predicts that 147,000 Americans will be killed
by August 4.
Some of the issue here may be the choice of models. IHME has been
criticized by epidemiologists , as have the Imperial College modelers in Britain (who have
lately been distracted by, er, more
extracurricular activities ). But the bigger problem is best summed up in a quote
to Politico by the head of IHME, explaining why his organization's projections
were so wrong. "We had presumed, perhaps naively," he said, "that given the magnitude of the
epidemic, most states would stick to their social distancing until the end of May." In other
words, the models are premised on assumptions that can be scrambled by real-world events,
whether political decisions or acts of God or the caprices of the virus itself. They aren't
showing us the future so much as extrapolating off of a snapshot, one that can easily change.
Yet we treat them as practically mystic. "200,000 could die!!" scream the headlines, with
"could" ever the weasel word.
We don't just do this with the death toll. On the economy, too, we seem hopelessly confused.
Here's a smattering of headlines from the past two months: "Unemployment rate could exceed 20%
by June, top White House adviser says." "Economists see uneven jobs recovery, high U.S.
unemployment through 2021." "Top JPMorgan investment advisor: It will take '10 to 12 years' for
U.S. employment levels to return." "The coronavirus recession will be deeper and faster than
the financial crisis." "Economists say quick rebound from recession is unlikely." "Trump's
baseless claim that a recession would be deadlier than the coronavirus." "U.N. warns economic
downturn could kill hundreds of thousands of children in 2020."
Stare into this blurry puddle long enough and you might conclude that no one has any idea
what the hell they're talking about. Or you might fall back on your own biases, choosing to
believe stories that buttress your political beliefs and speak to your own personal
circumstances. Either way, this kind of confusion can have long-reaching effects. Consider, for
example, a new study that was released last week, which found that there could be 75,000
so-called deaths of despair -- meaning suicides and drug and alcohol overdoses -- as a
result of the coronavirus recession. It called to mind another
social science finding , one of the most consequential of the last decade: that life
expectancy among less educated, middle-aged, white Americans was declining, driven primarily by
those deaths of despair.
That claim, courtesy of researchers Anne Case and Angus Deaton , made
its way around the internet. It fed into the narrative of the populist right and Donald Trump.
It provided an empirical grounding for "American carnage." But wait: a less noticed study a
year later, which took Case's and Deaton's data and adjusted for age, found a more mixed
picture. According to research from
Columbia University , while middle-aged white women had indeed seen increased mortality
rates, middle-aged white men had reversed this trend back in 2005. And then came another study, in the
American Journal of Public Health , that challenged the very concept of "deaths of
despair," warning that "the gap between deaths of despair as a claim and deaths of despair as a
rigorously tested scientific concept is wide."
There is a Grand Canyon-sized gap between what we think we know and what we actually know.
How to navigate this chasm? Two maxims can help.
The first comes from Friedrich Hayek: "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to
men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." Hayek was concerned
with what he called the "fatal conceit," which he defined as the belief "that man is able to
shape the world around him according to his wishes." We might add a corollary: that man is able
to anticipate the world around him according to his wishes. Because knowledge is
complex and dispersed, Hayek argued, no one can ever marshal enough of it to centrally plan an
economy. Likewise even a sophisticated model can't have enough data to foresee how a pandemic
will play out. There are simply too many variables, drawing on too many areas of life.
The second maxim comes from a very different source: John Dickinson, perhaps our most
conservative founding father. "Experience must be our only guide," Dickinson said. "Reason may
mislead us." Of course, by reason, he didn't mean vast computer algorithms struggling to track
contagion across seven continents; he was thinking of 18th-century rationalism, which he
contrasted with the more reliable yardstick of historical experience. While what seemed
philosophically sound in the abstract could be tainted by personal bias or disconnected from
real life, precedent was far more settled. How something had worked in the past was a good
indication of how it would work in the future.
Unfortunately we have very little precedent when it comes to the coronavirus, though the
Spanish flu can perhaps offer some clues. The 1918 influenza, like the current pandemic, began
in the spring, only to enter a second wave in the fall that killed more people than the first.
A third wave then began that winter and stretched into the summer of 1919. That's chilling, yet
there's good news too: the recession that followed was short and quickly blossomed into the
1920s, one of the most dizzying economic expansions in our history.
So top hats and flapper dresses all around? Who knows? It's called the novel coronavirus for
a reason. The awful truth is that we have very little idea how long this will go on and how it
will ultimately turn out. And the reason for that is that we know so very much less than we
think we do.
"Paul's challenge encapsulates the debate between elected officials eager to open up businesses and willing to accept the risk
that more people will die, and public health experts committed to lowering infection rates and keeping the public as safe as possible.
" People are hurting and we're destroying our country ," Paul told reporters outside the hearing room. "We've got to open up business
we got to let people vote, and we're not going to live in a perfect world without infectious disease, we're still going to have it,
but we got to open the economy and that's the number one message I have."
The Kentucky senator, an opthamologist, told Fauci he didn't believe there would be a surge in cases if schools opened, which
is not what public health experts say. Paul dismissed predictive models of the virus. "The history of this, when we look back, will
be of wrong prediction after wrong prediction after wrong prediction ," Paul said.
Paul then targeted Fauci personally: "As much as I respect you Dr. Fauci, I don't think you're the end-all, I don't think you're
the one person that gets to make the decision . We can listen to your advice. But there are people on the other side saying there
won't be a surge and we can safely open the economy." CNBC
--------------
IMO, there may or may not be an effective vaccine developed against COVID-19. Some virus bugs are never countered effectively
by vaccines. There are no vaccines for the common cold, the Spanish Influenza of 1918, and many other virus strains. Some diseases
must burn themselves out in a population by establishing herd immunity. Bubonic Plague is a bacterial infection, but the same thing
was true of it. It ravaged Europe, but eventually the fire of infection burned out in Europe and those of us who are descended from
Europeans are the descendants of the herd survivors.
COVID-19 is nothing like the Black Death or the Spanish Influenza in lethality except for the old and infirm. Suck it up, people!
Cowboy up! Grow a pair! Fauci is a techno dweeb who would keep the US shut down economically until the survivors of COVID-19 would
be living in a post-apocalyptic world of small communities living in poverty, a dystopian nightmare.
Rand Paul is also a doctor, and a survivor of the disease.
The Democrats are having a good time playing with Trump while the country burns to the ground economically.
Biden? Pelosi? Juan Williams? Northam? You want them? If you do, and you want to hunker down until the country dies, well then,
Bless You! You will deserve what you get.
SWMBO and I, and the doggies are unlikely to be here to share your pain. pl
LA County apparently wants to extend the lockdown by another 3 months. This is just insane!
Old guys like me could hang out more at the ranch but the youth need to be out and about.
There's no perfect risk-free scenario as you point out. Unfortunately we have cultivated a nanny state of big government and
big business that are quite rapacious in reality. Has any state actually passed legislation to enforce lockdowns? These are just
executive orders at the state and local levels. It would appear that these orders suspends the constitution? I'm surprised no
one has yet challenged these orders in state and federal courts.
We sure are an afraid lot. What happened to the derring-do?
maybe they could do a special ufc - wrestling type show with paul and fauci.. the american public seem very keen on this sort
of thing and would eat it up..
can someone explain how herd immunity works?? i've never heard of people being referred to as a herd... i missed that in school..
BTW, notice how Ukraine has vanished from the national conversation.
Who needs to keep yapping about how Trump let down (one faction in) Ukraine when they can blame him for the economic calamity
which, in point of fact, is due to the vast overreaction that has been pushed by the media and Dem politicians.
For example, failing to point out that New York has unique demographics, which directly and conclusively led to its high hospitalization
and fatality rate.
A key point the media doesn't adequately emphasize, IMO, is the sharpness of the dependency on age.
In Virginia, there have been, to date, roughly 900 deaths attributed to the virus.
Of those deaths, over half were to people over 80.
Roughly one quarter were people in their 70s.
About 15% were people on their 60s.
Less than 10% were people under 60.
There were ZERO deaths of people under 20.
To see a bar chart which shows the exact numbers, visit https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/coronavirus/
Then click on "Demographics", then set "Select Measure" to "Deaths".
"public health experts"
These folks appear to be expert only at guaranteeing thier jobs. The backpedaling, double speak and out right fraud is beyond
shameless. I notice we aren't talking about the Georgia death count any longer but St. Travoon of the skittles accolyte. This
thing is over but for NYC and the politicians in the democratic death traps being governed by fools. Ordering infected elderly
patients back to nursing homes, which experts advised that to Cuomo and Whitmer? Suicide, drug overdoses, those deaths don't count?
"Biden? Pelosi? Juan Williams? Northam? You want them?" No, nor Whitmer nor Newsom. If we get them I won't be around much longer
than your doggies and I'm much younger than you and SWMBO.
I think a big part of the problem is the total lack of any deeper philosophic debate, as part of a normal social functioning.
People want answers not truths, so there are plenty of politicians and priests, but philosophy is neutered and left to the back
alleys of academia.
We are linear, goal oriented creatures in a cyclical, reciprocal, feedback generated reality, in which there is this organic interplay
between competition and cooperation, as well as public and private functions of society, etc. So when we impose this goal oriented
model on those facts of life, we end up with a bunch of absolutist ideologs running the world and using the other side as boogymen
to rally their cultists. Rather than appreciating such interplay is fundamental to life.
When we have such a fundamentally primitive understanding of how reality functions, having nuanced discussion of life and death
issues is not possible.
The people won't stand for Fausti's nonsense, nor the Democrats'. They will just open their businesses and local governments -
especially county level - will allow it. Already happening in PA. Heck even some states are doing it. As counties and states open
up, the populations of those that do not will become increasingly agitated and begin to break "the rules". There will be a ripple
effect. The cowards and social media magnates and leftists will call them names and wave fingers at them, but the people won't
care. Actually they will continue to open with even more fervor just to give give these "elites" the finger.
As always, the socialist/dictator class ignores human nature and believes people can be programmed. As always, they are wrong.
People are no longer buying the models and case rates BS, etc. that the "scientists" put out there. Geekery ain't cutting it any
more.
Hopefully, this will all occur peacefully with the socialists/dictators just throwing up their hands. If they double down,
then the tree of liberty gets watered. Probably the outcome that needs to happen, terrible as it is. Right now Pelosi is trying
to develop a plan to bribe the people into staying locked down and vote democrat. It will fail.
LA County apparently wants to extend the lockdown by another 3 months. This is just insane!
Old guys like me could hang out more at the ranch but the youth need to be out and about.
There's no perfect risk-free scenario as you point out. Unfortunately we have cultivated a nanny state of big government and
big business that are quite rapacious in reality. Has any state actually passed legislation to enforce lockdowns? These are just
executive orders at the state and local levels. It would appear that these orders suspends the constitution? I'm surprised no
one has yet challenged these orders in state and federal courts.
We sure are an afraid lot. What happened to the derring-do?
maybe they could do a special ufc - wrestling type show with paul and fauci.. the american public seem very keen on this sort
of thing and would eat it up..
can someone explain how herd immunity works?? i've never heard of people being referred to as a herd... i missed that in school..
BTW, notice how Ukraine has vanished from the national conversation.
Who needs to keep yapping about how Trump let down (one faction in) Ukraine when they can blame him for the economic calamity
which, in point of fact, is due to the vast overreaction that has been pushed by the media and Dem politicians.
For example, failing to point out that New York has unique demographics, which directly and conclusively led to its high hospitalization
and fatality rate.
A key point the media doesn't adequately emphasize, IMO, is the sharpness of the dependency on age.
In Virginia, there have been, to date, roughly 900 deaths attributed to the virus.
Of those deaths, over half were to people over 80.
Roughly one quarter were people in their 70s.
About 15% were people on their 60s.
Less than 10% were people under 60.
There were ZERO deaths of people under 20.
To see a bar chart which shows the exact numbers, visit https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/coronavirus/
Then click on "Demographics", then set "Select Measure" to "Deaths".
"public health experts"
These folks appear to be expert only at guaranteeing thier jobs. The backpedaling, double speak and out right fraud is beyond
shameless. I notice we aren't talking about the Georgia death count any longer but St. Travoon of the skittles accolyte. This
thing is over but for NYC and the politicians in the democratic death traps being governed by fools. Ordering infected elderly
patients back to nursing homes, which experts advised that to Cuomo and Whitmer? Suicide, drug overdoses, those deaths don't count?
"Biden? Pelosi? Juan Williams? Northam? You want them?" No, nor Whitmer nor Newsom. If we get them I won't be around much longer
than your doggies and I'm much younger than you and SWMBO.
I think a big part of the problem is the total lack of any deeper philosophic debate, as part of a normal social functioning.
People want answers not truths, so there are plenty of politicians and priests, but philosophy is neutered and left to the back
alleys of academia.
We are linear, goal oriented creatures in a cyclical, reciprocal, feedback generated reality, in which there is this organic interplay
between competition and cooperation, as well as public and private functions of society, etc. So when we impose this goal oriented
model on those facts of life, we end up with a bunch of absolutist ideologs running the world and using the other side as boogymen
to rally their cultists. Rather than appreciating such interplay is fundamental to life.
When we have such a fundamentally primitive understanding of how reality functions, having nuanced discussion of life and death
issues is not possible.
The people won't stand for Fausti's nonsense, nor the Democrats'. They will just open their businesses and local governments -
especially county level - will allow it. Already happening in PA. Heck even some states are doing it. As counties and states open
up, the populations of those that do not will become increasingly agitated and begin to break "the rules". There will be a ripple
effect. The cowards and social media magnates and leftists will call them names and wave fingers at them, but the people won't
care. Actually they will continue to open with even more fervor just to give give these "elites" the finger.
As always, the socialist/dictator class ignores human nature and believes people can be programmed. As always, they are wrong.
People are no longer buying the models and case rates BS, etc. that the "scientists" put out there. Geekery ain't cutting it any
more.
Hopefully, this will all occur peacefully with the socialists/dictators just throwing up their hands. If they double down,
then the tree of liberty gets watered. Probably the outcome that needs to happen, terrible as it is. Right now Pelosi is trying
to develop a plan to bribe the people into staying locked down and vote democrat. It will fail.
The Current Situation in the United States: May 2020
James K. Galbraith
Two weeks ago week the US death toll from Covid-19 exceeded that of US soldiers in
Vietnam, 1955-1974. On May 1 the one-day toll reached a new high, greater than that in New York
City on September 11, 2001. Meanwhile economic output has collapsed and over thirty million
Americans had filed unemployment claims as of April 30, 2020. On the public health front,
testing remains inadequate, contact tracing non-existent, treatment options appear stalled and
millions remain uninsured. The federal bailouts have worked well in one way only: to spur a
modest revival of stocks and to forestall massive defaults on bonds.
The failures of the public health system border on sabotage. Test kits were available
from the WHO in January; the US elected not to use them. The first production of tests from the
CDC was botched. Testing was deliberately limited as community transmission grew, so that the
virus escaped from early containment that might have been possible. Lockdowns and quarantines
came late, were poorly organized and weakly enforced. Supplies of PPE were not allocated to
hospitals and health care providers according to need; the Defense Production Act was not
deployed in timely and effective manner to ramp up home production; no effective federal system
to manage international medical supply chains exists to this day. While some firms have no
doubt done their best, reports of profiteering and scams are rampant.
The push to reopen the economy is a further mark of failure. As food supply workers
were not properly protected, unacceptable levels of sickness and workplace contamination have
occurred, notably in meat. Food banks are in crisis, while milk, eggs and other perishables are
wasted. State governments facing fiscal catastrophe press businesses to reopen on terms that
cannot be profitable, because capacity is constrained for health reasons. The openings are
calculated to force workers off of unemployment insurance, which can be revoked if they decline
to return to risky jobs. Many smaller businesses are deciding not to reopen; they will face
bankruptcy instead and disappear. Although evictions and foreclosures are technically deferred,
many landlords have ignored this and in any event rent, mortgages, utility bills and other
debts continue to accrue.
Models of the pandemic now openly predict infections rising further as lockdowns are
relaxed, to the point of testing the capacity of health care systems even in parts of the
country not yet severely affected. Whether this will happen or not is not yet clear; the public
may continue, as a general rule, to practice safe contact behavior, and if the transmission
rates hold below 1, as they presently are estimated to be in almost all of the American states , the pandemic may continue to
decline. But if the models are borne out, death rates will rise by many multiples of their
current values. These events are projected to lead to further lock-downs on a rolling basis,
until such time as a vaccine or therapy is available. There is no guarantee of
either.
Even if the pandemic is now contained the economy will not revert to "normal." The
United States is a premier producer of energy, aerospace, advanced information technologies and
financial services. It assembles many million automobiles, appliances and other consumer
durable goods every year. The oil sector has suffered a price collapse and borders now on mass
bankruptcy; when fracking wells are capped they will sand up and become very costly to reopen,
so the US energy-based economic expansion is over. Airplanes are lined up in parking spaces; no
new civilian passenger airliners will be needed indefinitely. Households who are either
unemployed or working from home (and therefore not commuting) or that face deferred rent and
mortgages will not soon be in the market for new cars; in any event the old ones will last
longer as they are being driven much less. As office buildings remain empty, new ones will not
be built. Similarly for retail stores, already driven to the wall by on-line ordering and
deliveries. The banking sector is on the hook for energy loans gone bad, and for household
debts, and for corporate loans that will be at risk once the bailout money runs low. The debts
built up during the pandemic will be defaulted in many cases, ruining credit for the households
affected. All of which foretells a long depression even under the best foreseeable public
health conditions. A cycle of infections and lock-downs will make all of this that much
worse.
There is an illusion about, that the recent prosperity can be revived by "reopening." But
many industries – aircraft, airlines, hotels, automobiles, appliances, commercial
construction, energy – will definitely shrink, whatever happens now and no matter how
much money they receive. The bailouts were a measure predicated on the idea that these
industries were facing just a temporary interruption. But it is difficult to see how
bankruptcies and liquidations can be avoided if there is no revival in the demand for product.
And large-scale production relies on interlinked supply-chains, so that if a single major
producer (for example one of the majors in the automotive sector) fails, there is a risk of
cascading liquidations (for example in auto parts), making operations difficult – perhaps
impossible – for the survivors. In these industries the supply chains and subcontractors
are much larger in the aggregate than the assembly operations of the final production firm.
Higher education, a large sector in America, faces a crisis of high costs, collapsing
enrollments and the actual alternative of cheap on-line instruction in many fields. This was
already in the works for demographic reasons, and is now being accelerated by the loss of
household wealth. Health care, ten times larger, also faces financial difficulties as millions
are losing their insurance and – for the moment anyway – as accidents, other
infectious diseases and such are down, depriving doctors and hospitals of reimbursements.
Service industries from restaurants to retailers cannot function profitably at one-quarter of
capacity; bars, nightclubs, and most sporting venues cannot reopen at all.
Federal decision-making has failed at every level. In the executive branch, it has
been at best a complex of incompetence, denial, and political motivation. At worst,
decisions were taken and are still being taken in full knowledge of the projected death rates
and potential for private profiteering, both in the medical sector and in the larger financial
economy. It is known that some private speculators made over three hundred billion dollars
shorting the stock market before the February collapse, and that some Members of Congress sold
their holdings based on information provided in intelligence briefings. Congressional action
has been slow, marred by politics, lobbies, regional rivalries, poor judgment and a
misdiagnosis of the economic issues, as Congress reached for legislative models used in past
business downturns, especially the crisis of 2007-2009, which had no quarantine or other public
health component.
The specific policies implemented were plagued by problems. To calculate payments
under the first CARES Act, the IRS had to use filings from tax year 2018, and also ran into
printing bottlenecks for paper checks that had to be mailed to those without direct deposit.
Unemployment insurance benefits were made relatively generous, and the state unemployment
insurance web-sites could not handle the crush, so they crashed, leaving many without the
ability to access the program. Instead of simple wage replacement (which would have protected
health insurance and union membership) the Small Business Administration issued rules that
appeared unusable for many firms, banks gave preference to favored clients, and in the first
round also the money soon ran out. In short, the effort to save the economy by pouring money
into it through conventional channels was inadequate, ill-considered, inefficient, and in some
respects corrupt. The best that may be said is that it was much better than doing nothing at
all.
As events progress, the usual pattern of property sales and purchases cannot proceed. So
property values will collapse, leaving millions of homeowners without equity; as this happens,
mass foreclosures and property seizures are inevitable under the present legal rules. Predatory
private investors will buy distressed assets at firesale prices and the American population
will revert, largely to renter status. For those with means, private tutors and doctors will
remain available; the others will manage as they can. Needless to say, depression, despair,
drug abuse and suicide will prevail.
Or maybe they won't . In the wake of the Great Financial Crisis, it was possible
– barely possible, but possible – to shift the blame from the bankers to the
victims, from those who built a massively fraudulent financial system to those who took out the
loans that they could not repay. But there was no viral element, no public health trigger, to
that crisis. This one is different. Every development described above is a consequence, direct
or indirect, of the coronavirus. Those who were laid off, and who went home, and who broke the
transmission of the disease, did their part, just as health-care professionals and grocery
clerks did theirs. Their legal case for relief remains weak. But the moral case is strong and
the economic case is beyond dispute. Even the incumbent Treasury Secretary, Steven Mnuchin, a
foreclosure-predator of the first water after 2008, has stated that
the economic crisis "is no fault of American business, it is no fault of American workers, it
is the fault of a virus." This is true but it does not mean that things will return to the past
if the virus can be made to go away.
To move forward, first of all, debts incurred before and during the pandemic will
have to be written down. The energy sector and transport sectors will have to be rebuilt, based
far more on renewables and sources other than oil. A large share of basic industries –
especially in the health sector – will have to be repatriated so that basic sufficiency
exists in this country. Millions of people will be needed to monitor and support public health;
jobs for them must be organized and funded by the government. State and local governments will
have to be federally-funded, in substantial part, to provide basic public services. New and
sustainable housing must be built, in new community structures. High speed broadband must be
provided to all. A new financing model – cooperative, with public support – will be
required to re-establish small businesses. Local, decentralized cultural and sporting venues
will have to replace mass-based experiences; these too will require cooperative structures and
public support. In short, the only way out, remotely acceptable to the population at large,
will require a comprehensive restructuring of the economy on a cooperative foundation, with the
government stepping up to guaranteed funding, employment, and public investments.
Disaster capitalism is being tried, and the worst case is now the likely case. But there is
a scale beyond which disaster capitalism cannot go. At a certain point, the carnage becomes too
great to neglect, impossible to avoid and lethal to overlook. At a certain point, ordinary
people will stand up and refuse to be bullied any more. That point has not quite arrived; we
are still in the mind-set of "getting back to normal," even as the pandemic continues. The
contradiction between normality and public health is on people's minds; the impossibility of
returning to the previous abnormal-normal has not yet settled in. It will, in due course. At
that point, the question of alternatives will have to be faced.
>Patient #1 was a 35 year old male who presented at a Seattle (WA) clinic on Jan 15, 2020
A month later Fauci was still proclaiming in public that the evil virus was less of a
problem than the annual influenza. Someplace there is a video of Fauci saying this, right
around Feb 15.
I can not understand how even complete incompetents manage to make exactly the wrong
decision at every opportunity. In the UK there was a policy to send elderly patients, both
suspected and known to have the virus, to care homes, without even warning the care home
people. Supposedly it was to make room for corona patients who were even sicker than the ones
going into care homes. This is straight-up criminal negligence.
The governor -- who himself has described nursing homes as a "feeding frenzy'' for the
deadly coronavirus -- said that the facilities can't challenge a state regulation
forcing them to admit patients with the contagion .
The CEO of a hard-hit Brooklyn nursing home, where 55 patients have died from the
coronavirus, told The Post last week that he'd been warning state Health Department
officials for weeks he had staffing and equipment issues -- yet received little help.
"There is no way for us to prevent the spread under these conditions,'' the head of the
Cobble Hill Health Center, Donny Tuchman, wrote in an e-mail to the department on April
8.
He said he asked to move some patients to the makeshift wards at Manhattan's Javits
Center and aboard the city-docked USNS Comfort amid the pandemic, only to be told those two
spots were receiving only patients from hospitals.
"I made specific requests to transfer patients, and it didn't happen,'' Tuchman told The
Post. "There weren't options."
Deliberate policy decisions have killed and continue to kill people. That is perfectly
clear, even while the origins of the virus and the intent of decisions are hiding in the
muck. Will relatives of the dead just accept this as "an act of god", or will they come to
understand these events as "acts of dear leaders"?
For two months Dear Leaders have claimed that destroying the economy, house arrest, and no
care home visitors are for the express purpose of protecting ... care home residents. But
most of the dead were care home residents, along with plenty of their care workers.
Yes it sounds melodramatic but I keep seeing black-and-white images of people being herded
into shower rooms in order to get showered with Zyklon B. Please tell me why we are not
witnessing state-sanctioned murder.
"... Paul, who also has a medical degree, called for "a little bit of humility in our belief that we know what's best for our economy," questioning Fauci's support for a prolonged economic shutdown during a Senate hearing on the government's coronavirus response on Tuesday. ..."
"... With all due respect I don't think you're the end-all, I don't think you're the one person who gets to make a decision. ..."
"... "I hope that people who are predicting doom and gloom and saying oh we can't do this there's going to be a surge will admit they're wrong if there isn't a surge," the senator continued, calling for the Trump administration to listen to experts who disagreed with the "doom and gloom" predictions of Fauci and his ilk. ..."
"... Paul added that continuing the lockdown would widen the class divide, explaining that if children are kept out of school for months on end, then "the poor and underprivileged kids who don't have a parent that's able to teach them at home aren't going to be able to learn for a full year." He also said that the catastrophic narrative painting Covid-19 as a killer necessitating mass shutdowns had gotten started with "wrong prediction after wrong prediction," starting with the British scientist Neil Ferguson's apocalyptic forecasts – even as the British scientist had been meeting secretly with his mistress in violation of the lockdown he'd been championing. ..."
Republican Senator Rand Paul has challenged National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases director Dr Anthony Fauci on the nation's Covid-19 policy, suggesting the US is
waiting too long to reopen. Paul, who also has a medical degree, called for "a little bit of
humility in our belief that we know what's best for our economy," questioning Fauci's support
for a prolonged economic shutdown during a Senate hearing on the government's coronavirus
response on Tuesday.
Sen. Paul argues school decisions should be made district by district, tells Dr. Fauci: "I
don't think you're the end all."Fauci: "I'm a scientist... I think we better be careful if we
are not cavalier in thinking that children are completely immune to the deleterious effects."
pic.twitter.com/dIjXwkM5AU
With all due respect I don't think you're the end-all, I don't think you're the one
person who gets to make a decision.
"I hope that people who are predicting doom and gloom and saying oh we can't do this
there's going to be a surge will admit they're wrong if there isn't a surge," the senator
continued, calling for the Trump administration to listen to experts who disagreed with the
"doom and gloom" predictions of Fauci and his ilk.
" In rural states, we never really reached any sort of pandemic levels in Kentucky and
other states ," Paul pointed out, even as he acknowledged that " New England " had
been hit hard by the virus. " We have less deaths in Kentucky than we have in an average flu
season. "
" We don't know everything about this virus ," Fauci countered, challenging that
children in some parts of the country were turning up with " a very strange inflammatory
syndrome " similar to Kawasaki syndrome.
" You're right in the numbers that children do much much better .but I am very careful,
and hopefully humble, in knowing that I don't know everything about this disease, and that's
why I'm very reserved in making broad predictions ," Fauci continued.
Paul added that continuing the lockdown would widen the class divide, explaining that if
children are kept out of school for months on end, then "the poor and underprivileged kids who
don't have a parent that's able to teach them at home aren't going to be able to learn for a
full year." He also said that the catastrophic narrative painting Covid-19 as a killer
necessitating mass shutdowns had gotten started with "wrong prediction after wrong prediction,"
starting with the British scientist Neil Ferguson's apocalyptic forecasts – even as the
British scientist had been meeting secretly with his mistress in violation of the lockdown he'd
been championing.
Fauci's supporters took to social media to slam his opponent, noting that Paul had gone to
the Senate gym while infected with the coronavirus and perhaps infected others. They also cited
high numbers of Covid-19 cases in Paul's home county of Warren County, Kentucky.
Watching Republicans cheer on Rand Paul "taking on" Dr. Fauci almost perfectly
characterizes the anti-intellectual, anti-reason, anti-fact, and frankly degenerate state of
the Republican Party.
Warren County, Kentucky – where Rand Paul lives – has more COVID-19 cases per
capita than 51 of the 67 counties in New England states.Senator Paul is wrong and the
ignorant message he is peddling is dangerous. There is no special immunity to this virus
based on where you live. https://t.co/l9u5RBYR2J
Rand Paul absolutely destroys Dr. Fraudci. "I don't think you're the end all. I don't
think you're the one person who gets to make the decision." pic.twitter.com/nvljuGAy5u
Federal 'social distancing' guidelines were lifted at the end of April, but hotspots like
New York and California have extended their economic shutdowns as lesser-hit states have begun
to relax restrictions.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
"... X22 Report Fauci's Connections To Wuhan Ready To Be Exposed - Episode 2171c ..."
"... I don't remember Fauci ever apologizing his remarks concerning - you don't need to worry, you don't need masks - masks are bad, the virus can't be spread easily, his models predicting millions would die in the US. ..."
"The history of this when we look back will be wrong prediction after wrong prediction after wrong prediction... As much as I
respect you, Dr. Fauci, I don't think you're the end all, I don't think you're the one person that gets to make a decision,"
said Paul - who added that we need to "observe with an open eye what happened in Sweden, where the kids kept going to school."
"The mortality per capita in Sweden is actually less than France, less than Italy, less than Spain, less than Belgium,
less than the Netherlands, about the same as Switzerland. But basically I don't think there's anybody arguing that what
happened in Sweden is an unacceptable result. I think people are intrigued by it, and we should be."
"I don't think any of us are certain when we do all these modelings - there have been more people wrong with modeling
than right. We're opening up a lot of economies around the US, and I hope that people who are predicting doom and gloom
and saying 'oh, we can't do this, there's going to be a surge' - will admit when there isn't a surge."
Watch:
Sen. Rand Paul:
"The history of this when we look back will be wrong prediction after wrong prediction after wrong prediction... As much as I
respect you, Dr. Fauci, I don't think you're the end all, I don't think you're the one person that gets to make a decision."
pic.twitter.com/SP9T638y2B
Fauci responded, (25 seconds in below), saying "Sen. Paul, I have never made myself out to be the end-all & only voice of this.
I'm a scientist, a physician, and a public health official."
He then offered a 'but, the children!' argument - latching onto Paul's comment that we don't know everything
about the virus, and that "we really better be very careful, particularly when it comes to children."
"Because the more and more we learn - we're seeing things about what this virus can do that we didn't see from the studies in
China. Or in Europe. For example, right now children presenting with COVID-19 who actually have a very strange inflammatory symdrome,
very similar to Kawasaki syndrome. I think we better be careful that we are not cavalier in thinking that children are not immune
to the deleterious effects.
"I never made myself to be out the end all.
I’m a scientist, a physician, and a public health official.
I give advice according to the best scientific evidence. "
I have not promoted the
#FireFauci movement.
I've defended him.
But now...
Fauci responded to a factual-based inquiry by @RandPaul w/an egregious
allusion to some mystery Kawasaki-like disease & tripled-down on his aversion to a 2020-21 school session.
Why isn't anyone asking directly about the 'gain of function' studies that NIH was doing on the US prior to outsourcing the
experiments to Wuhan and illegally funding it via the NIH....why is there a need to lockdown 300m people for a relative small
number of deaths which in turn are focused on the elderly with prior illnesses...what is the relationship betwe3n the CDC and
the European CDC... does the European CDC pay European hospitals for every diagnosis and every ventilator use.... its all BS...hopefully
people are beginning to smell a rat and through these bums out....
Al Agent, 3 minutes ago
True. Fauci wasn't elected to make policy; in fact, he wasn't elected at all! He was employed to advise on what happens under
different scenarios. Trump's economic advisors weren't elected to make policy; in fact, they weren't elected at all! They are
employed to advise on what happens under different scenarios.
Congress and The President decide on policy. They were elected to do that.
Templar X, 16 minutes ago
There will never be a vaccine for COVID-19 which is safe, effective, and worthwhile.
The fastest a vaccine has ever been developed in the past was four years after the first appearance of a new infectious disease.
Four years from now people will either have herd immunity or they will be dead.
Within a year or two, the COVID-19 virus will likely mutate itself to death, or it will weaken and become no worse than a regular
flu virus.
COVID-19 is, apparently, less harmful to people under 65 years of age and those with no underlying health conditions, which,
of course, is also true of the common flu.
theWHTMANN, 32 minutes ago
How come no one asks Fauci straight to his face regarding all the deaths that will happen because of the lockdown (missed surgeries,
suicide, famine, et al.). What is this con man's response? He doesn't care? What if non-COVID deaths because of the lockdown are
3x or 4x the COVID deaths? What then? Does anyone ask this fool Fauci whether he will take responsibility for anything?
mrpc, 30 minutes ago
Like Fauci says himself, in the interview, he gives advice. He doesn't make the decisions.
sun tzu, 34 minutes ago (Edited)
Where's the carnage in Georgia, Florida, Texas, and South Carolina from reopening? I see no massive surge in the hospitals
or deaths. The only carnage I see is in the nursing homes in New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts all states run by Democrats
PerilouseTimes, 8 minutes ago
I made an appointment for a procedure this week and had to go in for covid pretesting today. It was my second test in three
months. I worked with and personally interacted with, people that tested positive for covid in mid March. I was unusually sick
in January and have talked to many others that was strange sick in January as well. After speaking with the health professionals
and the people I know in and around this, I am convinced that this is all a load of ****. I had covid in Jan, and so did many
of the others I worked with. The nurse I just talked to said to me that her and her family along with many people that she is
testing was convinced that they had it between Dec. and Feb. I'm in GA and it is long past time to get this show on the road.
Those experiments were going on in the United States until 2014. They were Dr. Anthony Fauci's projects. President Obama
ordered that to stop because they had a lot of lab escape problems in 2014 from three different labs
Instead of stopping as he was ordered, Fauci moved those operations to the Wuhan lab in China and continued to do those
experiments right up until the time that the coronavirus [pandemic occurred]. In fact, [infectious disease expert] Ian Lipkin
was doing those experiments over there when [COVID-19] exploded. And I'll tell you exactly what happened because it's very
suspicious."
---ZerooreZ---, 56 minutes ago
I am genuinely impressed with the American spirit, that everything covid related has happened at double the speed in the USA
compared to the UK - you were the last to get this thing and seem to be the first to open back up (well done!). I guess because
you guys have lived with guns your whole lives, you are braver than the average UK citizen who literally have been the most obedient
and most scared bunch I have experienced. People literally throw themselves off the pavements into the road to avoid someone walking
the other way, they would rather be
I don't remember Fauci ever apologizing his remarks concerning - you don't need to worry, you don't need masks - masks are
bad, the virus can't be spread easily, his models predicting millions would die in the US.
Newsweek reveals that as recently as last year, the US funded scientists at the Wuhan
Institute of Virology in 'gain of function' research on bat coronaviruses.
The source of that funding? The National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease,
headed by.....(drumroll please)....Dr Anthony Fauci, lead medical expert for America's Covid-19
task force.
President Donald Trump's legal counsel, Rudy Giuliani, in a recent chat on "The Cats
Roundtable" on New York AM 970 radio, suggested a good U.S. attorney general move about
now would be to investigate key members of the past Barack Obama administration on the
Wuhan, China, laboratory, to see what they knew and when they knew it.
And then he mentioned Dr. Anthony Fauci specifically.
And then he accused the prior Team Obama of sending $3.7 million to the lab in 2014
-- at a time when that same Team Obama had banned the funding of any lab that was
involved in virus experimentation.
And then he named Fauci as the guy who gave the money to the Wuhan Institute of
Virology.
Ouch. Politically speaking, the perception of one of this administration's loudest
voices on the coronavirus front -- the one calling for shutdowns and shut-ins and
contact tracing-slash-government-tracking of American citizens -- well, it doesn't look
good to have him tied financially to Wuhan.
Giuliani, as RedState noted, said this:
"Back in 2014, the Obama administration prohibited the U.S. from giving money to
any laboratory, including in the U.S., that was fooling around with these viruses.
Prohibited. Despite that, Dr. Fauci gave $3.7 million to the Wuhan laboratory.
And then even after the State Department issued reports about how unsafe that
laboratory was, and how suspicious they were in the way they were developing a virus
that could be transmitted to humans, we never pulled that money."
Giuliani said if he were attorney general, he'd open an investigation.
Something strange here: virions do not travel as single units. They travel "en mass" within
water droplets. They also prevent spread of aerosol from sick people. So the professor is barking
on a wrong tree.
Moreover single virion is so small that it will be affected by Brownian movement which make it impossible
for it to travel in a given direction at all -- it will he chaotic movement. So this physics
professor looks like very weak in physics
Interview with Professor Denis Rancourt
by Kim Petersen / May 8th, 2020
A health professional told me back in March that face
masks were ineffective but that respirators (the N95) were. Because of the source, I thought
there must be validity to this. However, it seemed counterintuitive. I reasoned that there
would be differentials between using any type of mask versus no mask because no mask usage
would allow aerosols to penetrate unabated, whereas a mask should capture much of the aerosol
and reduce risk of spread to others and presumably should also function to mitigate breathing
in viral-laden droplets. Because of the greater density of respirator material, the
prophylactic would be reasoned to be greater.
However, what I had not considered was how extremely small the virion was in relation to
the porosity of the material in the masks and respirators. I also had not looked at the
scientific literature on the subject until now.
Denis Rancourt, an eminent physics professor , former
anarchist, and author, examined the scientific evidence for using face masks and respirators
as preventative of contracting respiratory influenza-like disease, or respiratory illnesses
believed to be transmitted by minuscule droplets.
What I have noticed is that Rancourt is wedded to the evidence, and he is unafraid to make
known his conclusion even though it goes against the mainstream consensus. His article, "
Masks Don't Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy ," is Rancourt
at his iconoclastic finest. He concludes,
No RCT [randomized control trial] study with verified outcome shows a benefit for HCW
[health care workers] or community members in households to wearing a mask or respirator.
There is no such study. There are no exceptions.
The virions are super tiny, tinier than the pores in the respirators. Rancourt writes,
if anything gets through (and it always does, irrespective of the mask), then you are
going to be infected. Masks cannot possibly work. It is not surprising, therefore, that no
bias-free study has ever found a benefit from wearing a mask or respirator in this
application.
Rancourt's article is fascinating and anyone curious abut the efficacy of masks should
read it.
*****
Kim Petersen : Recently, American vice-president Mike Pence was criticized for walking
around the Mayo clinic accompanied by mask-wearing staff although he did not wear a mask. He
excused his refusal to don a mask based on the frequent testing he undergoes, so presumably
he would not be a danger to others. Given what the science reveals on mask wearing, how do
you view the reaction to Pence's refusal to wear a mask?
Denis Rancourt : In my article "
Masks Don't Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy ", I show that
there have been many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs, which
were designed to detect any benefit from wearing a mask, in terms of reducing the risk of
being infected by a viral respiratory disease.
In the many studies, in which the known bias of self-reporting is eliminated by using
laboratory-confirmed infection detection, no statistically meaningful advantage is ever
found, in either health-care or community settings, with either surgical masks or N95
respirators. No study, and there have been many, has been able to establish any advantage of
wearing a mask or respirator, with viral respiratory diseases.
This means that, even in controlled professional health-care settings, any benefit is too
small to be detected by science, and that other factors must be overwhelmingly more
important.
Regarding all viral respiratory diseases -- which are both known to be transmitted by
small aerosol particles (i.e., "droplets" of less than a few microns in diameter) and known
to be highly infectious in terms of the so-called minimum-infective-dose (i.e., the number of
virions that will likely be sufficient to cause illness or detectable infection) -- in plain
language, this means "masks don't work". (A "virion" is a single virus unit, the RNA and its
shell.)
Therefore, any societal debate about the virtue or responsibility of wearing a mask to
reduce the risk of infection, whether it involves Pence or anyone else, is occurring in a
science vacuum. It is a political and psychological debate, not one that is
science-based.
Likewise, no unbiased RCT has ever shown any advantage for a confirmed-infected person to
be less likely to transmit a viral-respiratory-disease infection to susceptible (i.e., not
immune) persons if the infected person wears a mask.
Studies that show that cough and sneeze droplets are physically intercepted by masks are
irrelevant in this regard, because they do not represent the reality of actual person to
person transmission, nor do they measure actual transmission.
In my article, which has been read more than 70 K times on Research Gate, I also review
what is known about the physics and biology of transmission of this class of diseases. I
argue that, on this basis, one should not expect masks to work. Likewise, if masks cannot
stop inward transmission (into the lung), then, by the same physics, they cannot stop outward
transmission.
However, it is important to distinguish a RCT that evaluates risk of actual
person-to-person transmission of confirmed infection, as one class of study, and the
necessarily simplistic arguments based on hypothetical scenarios using physics and biology.
And the "masks intercept droplets" studies are useless in the relevant context. Masks
intended to stop a surgeon's spit from impacting an incision area are a completely different
question.
Coming back to Pence, a face mask is a powerful psychological symbol of submission (to
both the invisible disease and any State policy directives), such that it is understandable
that many political leaders would not want to wear masks in front of media cameras.
KP : You write that there has been no randomized controlled trial that shows a benefit for
anyone (doctors, nurses, regular folks, et al.) wearing a mask or respirator. The reason
proffered is because the mask/respirator material is too porous for virion particles. The N95
respirator blocks at least 95 percent of very small (0.3 μm) test particles, but the
virion particles (from 0.06 μm to 0.14 μm) (See Na Zhu et al., " A Novel Coronavirus from Patients
with Pneumonia in China ," 20 February 2020, NEJM, 382:727-733.) can pass through.
I am trying to visualize this on a larger scale. If I kick a soccer ball at a chain-link
fence, all soccer balls will be blocked. But if I throw a handful of sand at the chain-link
fence, almost all grains of sand will pass through. Is this an apt analogy for the mask and
the virion?
DR : The many RCTs show no statistically valid benefit from wearing a mask or N95
respirator, and show no differences in RCT comparisons between surgical masks and N95
respirators, regarding risk of infection from this class of diseases. That is a separate
question from any hypothetical mechanistic explanation as to why any benefit from wearing a
mask would be so small as to be undetected. In other words, that masks don't work must be
discerned from the question of why masks don't work. The former is a scientific outcome of
the studies, irrespective of what we believe or infer about the latter.
Nonetheless, regarding a discussion of the hypothetical mechanisms, one can say the
following things:
There can be little doubt that the overwhelmingly dominant path of infection is via
small aerosol particles of less than approximately 2 microns in diameter.
Such a particle can contain many and up to hundreds of virions.
One virion is approximately 0.1 microns in size.
Such small aerosol particles stay suspended in air in-effect indefinitely, as part of
the fluid air; as would virions themselves, subject to chemical adsorption and
aggregation.
Regarding the masks and respirators, pore-size of the filtering material is not the
relevant bottleneck in practice.
The seal to the face is never perfect, and the mask is regularly moved by pressure
differences, by the user for reasons of discomfort, and by normal facial and operational
movements.
Inhaled and exhaled air will flow mostly through the paths of least resistance (or
fluid impedance): through the breaks in the seal, through the sides of a mask, and though
the larger pores or stretches or micro-tears in the filtering material.
The minimum-infective-dose is expected to be less that a single small aerosol particle,
and can be as little as a single undamaged virion.
Thus, it is not difficult to conclude that mask and respirators should not work, even
leaving out the complex particle-mask-material interactions that can occur, mask aging and
wear considerations, and so on.
KP : You cite possible harm from dictates requiring the wearing of masks. Could you
elaborate?
DR : My answer is in two parts. First, there is potential medical harm to the individual
from the wearing of a mask. Second, there is societal and psychological harm from being
forced to wear a mask in public.
In one large RCT in Japanese health centers, health-care workers who wore respirators
suffered significantly more headaches than the cohort of workers who did not wear
respirators. This was a statistically significant outcome. Furthermore, professional
health-care workers self-report significant discomfort from wearing respirators, and
therefore often adjust them or remove them, contrary to protocol. If healthcare workers, in
circumstances in which there is no scientific basis for wearing respirators, suffer headaches
and discomfort, then this can only negatively impact the intended health care.
More broadly, the potential health hazards of population-scale extended personal mask use
have not been studied. Potential health hazards include such factors as:
constriction of breathing itself, including both flow restriction, and recycling of CO2
and vapour-laden breath
breathing-in the particles, fibres and chemicals from the mask-material itself, both in
a new mask and for aging, used, washed, and sun-bleached masks
retention of particulates and adsorbed substances in proximity to the face, which would
normally be expelled in the exhaled breath
collection, concentration and retention of particulates and adsorbed substances from
the environment onto the mask, in proximity to the face
reactions of particulates and adsorbed substances on the mask, including shedding of
virions or virion-carrying nano-particles from larger mask-captured droplets
and so on
Such factors have not been studied, yet population-scale policies of extended mask-wearing
are being implemented.
From a societal perspective, what are the consequences of government coercion ("education"
and enforcement) to wear masks in public, given that there is no scientific basis for any
benefit from mask wearing, in terms of reducing the risk of being infected by a viral
respiratory disease?
How is this not an arbitrary application of power, which directly infringes or denies
personal freedom? What are the long-term consequences of habituation to arbitrarily applied
violations of personal freedom?
The recent scientific study of Hickey and Davidsen (2019) (" Self-organization
and time-stability of social hierarchies ") in my view provides a theoretical foundation
that such habituation to arbitrarily applied power is part of a progressive degradation
towards an extreme totalitarian state, depending on the degree of authoritarianism (whether
contestation is effective) and the degree of violence (magnitude of the penalty for
disobeying).
We should rollback arbitrary State powers. I would say: If an individual evaluates or
believes that a mask constitutes health or privacy or religious protection in public, then
the individual should be free to wear a mask, but how can forcing all individuals to wear
masks be justified, beyond government pronouncements? Security cannot be based on arbitrarily
forced behaviour of everyone. This is the classic recipe for totalitarian rule.
In fact, the present case of pandemic mask laws or policies is a case where a health
pretext and stoked fear are being exploited by governments, in a globalized corporate
environment in which there are billions to be made from vaccines and other treatments, and
where legal liabilities for the treatments have largely been socialized. Regular vaccination,
for diseases that have always been kept in check by the human immune system, are a hard
method of creating dependence on the State, involving seasonal violations of bodily
integrity, which could become forced.
KP : You point a finger at governments, monopoly media, and institutional propagandists
for deciding "to operate in a science vacuum, or select only incomplete science that serves
their interests." Which institutional propagandists do you refer to?
DR : The main institutional propagandists here are the arms and legs of the pharma-medical
complex, from the WHO and CDC, through the medical schools, to every hospital, research
laboratory, clinic, community health center, and doctor's office. The medical establishment
is a major network of the high-priests that structure and control modern society. In their
book, "health" is a dependence on the health system, not healthy living conditions, contrary
to all the science regarding the determinants of public health. I mean, Pharma and medical
errors are the third leading cause of death in the Western world, after heart disease and
cancer, and that is not a "pandemic"? It is not even on the radar, except in specialized
conferences and journals.
As another example of institutional and professional alignment with top-down directives
and recommendations, John Ioannidis showed in 2005 (" Why Most
Published Research Findings Are False ") that most of the scientific research that finds
marginal benefits for expensive and dangerous treatments is incorrect.
In the case of the on-going COVID-19 saga, several top researchers and experts have broken
rank, and these professionals have been profiled in a series of three articles in
Off-Guardian , for example. Generally, these contrarians who insist on practicing
science, have been avoided by the mainstream media, and have had to be featured in the
alternative media, and on YouTube. John Ioannidis and Knut Wittkowski are just two of the
names that stand out for me.
KP : Given that the conclusion of your review of meta-analyses is accurate, why would so
many health care professionals, who presumably have been trained in evidence-based practice,
disregard the absence of evidence for the efficacy of masks and respirators?
DR : It is a myth that medicine is an evidence-based practice. This myth is propagated by
the medical establishment. It has never been the case in the history of medicine, and it is
not the case today. In practice, medicine is whatever the profession can get away with and
profit from.
From a political perspective, the public-relations statement about being "science-based"
is a propagandist mantra applied in training those initiated into the profession. It is
designed to deliver legitimacy in the public's mind and among other professions, and means
that the profession will attack, destroy or capture competitors that are not in the
profession, such as homeopaths, nutritionists, acupuncturists, chiropractors, psychologists,
councillors, life coaches, etc.
There is a large litigation record of this reality. If you litigate against or attempt to
discipline an MD or a medical specialist for a practice that is not science based, then you
find that the in-court or administrative-tribunal argument will never be about the science
itself or whether a scientific basis exists. None of the actual medical researchers will be
called as expert witnesses, and they would be seen as irrelevant and thus inadmissible.
Instead, a complete defence will be based on whether or not the hired expert witnesses for
the defendant will be of the opinion that the impugned practice is within the spectrum of
actual practice in the field, irrespective of whether there is a scientific basis. In order
to win, you will need to prove that the impugned act or practice is egregiously contrary to
what is generally done or officially recommended by a certifying body; again, irrespective of
any scientific-basis consideration. "Scientific basis" is given lip service, nothing
more.
For example, when a drug or procedure is convincingly and unavoidably proven to be
unacceptably harmful after being put into practice, and this harm is reported in the
mainstream media, and there is organized public outcry, then the practice is changed but no
practitioners are ever found to have been at fault. This means that the practitioners are not
responsible to evaluate and establish a scientific basis for their prescriptions and
treatments. They are only bound to do what one does in the profession. If mechanical
ventilators are the treatment for critical COVID-19 patients, then we kill those patients
with those mechanical ventilators until the proverbial shit hits the fan ("
New study finds nearly all coronavirus patients put on ventilators died ," The
Hill , 23 April 2020).
The history, to this day, of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is exhibit-one regarding the extent to which
medical practice is distinct from any scientific basis. The said Manual is the
pseudo-scientific organizational pretext for a large pharmaceutical project of managing the
mind, which relies on heavy-handed "precautionary" prescriptions, made by any army of medical
practitioners. For example, see Gary Greenberg (2013) ( The Book of WOE: The DSM and the
Unmaking of Psychiatry ).
I could go on for days. Coming back to the masks, medical commentators, like politicians,
will say whatever seems advantageous at the time, in terms of propping up their own
legitimacy and popularity, and in terms of avoiding public-perception liability. If it is
politically risky to recommend masks, then masks are out, and there is no evidence that they
work. If it becomes risky to go against masks, then masks are in, and we must all do our part
to protect those who are most vulnerable, etc.
KP : Since there is evidence that viruses flourish during dry periods, might the use of a
humidifier be a recommended preventative measure during seasons when humidity is low?
DR : There is conclusive evidence that viral respiratory diseases and flu-like diseases
predominantly propagate via small aerosol particles, which are stabilized in dry air, and
that this is why these diseases are seasonal in mid-latitude regions. The reproduction
number, R 0 , can vary four-fold during a season, in accordance with absolute
humidity of the atmosphere. This oft-confirmed discovery was initiated with the landmark work
of Shaman et al . (2010) .
Closed buildings such as hospitals, residences for the elderly, and day-care centers are
proven to have large densities of virion-laden aerosol particles suspended in the air, in the
dry season. In addition, air-flow has been shown to play a role regarding transmission, in
restaurants and airplanes.
Therefore, it is not unreasonable to examine the use of controlled absolute humidity, and
air-flow management in critical facilities housing many persons at risk of severe
complications if infected. A high humidity would in-principle draw-out virtually all the
aerosol particles, by condensation, particle growth, and gravitational removal. In principle,
what was an environment of high-density of aerosol particles, would become an environment of
low-density of aerosol particles. Only a true RCT comparative study, with
laboratory-confirmed infection determinations, could demonstrate whether such measures can be
effective.
Literally every human concern - every social, psychological, spiritual concern; every
political, constitutional, rule-of-law concern; every concern of human and civil rights,
civil liberties, human freedom; every concern of children's healthy development; and
literally every health concern except for this flu - have been eradicated from the
propaganda and evidently from the minds of the police-statists.
Their minds have been scoured clean of literally every thought except for a threadbare
fanatical obsession with quantity of life (an obsession they pursue in defiance of all the
evidence; their lockdowns don't work even according to their own terms, let alone according
to the terms of ecology, biodiversity, sound epidemiology; even their arch-ideologue and high
priest Neil Ferguson was caught admitting that he regards his entire agenda as nothing but a
Big Lie), and a grossly reductive notion of "opening the economy", which they deploy in order
to slander the rapidly increasing number of people who are questioning, criticizing, and
rejecting the lockdowns for a vast diversity of reasons I only briefly surveyed above.
The fact that the police-statists are utterly unwilling to meet any of these concerns
except for the economic, and are willing to meet that one only in the most reductive,
fraudulent, slanderous way which expresses total contempt for the vast numbers of people
being economically destroyed beyond any hope of recovery (which is a major purpose and goal
of the terror campaign and lockdowns), says it all about the total bankruptcy of their
position. As in every other case, police-state authoritarianism has nothing but brute thug
force, including in its ideas.
2001 His predictions on the Foot & Mouth Epidemic led to the needless 'voluntary'
slaughter of 12 million animals. This in turn led to countless bankruptcies and suicides
amongst small farmers. It also helped accelarate the concentration of farming into the hands
of Big Farmer.
2002 He predicted 'up to' 50,000 would die from aka variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease aka
'Margaret Thatcher disease'. The total from 1990 to 2017 was actually 178.
2005 He predicted 'up to' 200 million people worldwide would be killed by H5N1 aka 'bird
flu'. By 2006, WHO had reported 78 definite fatalities out of 147 eported cases.
2009 He predicted 'up to' 65,000 deaths in the UK from H1N1 aka 'swine flu'. In reality,
457 died from it in the UK.
2020 He predicted 'up to' 500,000 deaths in the UK (and 2.2 million in the US) from
Covid-19, used by the UK government to justify the lockdown. UK to date ~31,000 (probably
~85% exhibiting multiple comorbidities and dying 'with' Covid-19 rather than 'from' it).
Still it is early days, and ignoring the new death rate has been decreasing since ~ April 15,
give it another 4 years and we will be there!
So his score is 0 out of 5. Truly impressive.
The underlying question remains, why did the UK government take his advice when he has
been proven grossly wrong time after time?
It looks like Fauci is a political hack. But that not all. He also helped to deepen the
current recession.
Notable quotes:
"... Perhaps one way to help see through the professional obfuscation, and identify just exactly how political Dr. Fauci is, would be to: compare and contrast Dr. Fauci under President Obama in September 2009 after 3,000 to 4,000 H1N1 deaths in the USA -vs- Dr. Fauci under President Trump in March 2020 after 200 to 300 COVID-19 deaths. ..."
Perhaps one way to help see through the professional obfuscation, and identify just
exactly how political Dr. Fauci is, would be to: compare and contrast Dr. Fauci under President
Obama in September 2009 after 3,000 to 4,000 H1N1 deaths in the USA -vs- Dr. Fauci under
President Trump in March 2020 after 200 to 300 COVID-19 deaths. WATCH:
Now, to better absorb the information . According to the CDC final estimate of 2009 U.S. H1N1
cases ( published
in 2011 ): from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010 approximately 60.8 million U.S. cases,
274,304 U.S. hospitalizations, and 12,469 U.S. deaths occurred due to H1N1. That's the
empirical data.
The concept of "flattening" the virus curve; the presumptive reason for social distancing
and shutting down the U.S. economy; is based on a theory to extend the spread of COVID-19 to a
lesser incident rate over a longer duration, thereby lessening the burden on the U.S.
healthcare system. Hence, 'flatten' the spike in infections.
Put another way: "Flattening" means the same number of people eventually contract the virus,
only they do so over a longer period of time, and the healthcare system can treat everyone
because the numbers do not rise to level where the system is overloaded. In theory that seems
to make sense.
However, no-one is asking: what is the current stress level on the healthcare system right
now? Where are we in that capacity? and what is normal capacity level during a high-level flu
outbreak? and Where are we when compared against that baseline?
♦ Remember in 2009
there were over 61 million cases of H1N1, more than 274,000 hospitalizations and 12,469
additional deaths specifically attributed to that strain of flu virus in the U.S. [ DATA HERE ]
The premise to extend the virus duration in an effort to lower the infection rate and spread
the virus over a longer period of time needs to measured against: (a) where the healthcare
system is at any given moment; and (b) under traditional high-flu seasons where are we during
those historic events.
♦ STRESS LEVEL – The healthcare 'system' per se, is expending an awful lot of
time on mitigation efforts. As Dr. Birx noted: the current negative test rate for coronavirus
among those showing symptoms who are tested is 94 to 98 percent. That means of all the people
taking coronavirus tests, 94/98 out of 100 are symptomatic (they are sick) but they are not
infected with coronavirus. They are normal flu cases.
Our healthcare "system" is expending an incredible amount of resources on a mitigation
effort. According to Dr. Birx and the current U.S. test results, 94 to 98 percent of those
mitigation efforts are not engaging with coronavirus. They are dealing with regular flu
(perhaps a strong flu).
If you extract the mitigation effort from the overall effort, the current stress level on
the healthcare system doesn't seem to be overwhelming. What is stressing the system is a
coronavirus mitigation effort with a rate of 94 to 98 percent testing negative.
♦ Dr. Fauci's theory is self-fulfilling .
If the viral spread never exceeds the capacity of the healthcare system to deal with it, he
can claim success. Look, our flattened curve worked.
However, when contrast against flu outbreaks, no-one knows what the COVID-19 capacity
threshold is within the healthcare system. There's no way to disprove Fauci's theory.
Given the nature of the baseline for overall U.S. sanitation and hygiene, which is
significantly higher than Italy, S-Korea and China; and given the higher standards of food
safety (U.S. is the world leader); again significantly higher than Italy, S-Korea and China;
and given the nature of the U.S. healthcare system (more capacity per person); is it really a
fair comparison to overlay a COVID-19 outbreak, without also overlaying a traditional flu
outbreak?
Any theory that cannot be scientifically tested; and is simultaneously self-fulfilling; is,
by its nature, a false theory.
This is not to say that Dr. Anthony Fauci is intentionally misleading anyone; however, it is
absolutely true that no-one will be able to quantify if trillions of dollars of economic wealth
lost; and trillions more in economic activity lost; and trillions more in deficit spending; and
that might all be done just to follow the fantastical whims of a doctor who is directing the
mitigation of an ordinary flu-virus/season, and appears to be quite full of his own sense of
self-importance.
Does Dr Fauci enjoy indirect financial ties to Gilead? Does he own the stock?
Notable quotes:
"... Basically, this was a negative trial. Of the 255 patients screened, 237 met the eligibility criteria, and 158 were assigned to the remdesivir group, with 79 assigned to placebo control. Unfortunately, remdesivir treatment was not associated with a shorter time to clinical improvement, and mortality was not different between the two groups. ..."
"... It does look very fishy to me. Endpoint or outcome switching, particularly late in a clinical trial is a huge red flag. ..."
"... There are also other reasons to question this trial, including how no confidence intervals were reported, that not even an abstract was published, just a press release with, as Heathers put it, "two results in four lines": ..."
"... I remain very suspicious that the NIH study was announced the same day that a negative study out of China of remdesivir was published. It just seems too convenient. Maybe I'm being overly suspicious. Maybe I'm too suspicious. Maybe I'm falling prey to conspiracy mongering. However, in the Trump era, when the Trump administration has politicized previously (mostly) apolitical government agencies as never before, it's hard not to wonder. ..."
"... He was unimpressed by remdesivir's modest benefit. "It was expected to be a whopping effect," Topol added. "It clearly does not have that." ..."
"... Indeed, given that the pre-test probability of remdesivir having a significant effect was low, meaning that this trial is probably just noise: ..."
"... But Gilead will make billions and billions of dollars ..."
"... Could Anthony Fauci explain why the investigators of the NIAID remdesivir trial did change the primary outcome during the course of the project (16th April)? Removing "death" from primary outcome is a surprising decision. ..."
"... The most common adverse effects in studies of remdesivir for COVID-19 include respiratory failure and blood biomarkers of organ impairment, including low albumin, low potassium, low count of red blood cells, low count of platelets that help with clotting, and yellow discoloration of the skin. Other reported side effects include gastrointestinal distress, elevated transaminase levels in the blood (liver enzymes), and infusion site reactions. ..."
"... So, if it does shorten duration, is it worth potential liver damage, respiratory failure and organ impairment? In other words is the cure potentially as bad as the disease. ..."
"... For yet another drug that was supposed to be a game changer, I am unimpressed by its results. The whole mechanism is wrong. A drug with this mechanism would need to be almost a prophylactic for it to be hugely effective. ..."
"... Fauci didn't seem to have any problem cautioning against unwarranted optimism for CQ/HCQ even while DJT was championing the stuff. What is different about this? . ..."
"... So, what did Fauci say about chloroquine? ""We've got to be careful that we don't make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug. We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitely prove whether any intervention is truly safe and effective," Fauci, who is also a member of the White House coronavirus task force, said during an interview on "Fox & Friends. . . "We don't operate on how you feel, we operate on what evidence and data is," Fauci said, adding that it was "not a very robust study" or "overwhelmingly strong."" (Concha, 2020 Apr 3) ..."
"... Now, what did he say about Remdesivir: "Speaking to reporters from the White House, Fauci said he was told data from the trial showed a "clear-cut positive effect in diminishing time to recover." Fauci said the median time of recovery for patients taking the drug was 11 days, compared with 15 days in the placebo group. He said the mortality benefit of remdesivir "has not yet reached statistical significance." ..."
"... Disappointingly, the lock down seems to have made a number of people irrational. Just a quick post to expound on my Fauci post for those who see the world as binary – ie: black or white. These people think you either support Fauci 100% or 0% and a single criticism of any Fauci statement means 0% support of Fauci. I do not happen to worship at the altar of Fauci or any scientist and recognize all are subject to errors – including myself. I view the world in a more nuanced manner than those with the black/white delusion. I find I can disagree with some things a person says or stands for and agree with some other things they say or do. ..."
"... I am of the opinion that Fauci made a mistake here. The evidence for Remdesiver is nowhere near good enough for it to become the standard of care. ..."
"... On the other hand, watching the White House performance from afar, I can see the administration is dysfunctional and is run by a narcissistic bully, who will publicly turn on anyone who disagrees with them. ..."
"... I believe that is the main thrust of this Orac article – that the evidence for Remdesiver efficacy is sorely lacking. ..."
Remdesivir: Gilead wins with unimpressive results announced by press release On Wednesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci announced positive
results for the antiviral drug remdesivir treating COVID-19. They were unimpressive and, suspiciously, announced by press release
rather than scientific paper. It's all very fishy, but one thing's for sure. Gilead Sciences will make boatloads of money.
I've been writing a lot about the unjustified and
premature hype
over hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug with mild immunosuppressive activity that is also used to treat rheumatoid arthritis
and other autoimmune diseases and how the drug probably doesn't work against COVID-19, despite its being
hyped by President
Trump and his sycophants, toadies, and lackeys on Fox News,
Dr. Mehmet Oz ,
Dr. Phil , Dr. Didier Raoult
, and a
bevy of irresponsible fame seeking doctors who have no idea how to do a proper clinical study.
There are, however, other drugs
being hyped out there, drugs that might actually have a better chance of turning out to be effective treatments for COVID-19. Chief
among these is remdesivir, the experimental antiviral drug being tested by Gilead Sciences.
Remdesivir is an adenosine (a nucleotide) analog that inhibits
viral RNA polymerases. It is incorporated into RNA made by the virus, causing the premature termination of the RNA molecule, thus
interfering with viral replication. The drug was originally developed to treat Ebola and Marburg but was ultimately found to be
ineffective against these viruses . Because it inhibits the replication
of a number of RNA viruses, it was only natural that it would be considered as a possible treatment for COVID-19, and Gilead has
been relentlessly promoting it as such as the company has been working to carry out clinical trials.
White House health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci said Wednesday that data from a coronavirus drug trial testing Gilead Sciences'
antiviral drug remdesivir showed "quite good news" and sets a new standard of care for Covid-19 patients.
Speaking to reporters from the White House, Fauci said he was told data from the trial showed a "clear-cut positive effect
in diminishing time to recover."
Fauci said the median time of recovery for patients taking the drug was 11 days, compared with 15 days in the placebo group.
He said the mortality benefit of remdesivir "has not yet reached statistical significance."
The results suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the
placebo group, according to a statement from the National Institutes of Health released later Wednesday.
"This will be the standard of care," Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, added. "When
you know a drug works, you have to let people in the placebo group know so they can take it."
My skeptical antennae started twitching immediately, because on the same day a study from China was published in
The Lancet that
was far less impressive. In fact, it was a negative trial. What also got my skeptical antennae all aflutter twitching away was how
the results of the remdesivir trial were announced. Normally, when a study is announced to the press, it's upon publication of the
paper, and the press release is issued either the same day or the evening before publication. As of last night, as I wrote this,
however, the actual paper reporting the results of the clinical trial had not yet been published. As I perused Twitter on Wednesday,
I found even more reasons for skepticism.
So, before I get to the study touted by Dr. Fauci, let's review some history.
Remdesivir: The early days versus COVID-19 (like, you know, three weeks ago)
The first data published on remdesivir was a single-arm uncontrolled trial that somehow got published three weeks ago in
The New England Journal of Medicine . This was
peak COVID-19 publishing, when an uncontrolled case series of patients with severe COVID-19 treated with remdesivir under compassionate
was published in a super high impact journal like NEJM and made headlines as a result. Be that as it may, the case series examined
61 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who had an oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing room air or
who were receiving oxygen support. They received a 10-day course of remdesivir, consisting of 200 mg given intravenously on day 1,
followed by 100 mg daily for the remaining 9 days of treatment. (Remdesivir is an intravenous drug.) The authors reported clinical
improvement in 68% of evaluable patients:
Of the 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesivir, data from 8 could not be analyzed (including 7 patients with
no post-treatment data and 1 with a dosing error). Of the 53 patients whose data were analyzed, 22 were in the United States,
22 in Europe or Canada, and 9 in Japan. At baseline, 30 patients (57%) were receiving mechanical ventilation and 4 (8%) were receiving
extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. During a median follow-up of 18 days, 36 patients (68%) had an improvement in oxygen-support
class, including 17 of 30 patients (57%) receiving mechanical ventilation who were extubated. A total of 25 patients (47%) were
discharged, and 7 patients (13%) died; mortality was 18% (6 of 34) among patients receiving invasive ventilation and 5% (1 of
19) among those not receiving invasive ventilation.
The case series also did not collect viral load data to confirm potential antiviral activity in humans or any association between
declines in viral load and clinical improvement. Basically, when you get right down to it, this study was not really much better
than Didier Raoult's crappy
study of his hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin combination, but that didn't stop the authors from concluding that comparisons with
contemporaneous cohorts "suggest that remdesivir may have clinical benefit in patients with severe Covid-19." In reality, like Raoult's
trials, this trial said nothing about the efficacy of remdesivir against COVID-19 other than that the drug could be given to COVID-19
patients with a reasonable safety profile.
Less than week later, as
related by Derek Lowe , came news that two clinical trials of remdesivir in China, one for
severe disease and one
for moderate disease
had been suspended. (They still are.) Lowe noted that both trials had the notice: "The epidemic of COVID-19 has been controlled well
at present, no eligible patients can be recruited." The apparent explanation was "the stringent inclusion criteria for the trials
– apparently patients had to have no previous therapy with any other experimental agent to enroll, and that eliminates a lot
of people." Around the same time, Adam Feuerstein and Matthew Herper published a story in STAT,
Early peek at data on Gilead coronavirus drug suggests patients are responding to treatment :
The University of Chicago Medicine recruited 125 people with Covid-19 into Gilead's two Phase 3 clinical trials. Of those people,
113 had severe disease. All the patients have been treated with daily infusions of remdesivir.
"The best news is that most of our patients have already been discharged, which is great. We've only had two patients perish,"
said Kathleen Mullane, the University of Chicago infectious disease specialist overseeing the remdesivir studies for the hospital.
Her comments were made this week during a video discussion about the trial results with other University of Chicago faculty
members. The discussion was recorded and STAT obtained a copy of the video.
Derek Lowe
discussed this story in depth, and I largely agree with him that the leak of the video to STAT was a serious breach of clinical
trial ethics and protocol. (I'm not alone in suspecting that it was almost certainly intentional to jack up Gilead's stock price,
a result that was achieved.) Lowe also noted:
But now that it's out there, let's talk about what's in the leak. Gilead stock jumped like a spawning salmon in after-market
trading on this, and one of the reasons was that that 113 of the 125 patients were classed as having "severe disease". People
ran with the idea that these must have been people on ventilators who were walking out of the hospital, but that is not the case.
As AndyBiotech pointed out on Twitter,
all you had to do was read the trial's exclusion criteria
: patients were not even admitted into the trial if they were on mechanical ventilation. Some will have moved on to ventilation
during the trial, but we don't know how many (the trial protocol has these in a separate group).
Note also that this trial is open-label; both doctors and patients know who is getting what, and note the really key point:
there is no control arm. This is one of the trials mentioned in this post on small-molecule therapies as being the most likely
to read out first, but it's always been clear that the tradeoff for that speed is rigor. The observational paper that was published
on remdesivir in the NEJM had no controls either, of course, and that made it hard to interpret. Scratch that, it made it impossible
to interpret. It will likely be the same with this trial – the comparison is between a five-day course of remdesivir and a ten-day
course, and the primary endpoint is the odds ratio for improvement between the two groups.
Again, these data, such as they are, are no more useful than Didier Raoult's data on hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to treat
COVID-19, but this brings us to the Chinese trial published in
The Lancet on Wednesday.
The Chinese randomized clinical trial
The Chinese trial
published two days ago is the first randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of remdesivir to treat COVID-19,
but it was also one of the studies halted. Eligible patients were adults admitted to the hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2
whose symptoms had lasted less than 12 days before enrollment and who had an oxygen saturation on room air of 94% or less or a ratio
of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less (another measure of hypoxia), and radiologically
confirmed pneumonia.
Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir at the same dose as the NIH trial touted
by Dr. Fauci or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days and were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir–ritonavir, interferons,
and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined at the time from randomization to
the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged
alive from hospital, whichever came first. An intention-to-treat analysis was carried out.
Basically, this was a negative trial. Of the 255 patients screened, 237 met the eligibility criteria, and 158 were assigned to
the remdesivir group, with 79 assigned to placebo control. Unfortunately, remdesivir treatment was not associated with a shorter
time to clinical improvement, and mortality was not different between the two groups. Subgroup analysis looking for hypotheses found
that there was a trend towards a shorter duration of symptoms (not statistically significant) in patients treated with remdesivir
who had had symptoms for less than ten days. Most disappointingly, there was no detectable difference in viral load between the remdesivir
groups and the placebo controls. Again, basically this was a negative study with only the barest hint that remdesivir might -- I
repeat, might -- work if administered earlier in the course of COVID-19. That's some pretty thin gruel.
Which brings us to the NIH trial of remdesivir touted by Anthony Fauci.
The NIH press release for its remdesivir trial.
The results of the NIH remdesivir trial can, unfortunately, only be gleaned from the press release and
news stories so far:
For the first time, a major study suggests that an experimental drug works against the new coronavirus, and U.S. government
officials said Wednesday that they would work to make it available to appropriate patients as quickly as possible.
In a study of 1,063 patients sick enough to be hospitalized, Gilead Sciences's remdesivir shortened the time to recovery by
31% -- 11 days on average versus 15 days for those just given usual care, officials said. The drug also might be reducing deaths,
although that's not certain from the partial results revealed so far.
"What it has proven is that a drug can block this virus," the National Institutes of Health's Dr. Anthony Fauci said.
"This will be the standard of care," and any other potential treatments will now have to be tested against or in combination
with remdesivir, he said.
Here is the
press release , posted to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases website:
Hospitalized patients with advanced COVID-19 and lung involvement who received remdesivir recovered faster than similar patients
who received placebo, according to a preliminary data analysis from a randomized, controlled trial involving 1063 patients, which
began on February 21. The trial (known as the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial, or ACTT), sponsored by the National Institute
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, is the first clinical trial launched in
the United States to evaluate an experimental treatment for COVID-19.
An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their
interim analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo
from the perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials. Recovery in this study
was defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level.
Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received
placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15
days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving
remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059).
More detailed information about the trial results, including more comprehensive data, will be available in a forthcoming report.
As part of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's commitment to expediting the development and availability of potential COVID-19
treatments, the agency has been engaged in sustained and ongoing discussions with Gilead Sciences regarding making remdesivir
available to patients as quickly as possible, as appropriate. The trial closed to new enrollments on April 19. NIAID will also
provide an update on the plans for the ACTT trial moving forward. This trial was an adaptive trial designed to incorporate additional
investigative treatments.
As you can see, the difference in mortality was not statistically significantly different, although that could just be because
of inadequate numbers. It's also very important to note the part about the adaptive trial design of this trial, which puts Dr. Fauci's
comment about how remdesivir will become the "standard of care" going forward into the proper context. In this
particular trial , multiple different drugs can be
compared to placebo or standard of care. The idea is that, if a signal of efficacy is found with one drug, that drug becomes "standard
of care" and the trial is adapted to study how adding other experimental drugs compares to the "standard of care." So what Dr. Fauci
meant was that, based on the finding, going forward remdesivir will become the "standard of care" arm for the trial and the experimental
arm will become remdesivir plus another experimental therapeutic. However, given that the FDA is on the
verge
of issuing an emergency use authorization for remdesivir to treat COVID-19, it looks as though remdesivir will become standard-of-care
in general soon.
But back to the results. Derek Lowe observed:
it's worth noting that had there been "clear and substantial evidence of a treatment difference" during the trial that the
DSMB was to have halted the study at that point. We can infer that nothing rose to that level, then: we have a difference, but
not substantial enough to have ended the trial prematurely.
It's also worth noting some things posted on Twitter about the trial. For instance, Waller Gellad noted:
It's very odd that the primary endpoint was changed:
Thread that summarizes my concerns with Remdesivir press release (not science) as well.
Changing the endpoint midtrial this way is like hosting a race for one destination then declaring wherever you end up after
running for an hour is the finish line. https://t.co/XMUXYW3njp
I'll summarize, so that you don't have to scroll through a Twitter thread if you don't want to. As James Heathers and Waller Gellad
noted, the original primary outcome of the trial when it was registered on March 20. The original primary endpoint of the trial was
an 8-point severity scale (death, on ventilator, hospitalized with oxygen, all the way down to discharged with no limits on activity)
but was changed to time to recovery. There's still a similar scale for the secondary endpoints, but no numbers for that were reported.
(Any bets on whether the results are negative?) This change was apparently made on or around April 16.
Gellad also notes:
last thing:
Here is the results table for the negative lancet trial of remdesivir. The highlighted results are what the primary outcome for
the NIH trial was until 2 weeks ago. https://t.co/niQ65zgLF2
It does look very fishy to me. Endpoint or outcome switching, particularly late in a clinical trial is a huge red flag.
Don't get me wrong. There can be legitimate scientific reasons to switch primary endpoints of a trial. as James Heathers
puts it:
Sometimes it becomes clear after you start that the registration is incomplete or wrong. Sometimes you have a better idea after
you start. Sometimes your thinking changes.
Other times, you're trying to cherry-pick the results.
There are also other reasons to question this trial, including how no confidence intervals were reported, that not even an abstract
was published, just a press release with, as Heathers put it, "two results in four lines":
(2) the results in the press release. I call this 'two results, four sentences' – press releases describe the results in incredibly
brief terms, usually the two most positive outcomes w the briefest explanation possible. He's me bitching about it earlier.
https://t.co/FQlaAQaytG
Basically, if you have two "good" results and twenty "bad" or uninterpretable results, what do you do? What are you going to tell
people? The two "good" results, of course!
Gary Schwitzer has
a nice
summary of the negative reactions to the trial and how it was announced.
The bottom line
I remain very suspicious that the NIH study was announced the same day that a negative study out of China of remdesivir was published.
It just seems too convenient. Maybe I'm being overly suspicious. Maybe I'm too suspicious. Maybe I'm falling prey to conspiracy mongering.
However, in the Trump era, when the Trump administration has politicized previously (mostly) apolitical government agencies as never
before, it's hard not to wonder.
Adding to my suspicion is the fact that the study was reported in a press release, rather than being published, which makes me
wonder if the press release was written to counter the negative study from China that would certainly have tanked Gilead's stock
prices. Yes, I know that the press release reported that this decis, apparently the announcement was decided upon after April 27
meeting of the data and safety monitoring board overseeing this trial, but the outcome switching so late in the trial makes me very
suspicious. Yes, the explanation, which should have been in the press release, along with an acknowledgment that the primary outcome/endpoint
had been changed, but wasn't is not unreasonable:
Then there was
this news report in which Fauci claimed that concerns about leaks fueled the announcement:
He expressed concern that leaks of partial information would lead to confusion. Since the White House was not planning a daily
virus briefing, Fauci said he was invited to release the news at a news conference with Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards(D). "It
was purely driven by ethical concerns," Fauci told Reuters in a telephone interview.
"I would love to wait to present it at a scientific meeting, but it's just not in the cards when you have a situation where
the ethical concern about getting the drug to people on placebo dominates the conversation."
An independent data safety and monitoring board, which had looked at the preliminary results of the NIAID trial, determined
it had met its primary goal of reducing hospital stays.
On Tuesday evening, that information was conveyed in a conference call to scientists studying the drug globally.
"There are literally dozens and dozens of investigators around the world," Fauci said. "People were starting to leak it." But
he did not give details of where the unreported data was being shared.
I smell bullshit here. What probably really happened is that he was under enormous pressure to release the results. It was also
unwise to discuss the results with so many scientists until the manuscript reporting the results of the trial had at least been submitted
for publication. I agree with the scientists who had "expected it [the trial data] to be presented simultaneously in a detailed news
release, a briefing at a medical meeting or in a scientific journal, allowing researchers to review the data." I also agree with
Dr. Eric Topol, referring to the Chinese RCT and this one:
"That's the only thing I'll hang my hat on, and that was negative," said Dr. Eric Topol, director and founder of the Scripps
Research Translational Institute in La Jolla, California.
He was unimpressed by remdesivir's modest benefit. "It was expected to be a whopping effect," Topol added. "It clearly does not have that."
Indeed, given that the pre-test probability of remdesivir having a significant effect was low, meaning that this trial is probably
just noise:
Unfortunately, by the time you are symptomatic with a virus, you are usually already high/peak viral load. So, when you give
an antiviral to someone who is already ill, the damage from the virus is largely done. It's there in big numbers and in the cells.
Indeed, I'm not only unimpressed with the modest benefit reported, I question whether there really was any benefit at all, particularly
in light of the Chinese trial, which found zero difference in viral load in the remdesivir group.
The whole thing looks damned fishy, and we can't judge the study until it's actually published. Meanwhile, whatever the true reasons
for releasing the study results this way, mission accomplished. The negative effect of the Chinese study on Gilead's stock price
was successfully countered and remdesivir becomes a de facto standard of care for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Worse, no
further trials of remdesivir versus placebo will be possible, because it's been declared that remdesivir "works" against COVID-19
and is the new standard of care! As Mark Hoofnagle put it in a great Twitter thread, that echoes my thoughts:
By the end of the day, reports that FDA is going to emergently approve remdesivir for treatment of COVID.
Gilead gets what they want. No one will want to be in a control arm in further trials and they will argue all future trials
must be noninferiority.
Absolute genius. You have to salute them. On the day a negative trial of their drug is reported, based on a press release they
took over the news cycle, and with some midstream edits to their endpoints their now "positive" trial wins them FDA approval and
a halted trial.
It's worse than that. If remdesivir is now the "standard of care" for hospitalized COVID-19 patients, it now becomes unethical
to randomize them to a placebo group testing ANY new drug for COVID-19. Trials will now have to compare remdesivir alone to remdesivir
plus experimental drug. We'll probably never know now for sure if remdesivir is truly effective against COVID-19.
But Gilead will make billions and billions of dollars.
Drs. Vladimir Zelenko and Stephen Smith have been claiming that hydroxychloroquine is a miracle drug based on anecdotes. Their
shoddy, poorly reported case series are not evidence of efficacy.
President Trump's COVID-19 advisors include Dr. Oz, Rudy Giuliani, and Peter Navarro, the latter an economist who thinks he can
science better than Anthony Fauci. Can science- and evidence-based medicine prevail with respect to hydroxychloroquine and coronavirus?
By Orac Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone,
somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to
himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as
David Gorski
...
In long twitter exchange mainly led by James Heathers, has anyone noticed that there are a series of tweets by Didier Raoult ?
One tweet reads:
Could Anthony Fauci explain why the investigators of the NIAID remdesivir trial did change the primary outcome during the
course of the project (16th April)? Removing "death" from primary outcome is a surprising decision.
In a quick search of the web I found the following two:
WHAT ARE SIDE EFFECTS OF REMDESIVIR (RDV)?
In the Ebola trial, researchers noted side effects of remdesivir (RDV) that included:
Increased liver enzyme levels that may indicate possible liver damage
Researchers documented similar increases in liver enzymes in three U.S. COVID-19 patients
The most common adverse effects in studies of remdesivir for COVID-19 include respiratory failure and blood biomarkers of organ
impairment, including low albumin, low potassium, low count of red blood cells, low count of platelets that help with clotting,
and yellow discoloration of the skin. Other reported side effects include gastrointestinal distress, elevated transaminase levels
in the blood (liver enzymes), and infusion site reactions.
Other possible side effects of remdesivir include:
Infusion‐related reactions. Infusion‐related reactions have been seen during a remdesivir infusion or around the time remdesivir
was given.[8] Signs and symptoms of infusion‐related reactions may include: low blood pressure, nausea, vomiting, sweating, and
shivering.
Increases in levels of liver enzymes, seen in abnormal liver blood tests. Increases in levels of liver enzymes have been seen
in people who have received remdesivir, which may be a sign of inflammation or damage to cells in the liver.
So, if it does shorten duration, is it worth potential liver damage, respiratory failure and organ impairment? In other words
is the cure potentially as bad as the disease.
And, as Orac and many commenters have made more than clear, one more example of Trump's government, ignoring science, and jumping
to conclusions.
For yet another drug that was supposed to be a game changer, I am unimpressed by its results. The whole mechanism is wrong. A
drug with this mechanism would need to be almost a prophylactic for it to be hugely effective.
One thing they discovered is that the proteins involved have zinc atoms incorporated into their structure. This won't surprise
any biochemists, as zinc-containing proteins are common. But there's been a steady flow of fringe treatments for the disease --
including some involving chloroquine derivatives -- in which zinc was a key component. We'll have to see whether that changes
now that it's clear that zinc is needed to make copies of the virus (assuming that fact registers at all with the people
prone to promoting fringe therapies).
What is that saying about zinc? I've always heard that zinc was a good thing to have a high intracellular level of it to protect
against viruses besides also being needed to make NO.
So: "Fauci just dropped down a level or two in my estimation of his commitment to rationality."
Let's look at the "Reality": "America needs a federal government that assertively promotes and helps to coordinate that, not one
in which experts like Tony Fauci and Deborah Birx tiptoe around a president's tender ego."
I wouldn't want to be in Fauchi's shoes. If he openly criticizes Trump, he is out and staying in allows him to have some effect.
Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. So, he has to balance his "committment to rationality" to trying to modify/reduce the
insanity of Trump. If he resigned or was fired, could he have more of an influence? Maybe, maybe not. I would not want to be in his
shoes! ! ! Personally, I would probably resign and try to get our media to listen to me. Just standing next to Trump would turn my
stomach.
So, maybe you should live up to your "name" and evaluate "reality" not an idealistic world.
So you wouldn't say what Fauci said and would quit, eh, Joel?
I wouldn't say what Fauci said about "standard of care" which is basically his endorsement of this.
I believe Orac wouldn't make that statement endorsing Remdesivir as the "standard of care".
I don't know of any self-respecting scientist who would make such a statement no matter what the pressure.
If I was pressured by DJT I would object but maybe agree to not make any statement pro or con about the subject – so as to keep my
position and influence but if someone asked me to say something I thought was not true I would not do it and refuse.
. Fauci didn't seem to have any problem cautioning against unwarranted optimism for CQ/HCQ even while DJT was championing the stuff.
What is different about this?
.
You write: "Fauci didn't seem to have any problem cautioning against unwarranted optimism for CQ/HCQ even while DJT was championing
the stuff. What is different about this?"
Yep; but the only studies promoting CQ/HCQ was a fraudulent one in France and an in vitro study.
What about Remdesivir? First it is a nucleic acid analogue designed to directly disrupt replication of the viral genome. Chloroquine/Hydroxychloroquine
were not even remotely designed to target viruses, though they have a moderate dampening effect on immune reactions, so they work
for autoimmune diseases (e.g., lupus, rheumatoid arthritis); but, as I wrote in a previous exchange, the immune response in an autoimmune
disease compared to a cytokine storm is like comparing 20 mile per hour winds to a category 5 hurricane, 160 mph winds. In addition,
chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine have a large number of mild side-effects and some really serious major ones.
So, what did Fauci say about chloroquine? ""We've got to be careful that we don't make that majestic leap to assume that this
is a knockout drug. We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitely prove whether any intervention is truly safe and effective,"
Fauci, who is also a member of the White House coronavirus task force, said during an interview on "Fox & Friends. . . "We don't
operate on how you feel, we operate on what evidence and data is," Fauci said, adding that it was "not a very robust study" or "overwhelmingly
strong."" (Concha, 2020 Apr 3)
Now, what did he say about Remdesivir: "Speaking to reporters from the White House, Fauci said he was told data from the trial
showed a "clear-cut positive effect in diminishing time to recover." Fauci said the median time of recovery for patients taking the
drug was 11 days, compared with 15 days in the placebo group. He said the mortality benefit of remdesivir "has not yet reached statistical
significance."
The results suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the
placebo group, according to a statement from the National Institutes of Health released later Wednesday. "This will be the standard
of care," Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, added. "When you know a drug works, you have
to let people in the placebo group know so they can take it." "What it has proven is a drug can block this virus," he said. (Lovelace,
2020 Apr 29)
"The data shows that remdesivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery," Fauci said
at the White House on Wednesday. The data he referred to is from a large study of more than 1,000 patients from multiple sites around
the world. Patients either received the drug, called remdesivir, or a placebo.
Dr. Michael Saag, associate dean for global health at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said the results seemed promising.
Antiviral drugs such as remdesivir tend to work earlier in the course of an illness, so "the thing that I think is important in this
study is the patients had advanced disease," said Saag, who is not involved with any remdesivir trials. (NBC News (2020 Apr 29)
Hospitalized patients with advanced COVID-19 and lung involvement who received remdesivir recovered faster than similar patients
who received placebo, according to a preliminary data analysis from a randomized, controlled trial involving 1063 patients, which
began on February 21. The trial (known as the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial, or ACTT), sponsored by the National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, is the first clinical trial launched in the United
States to evaluate an experimental treatment for COVID-19.
An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their interim
analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the perspective
of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials [my emphasis]. Recovery in this study was defined
as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level. . .
Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the
placebo group (p=0.059). the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases (2020 Apr 29).
So, first I'd bet you don't understand how nucleic acid analogues work?
Second, though I tend not to rely on one study, this one was fairly large and the shortening of time to recovery was clinically significant,
"defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level." And Dr. Michael Saag: "Antiviral drugs
such as remdesivir tend to work earlier in the course of an illness, so "the thing that I think is important in this study is the
patients had advanced disease,"
Standard of Care is more a legal definition than a clinical one. Basically it reduces risk of malpractice lawsuits.
While I probably would not have called it "standard of care", instead clearly stating that based on the recent trial, it is currently
the best we have to offer or something to that effect.
So, Fauci didn't call it a cure, didn't claim it reduced mortality, though indications it did, and based on over 1,000 patients,
found it reduced hospitalization and return to normal life by a clinically significant margin, the standard used for flu studies.
Again, I would have been more cautious in my working; but your rank attack on a man who knows more about infectious diseases that
you, I, and many others, a man who has dedicated his life to preventing and dealing with them is just plain sickening. Your black
and white view of Fauci is how antivaccinationists and other adherers to unscience see the world. And an MPH probably means a couple
of lower level epidemiology courses. So, the old saying: A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, coupled with a personality that
prefers a dichotomous world is very very problematic.
Only time and further studies will tell if Remdesivir really does shorten recovery time and, perhaps, also lowers mortality. Right
now, we have nothing else and I wouldn't jump on something because of this; but the over 1,000 patient study isn't nothing.
Just to be clear, Orac's critique is valid; but, as he says, by this time one becomes perhaps overly skeptical given Trump's insanity.
How cautious should Fauci have been? People are becoming desperate. The risks from Remdesivir are extremely low, so currently, either
use it or continue as is.
If there were significant risks and the one study had been one a much smaller group, the scales would be
different. And, though Orac is right they changed the outcome points, as mentioned, shortening of recovery time is a criterion used
for treatment of flu, so, though not, perhaps, the best end-point, it is certainly not the same as some studies using endpoints such
as lowered cholesterol without looking at deaths. They did look at deaths and though not significant, in the right direction. By
the way, do you even understand significance levels? Though only one study, p=0.059 isn't far from p=0.05.
References:
Concha, Joe (2020 Apr 3). Fauci warns there's no 'strong' evidence anti-malaria drug works on coronavirus
Lovelace, Berkeley (2020 Apr 29). Remdesivir coronavirus drug trial: Dr. Fauci says it will set new standard of care. CNBC
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (2020 Apr 29). NIH Clinical Trial Shows Remdesivir Accelerates Recovery
from Advanced COVID-19
Disappointingly, the lock down seems to have made a number of people irrational. Just a quick post to expound on my Fauci post
for those who see the world as binary – ie: black or white. These people think you either support Fauci 100% or 0% and a single criticism
of any Fauci statement means 0% support of Fauci. I do not happen to worship at the altar of Fauci or any scientist and recognize
all are subject to errors – including myself. I view the world in a more nuanced manner than those with the black/white delusion.
I find I can disagree with some things a person says or stands for and agree with some other things they say or do.
My criticism of Fauci in regard to his remdesivir endorsement does not mean I have 0% support for Fauci it means that with that
statement and some others my positive view of him is now ~80% but not 100% and I will have to check up on what he is endorsing
to make sure that I agree with it just like I do with any other scientist/person.
BTW – If some were to check my Disqus account history (Reality022) you would find posts strongly defending Fauci against the Loony
Libertarians who seem to think he is the debil.
.
Now to a second point:
There appears to be a group of Fauci apologists who, to excuse Fauci's statement, say it is due to 'pressure from Trump/the administration'.
I do not subscribe to this excuse and think it is a horrible thing to say for 2 reasons:
1) There is absolutely no evidence that this statement was made under pressure. That idea is totally invented in the minds of
the Fauci apologists in their attempt to exonerate Fauci.
2) It is a horrible thing to say about Fauci. I take him at his word. If he said it he meant it. The excuse actually means that
Fauci's word is so untrustworthy that he can be pressured into being dishonest about his scientific opinions and only the apologists
can tell us when he is lying or actually relating his honest view. The apologists are basically saying Fauci is dishonest.
I have much more respect for the man and believe he is honest but in this case merely wrong.
.
That is all I'm going to say about this subject as some people are going off the rails with their binary view of the world. (snicker)
And you continue to miss the point that "Standard of Care" is mainly a legal term. Are you that dense? It is you who stated your
opinion of Fauci sank, so your binary view of the world. Try reading my other comments, closely, maybe you will learn something;
but I doubt it. "Reality", lacks reality testing.
Reply
I tend to agree. I am of the opinion that Fauci made a mistake here. The evidence for Remdesiver is nowhere near good enough
for it to become the standard of care. But then I am not the one having to make these decisions under difficult circumstances.
I don't pretend to understand why Fauci might have made the comment, so don't see a lot of point in speculating about it.
On the other hand, watching the White House performance from afar, I can see the administration is dysfunctional and is run by
a narcissistic bully, who will publicly turn on anyone who disagrees with them. I also see there are people within and around the
White House who are happy to tell whatever lies they think Trump wants to hear, either through fear or hope for advancement. I understand
why people would add 2 and 2 and come up with 5.
Chris Preston said, "I am of the opinion that Fauci made a mistake here. The evidence for Remdesiver is nowhere near good enough
for it to become the standard of care."
I believe that is the main thrust of this Orac article – that the evidence for Remdesiver efficacy is sorely lacking.
Quoting Orac's article above: "In reality, like Raoult's trials, this trial said nothing about the efficacy of remdesivir against
COVID-19 other than that the drug could be given to COVID-19 patients with a reasonable safety profile."
.
I agree with your 2nd paragraph and think that Fauci is not one of those administration toadies and is being honest and has merely
made a mistake perhaps brought about through grasping-at-straws desperation as described in a current SBM article.
I, as well, do not know why Fauci made the statement but to me it is very disrespectful of the man to use as an excuse that he
is dishonest enough to lie like a toady when pressured by Trump.
I think we are essentially in agreement about this matter.
Have fun.
re dysfunctional administration.. narcissistic bully et al
It seems that the aforementioned will now " wind down" the Covid task force ( The Hill reports) but Drs Fauci and Birx
will still be involved in some capacity.
AS though the battle is already won. Hah! CA and the NY area are reporting lower numbers of deaths and hospital admissions BUT
whilst
other areas are increasing theirs.
Maybe the Orange One imagines that if we discuss Covid less, people will think it's gone, go back to work, buy stuff and the economy
will flourish. Ignore it and it'll go away. Wishful thinking as usual.
Apparently you lack understanding of English. As I explained even grandfathered in medical treatments with no hard scientific
evidence are considered the standard of care, that is, if a doctor uses them he/she lessens risk of lawsuits. Standard of care doesn't
mean a high level of scientific validity.
I guess I am wasting my time. Think of it this way, if allowed for compassionate use advised by ones doctor, then doctor may not
be protected against lawsuits. Unfortunately, as something I read a long time ago, even in Colonial times Americans would rather
sue than eat breakfast. Just one more sickness of American exceptionalism, so maybe, just maybe, all Fauci was doing was trying to
reduce this risk.
Not to mention that CDC closed the lab. So CDC is not part of great vaccine conspiracy, after all. Huge news, I would say.
One could mention, too, that Johnson & Johnson get COVID vaccine contract. So Dorit Reiss' plots are not very effective, ater
all. Reply
You write: Hmm . Problems with the Wuhan Lab and those nasty bats back in 2018. Just another coincidence, I suppose.
Weird. So many coincidences."
From a recent article in the Atlantic:
scientists have also identified about 500 other coronaviruses among China's many bat species. "There will be many more
-- I think it's safe to say tens of thousands," says Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance, who has led that work. Laboratory
experiments show that some of these new viruses could potentially infect humans. SARS-CoV-2 likely came from a bat, too.
It seems unlikely that a random bat virus should somehow jump into a susceptible human. But when you consider millions
of people, in regular contact with millions of bats, which carry tens of thousands of new viruses, vanishingly improbable
events become probable ones. In 2015, Daszak's team found that 3 percent of people from four Chinese villages that are close
to bat caves had antibodies that indicated a previous encounter with SARS-like coronaviruses. "Bats fly out every night
over their houses.
Some of them shelter from rain in caves, or collect guano for fertilizer," Daszak says. "If you extrapolate up to the
rural population, across the region where the bats that carry these viruses live, you're talking 1 [million] to 7 million
people a year exposed." Most of these infections likely go nowhere. It takes just one to trigger an epidemic.
Note. he links to peer-reviewed journal articles. So, as the second paragraph makes clear, antibodies to bat coronaviruses
exist in the population, etc. Add this to the sequencing of the genome that shows just how close it is to the 2003 SARS
corona virus and to bat coronaviruses and, as usual, your moronic "coincidences" just lacks any validity.
Note also that his article links to many other good ones.
As I've written before, nature is quite capable of creating really nasty microbes.
Oh this guy needs a dishonorable mention, Harvard traitor, Charles Leiber. "has received more than $15,000,000 in grant
funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DOD)." Our tax dollars hard at work for
this POS.
This is our guy: Charles M. Lieber Semiconductor nanowires: A platform for nanoscience and nanotechnology MRS Bulletin
Volume 36, Issue 12 (Laser micro- and nanofabrication of biomaterials)December 2011 , pp. 1052-1063 DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs.2011.26 So COVID 19 was not involved. One should indeed not serve two masters, DOD and a Chinese university
Reply
Note that he links to a number of excellent articles, including the two that the following is based on:
"scientists have also identified about 500 other coronaviruses among China's many bat species. "There will be
many more -- I think it's safe to say tens of thousands," says Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance, who has
led that work. Laboratory experiments show that some of these new viruses could potentially infect humans. SARS-CoV-2
likely came from a bat, too.
It seems unlikely that a random bat virus should somehow jump into a susceptible human. But when you consider
millions of people, in regular contact with millions of bats, which carry tens of thousands of new viruses, vanishingly
improbable events become probable ones. In 2015, Daszak's team found that 3 percent of people from four Chinese
villages that are close to bat caves had antibodies that indicated a previous encounter with SARS-like coronaviruses.
"Bats fly out every night over their houses. Some of them shelter from rain in caves, or collect guano for fertilizer,"
Daszak says. "If you extrapolate up to the rural population, across the region where the bats that carry these
viruses live, you're talking 1 [million] to 7 million people a year exposed." Most of these infections likely go
nowhere. It takes just one to trigger an epidemic."
So, 3 percent of people had antibodies to bat corona viruses. As the above explains, it is quite probable that
the current virus came from someone infected by a bat. Now, since sequencing of the current SARS-Cov-2 has found
its genome quite close to the 2003 SARS virus and to several bat coronavirus genomes, goes against your sick need
to blame the Chinese. A coincidence is not even close to any type of proof, except in the mind of a moron like
you looking to place blame. And there is a great book on "coincidences": David J. Hand (2014). "The Improbability
Principle: Why Coincidences, Miracles, and Rare Events Happen Every Day." Basically, what someone might think is
a rare coincidence isn't.
And, the major blame for what is happening in the U.S. is a combination of Trump and overall American unappreciation
for Public Health and, thus, pandemic preparedness. When it comes to cutting funding, first to go.
I realize that real research, logic, etc. have NO effect on moron's like you; but, hopefully, others monitoring
this exchange are open-minded.
And as Aarno pointed out, you attacked someone who had nothing to do with COVID. He worked with the Wuhan Institute
of Technology; yep, in Wuhan and that's it. It's a large city dimwit. More importantly, he has been charged, not
found guilty. I realize that the old adage innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to anyone you chose to attack.
You just don't know when to stop. YOU ARE DESPICABLE!
Reply
"... Dr. Judy Mikovits is the central figure of 'Plandemic,' which basically claims that "billionaire patent owners" are stoking the spread of the coronavirus, all in the name of forcing "experimental poisons" on the population in the form of vaccines. ..."
"... Mikovits' central argument – that an eventual vaccine for coronavirus will kill "millions of people" ..."
"... "donated the entire amount to charity." ..."
"... However, amid the half-baked theories, Mikovits touches on some truth. The federal government does in fact pay hospitals a set amount of money to treat coronavirus patients, about $13,000. This amount rises to $39,000 if the patient is placed on a ventilator. Mikovits insists that ventilation is the wrong treatment for coronavirus patients, and is only carried out to boost revenues – something the ER doctors would disagree with. ..."
"... It doesn't help that many of the claims are disjointed, and rather than working towards its main goal of demonstrating a sinister plan by Fauci and vaccine evangelist Bill Gates to poison the masses, the documentary instead just lumps together anything critical of the mainstream consensus on the virus to paint Fauci in a bad light. ..."
"... For instance, it's been widely reported that Fauci's organization did give millions of dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to finance its study of coronaviruses, after the federal government banned such research in the US. However, no smoking gun linking Fauci to the current outbreak is provided. ..."
"... "When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say." ..."
"... "bypass the gatekeepers of free speech," ..."
Pulled from YouTube, censored in internet searches, and denounced by every single mainstream
media outlet, what kind of information could make everyone so mad about 'Plandemic'? We watched
it to find out. A 23-minute teaser clip of the documentary went viral on Wednesday evening,
notching up tens of millions of views across multiple platforms. However, a media outcry soon
followed, with mainstream media outlets deploying their 'fact-checkers' to debunk its claims,
and Facebook and YouTube removing the video, citing their new rules on Covid-19
"misinformation."
Yet censorship is also a sure-fire way to generate interest in the very thing you're trying
to censor – and multiple copies and versions of 'Plandemic' began to appear like
mushrooms. So who's behind it and what's in there?
A doctor with quite a reputation
Dr. Judy Mikovits is the central figure of 'Plandemic,' which basically claims that "billionaire patent owners" are stoking the spread of the coronavirus, all in the name
of forcing "experimental poisons" on the population in the form of vaccines.
The claims are quite bold, but it doesn't help that Mikovits herself is far from an unbiased
source on the subject. She's been active in anti-vaccine and fringe circles for years, even
while insisting she's not "anti-vax" herself.
Once an active cancer researcher and (mainstream) virologist, Mikovits was disgraced in 2011
for publishing what others in the scientific community called false research into Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome. The dramatic events that followed – a search and arrest in her
California home – are used in 'Plandemic' to establish her alleged conflict with Dr.
Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and
President Donald Trump's coronavirus adviser.
Mikovits claims Fauci personally "paid off" law enforcement officials to arrest
her and detain her without trial. She was indeed arrested in November 2011, but for allegedly
stealing lab materials from the Nevada laboratory she worked at before her dismissal (which
Mikovits claims were "planted" in her house). Criminal charges brought against
Mikovits were later dismissed – but this has been tied to the legal troubles of her
former employer, Harvey Whittemore.
Evidence-free claims galore
Of course, the central part of the video – something being discussed in every
'Plandemic' piece and review – is made up of an array of Covid-19-related claims that
Mikovits makes.
These range from claims that wearing face masks "activates your own virus" (there's
no evidence of that) to the assertion that the devastating coronavirus outbreak in Northern
Italy can be linked to the uptake in flu vaccination the year before (a claim which appears to
be based on a misleading interpretation of one tangentially-related study, not any fresh
research).
Mikovits' central argument – that an eventual vaccine for coronavirus will kill
"millions of people" – is unprovable, and her assertion that Fauci will
personally profit from any vaccine is outright false. Mikovits accuses Fauci of profiteering
from royalties on an AIDS treatment he patented in the 1990s, but Fauci only placed his name on
the patent because regulations required him to, and "donated
the entire amount to charity."
However, amid the half-baked theories, Mikovits touches on some truth. The federal
government does in fact pay hospitals a set amount of money to treat coronavirus patients,
about $13,000. This amount rises to $39,000 if the patient is placed on a ventilator. Mikovits
insists that ventilation is the wrong treatment for coronavirus patients, and is only carried
out to boost revenues – something the ER doctors would disagree with.
It doesn't help that many of the claims are disjointed, and rather than working towards
its main goal of demonstrating a sinister plan by Fauci and vaccine evangelist Bill Gates to
poison the masses, the documentary instead just lumps together anything critical of the
mainstream consensus on the virus to paint Fauci in a bad light.
For instance, it's been widely reported that Fauci's organization did
give millions of dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to finance its study of
coronaviruses, after the federal government banned such
research in the US. However, no smoking gun linking Fauci to the current outbreak is
provided.
Boost by censorship
Yet, when information like this is declared verboten, that's what people will think. There's
a popular quote by 'Game of Thrones' author George RR Martin: "When you tear out a man's
tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he
might say."
When right-wing polemicist Alex Jones and his conspiracy-laden news site Infowars were
essentially banned from the internet in 2018, the Infowars app shot to the top of both Apple
and Google's app stores.
The phenomenon is known as the 'Streisand effect,' named for a 2003 lawsuit in which singer
Barbara Streisand sued a photographer who shot an aerial snap of her California mansion for
invasion of privacy. The lawsuit backfired, and led to hundreds of thousands of people
downloading the picture. Before the case, it had only been viewed six times.
Likewise, the documentary's producers will spin the furor over 'Plandemic' to their
advantage. Already, their website urges viewers to "bypass the gatekeepers of free
speech," and slams the "overlords of big tech" for silencing them.
Forbidden knowledge is tempting, and by wiping 'Plandemic' from the internet, Silicon Valley
will only increase its notoriety.
The connection of Dr Fauci to the Wuhan lab is also well established. He moved viral "gain
of function" research to Wuhan after it was closed down in the USA by the Obama Regime.
A Yale University epidemiologist is calling into question the legality of US President
Donald Trump and his administration's response to the COVID-19 novel coronavirus, appearing to
suggest that federal government officials could be tried under international law. Hours before
Trump
took to Twitter to announce the Coronavirus Task Force would "continue on indefinitely,"
Gregg
Gonsalves , an assistant professor of epidemiology of microbial diseases at the Yale School
of Public Health, posed a series of questions to fellow netizens on the social media site
regarding Washington's handling of COVID-19.
How many people will die this summer, before Election Day? What proportion of the deaths
will be among African-Americans, Latinos, other people of color? This is getting awfully
close to genocide by default. What else do you call mass death by public policy? #COVID19
#coronavirus
As of this article's publication, the US has tested over 7.5 million individuals for the
novel coronavirus, according to Johns Hopkins University . Data provided by the
university details that the country has confirmed 1.2 million cases of the novel coronavirus
and suffered over 71,400 associated deaths. At least 189,791 recoveries from COVID-19 have been
observed in the US.
Gonsalves' emphasis on the COVID-19 deaths of Black Americans, Latinos and other people of
color in the US stems from the fact that there has been a disproportionate amount of novel
coronavirus deaths in the Black community.
"Social conditions, structural racism, and other factors elevate risk for COVID-19 diagnoses
and deaths in black communities," wrote a team of epidemiologists and clinicians in a new study
analyzing novel coronavirus cases and death on a county level, as reported by CNN. The
scientists found that counties where Black residents made up more than 13% of the population -
about the percentage of the total US population that is Black - suffered 52% of COVID-19
diagnoses and 58% of associated deaths in the country.
"Structural factors including health care access, density of households, unemployment,
pervasive discrimination and others drive these disparities, not intrinsic characteristics of
black communities or individual-level factors," noted the researchers.
It's worth noting that the findings are preliminary, as the study still needs to go through
the peer review process.
"So, what does it mean to let thousands die by negligence, omission, failure to act, in a
legal sense under international law?" asked Gonsalves in another tweet
Wednesday morning .
The conduct of Trump and his administration has been called into question over the past
several weeks after reports revealed that the president and federal officials were briefed on
the novel coronavirus, and its potential threat to the US, several weeks prior to the
declaration of a national emergency on March 13.
Recently, Dr. Rick Bright, the former director of the US Biomedical Advanced Research and
Development Authority,
said that he alerted Department of Health and Human Services officials in January about
the US' unpreparedness for a possible COVID-19 outbreak. Bright said that he was met with
"indifference which then developed into hostility" from the administration and, in his
opinion, was the reason for his demotion within the agency.
While Trump is pushing for more Americans to return to their workplaces and restart the US
economy - which some believe could lead to a second wave of infections - Gonsalves wondered if
there could be some kind of intervention or charges brought against the federal government on
an international level.
"And I am being serious here: what is happening in the US is purposeful, considered
negligence, omission, failure to act by our leaders. Can they be held responsible under
international law?" he asked .
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if
we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could
lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent!" - Bill Gates
"men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary against whom they can
organize themselves and act together"
"new enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons
devised"
"in its present form, democracy is no longer well-suited for the tasks ahead. The
complexity and the technical nature of many of today's problems do not always allow elected
representatives to make competent decisions at the right time"
"In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that
pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fill the
bill"
"The real enemy then is humanity itself."
Excerpts from "The First Global Revolution" – I would add, a wonderful marxist
propaganda for the NWO.
Ms No, 4 hours ago Listen to this medical chick that saved millions from the EU and their
swine flu vaccine that caused brain damage. They tried to have her "psychiatrized" which means
locked away as crazy and probably tortured for the rest of her miserable life, being banged
with blood draw needles, forced meds and put in a straight jacket. Close to Assange
treatment.
https://youtu.be/Hlk_Zfz7xhU
harleyjohn45, 4 hours ago She may have Fauci by the short hairs. He is deeply embedded in the
national health care oligarchy. Not my favorite person, had a lot to do with destroying the US
economy along with MSM. DaiRR, 5 hours ago The big pharma crime syndicate, embedded in
government health agencies with operatives like Fauci, is a mega-billion dollar enterprise and
those dollars buy off thousands of people like Fauci. People smarter than me need to figure out
how to stop this once and forever.
Meanwhile, if you don't realize Google and Facebook and all their offshoots are your enemy,
you are the enemy too. wdg, 5 hours ago (Edited) Dr. Judy Mikovits is just the tip of the
iceberg as more and more doctors and reserach scientists are speaking out and exposing the BIG
PHARMA CRIMINAL SYNDICATE that includes the WHO, CDC, NIH and many other so-called health care
and research agencies around the world, and Drs. Fauci and Birx not to mention the leadership
of most western government who have been bought off by this Criminal Syndicate which has
murdered and debilitated millions of people. These are crimes against humanity carried out at
the highest levels of governments, corporations and governmental agencies. Watch the powerful
video interview of Robert Kennedy Jr. below which provides a window into the evil world we now
live in. Big Pharma and the medical profession which sold their souls for money are both
finished because the trust is gone. Class action suits will bankrupt the lot.
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Robert Kennedy Jr. Destroys Big Pharma, Fauci & Pro-Vaccine
Movement
Your Wikipedia and all your stupid marxist propaganda is fake, yep!
5 hours ago Why is the video doctored right at the end to make Fauci say a damning sentence.
You can see his head jerk to new positions as they piece together bits of video.
That fake ending just negated all credibility for the video.
Take a look at the original video where he told that (the part of interest is at the very
beginning starting at 2:50 and is ending at 3:40) and you shall see that the meaning (when the
parts where he brags about his past and future were removed) of what he actually have told in
that part was not altered in any way - the meaning is exactly the same. Due diligence in these
times is actually quite easy in cases like these, hence you should probably do the same prior
to posting
4 hours ago (Edited) I have zero tolerance for fake news. It's not up to me. If I spot it, I
call it. You just confirmed I was right. It's up to them to not fake video of a person they are
disparaging. There is no way for him to comment about that doctored section at the end.
Edit: I thank you for doing that research but it shouldn't be up to you either. This is not
the time for fake anything.
Commercialization of research including allowing patenting the research so that you can extract revenue stream from licensing
the patent and which became a binge addition in universities creates "academic entrepreneurs" which are very similar to Soviet
Mafiosi.
One thing that should be abundantly clear by now is that any thoughts, opinions, or speculation which challenges the official
narratives regarding COVID-19 will be promptly silenced by Silicon Valley, under the guise of protecting the public - which apparently
can't be trusted to absorb information and form their own opinions.
The most recent example of censored wrongthink is a new documentary, Plandemic, which features former chronic fatigue researcher
Judy Milkovits, who claims that Dr. Anthony Fauci - head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) - is
spewing 'absolute propaganda' about COVID-19.
In the video, Mikovits claimed Fauci perpetrated propaganda that led to the deaths of millions of people in the past. She also
raised questions about how COVID-19 deaths are being counted.
However, one of her biggest beefs against Fauci dates to the battles for credit over the discovery of HIV in the early 1980s.
In the video, Mikovits claimed she isolated HIV from the saliva and blood of patients in France but that Fauci was involved
in delaying research so a friend could take credit, which allowed the HIV virus to spread. These claims are not proven. They were
also disseminated in April by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Kennedy alleged on the Children’s Health Defense website (where he is chairman) -Heavy
Google's YouTube is currently playing whack-a-mole with a 25 minute promotional vignette for the documentary which has gone viral
- deleting new versions seemingly as fast as they pop up. The original version had over 1.6 million views when it was censored.
Facebook, however, hasn't deleted it (yet):
As noted by Heavy's Jessica McBride, Mikovits has a new book out,
Plague of Corrpution, which currently has 4.5 / 5 stars on Amazon.
Mikovits, who has
a new book out, was featured in the first vignette released to promote the movie. Her controversial career in the scientific
community has been punctuated by an arrest, lawsuit, retracted research study, allegations against Fauci and clashes with the
founders of the Whittemore Peterson Institute for Neuro-Immune Disease, which is located in Reno, Nevada. -Heavy
Mikovits has claimed that she published a "blockbuster" study which revealed that "the common use of animal and human fetal tissues
were unleashing devastating plagues of chronic diseases," and that the "minions of Big Pharma" have been waging war against her to
destroy her "good name, career and personal life."
In the Plandemic video, Mikovits makes other claims, including that patents are a conflict of interest, and she criticizes
the concept of mass vaccines. “They will kill millions, as they already have with their vaccines,” she said, stressing she was
not anti-vaccine. She claims there is a financial incentive in COVID-19 strategies to not use natural remedies in order to push
people to use vaccines.
Mikovits co-wrote a book called Plague: One Scientist’s Intrepid Search for the Truth about Human Retroviruses and Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), Autism, and Other Diseases
and claims 30% of vaccines
are contaminated with retroviruses.
The book contains a forward from Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The book was No. 2 on the Amazon bestseller list on May 6. -Heavy
Plandemic has received both praise and criticism,
however Google thinks it's best if you leave the thinking to them.
Fauci works for Bill Gates, and will push a vaccine & medications that he will profit from. I don't like him. However, the
end of this woman's video takes Dr. Fauci's 2017 remarks out of context. Fauci wasn't saying he knew this Plandemic would occur.
He was merely saying that every 4-8 years there is a new type of virus or flu strain in the world. (which is fearmongering in
a way -- with every new administration he needs to push for more funding by saying there will likely be an outbreak)
"Dr. Fauci, it turns out, has been a key cheerleader for this "death science" research for decades. He has also been credibly
accused by Dr. Judy Mikovitz and other virologists of stealing intellectual property and stifling whistleblowers who sought to
expose the truth about NIH-funded research and how it threatens humanity."...
Mokovitz has written a new book called, "Plague of Corruption". The hardcopy is "sold out" EVERYWHERE. I find this fishy. I
wonder if the kindle version has been edited to be less damaging to Fauci, et al. It wouldn't be hard for the government to buy
up all the copies. Plus, the website for the book does not load.
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines,
health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent!" - Bill Gates
"men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary against whom they can organize themselves and act together"
"new enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons devised"
"in its present form, democracy is no longer well-suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many
of today's problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time"
"In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like, would fill the bill"
"The real enemy then is humanity itself."
Excerpts from "The First Global Revolution" – I would add, a wonderful marxist propaganda for the NWO.
xxx Ms No, 4 hours ago
Listen to this medical chick that saved millions from the EU and their swine flu vaccine that caused brain damage. They tried
to have her "psychiatrized" which means locked away as crazy and probably tortured for the rest of her miserable life, being banged
with blood draw needles, forced meds and put in a straight jacket. Close to Assange treatment.
She may have Fauci by the short hairs. He is deeply embedded in the national health care oligarchy. Not my favorite person,
had a lot to do with destroying the US economy along with MSM.
DaiRR, 5 hours ago
The big pharma crime syndicate, embedded in government health agencies with operatives like Fauci, is a mega-billion dollar
enterprise and those dollars buy off thousands of people like Fauci. People smarter than me need to figure out how to stop this
once and forever.
Meanwhile, if you don't realize Google and Facebook and all their offshoots are your enemy, you are the enemy too.
wdg, 5 hours ago (Edited)
Dr. Judy Mikovits is just the tip of the iceberg as more and more doctors and reserach scientists are speaking out and exposing
the BIG PHARMA CRIMINAL SYNDICATE that includes the WHO, CDC, NIH and many other so-called health care and research agencies around
the world, and Drs. Fauci and Birx not to mention the leadership of most western government who have been bought off by this Criminal
Syndicate which has murdered and debilitated millions of people. These are crimes against humanity carried out at the highest
levels of governments, corporations and governmental agencies.
Watch the powerful video interview of Robert Kennedy Jr. below
which provides a window into the evil world we now live in. Big Pharma and the medical profession which sold their souls for money
are both finished because the trust is gone. Class action suits will bankrupt the lot.
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Robert Kennedy Jr. Destroys Big Pharma, Fauci & Pro-Vaccine Movement
Your Wikipedia and all your stupid marxist propaganda is fake, yep!
xxx 5 hours ago
Why is the video doctored right at the end to make Fauci say a damning sentence. You can see his head jerk to new positions
as they piece together bits of video.
That fake ending just negated all credibility for the video.
Take a look at the original video where he told that (the part of interest is at the very beginning starting at 2:50 and is
ending at 3:40) and you shall see that the meaning (when the parts where he brags about his past and future were removed) of what
he actually have told in that part was not altered in any way - the meaning is exactly the same. Due diligence in these times
is actually quite easy in cases like these, hence you should probably do the same prior to posting
xxx 4 hours ago (Edited)
I have zero tolerance for fake news. It's not up to me. If I spot it, I call it. You just confirmed I was right. It's up to
them to not fake video of a person they are disparaging. There is no way for him to comment about that doctored section at the
end.
Edit: I thank you for doing that research but it shouldn't be up to you either. This is not the time for fake anything.
This imperial college that consults with the CDC and WHO and others should have also looked
at previous forecasts... No one serious should have paid any attention to this Ferguson guy
because his modelling was off by factors.. He has now destroyed hundreds of millions of
lives, cost countries trillions. Mostly only Africa was saved because they have lived
thorough westerners saying they dont know what they are doing and stopped listening. Death
rates at a very few areas that were published were higher but were the same everywhere else.
In fact over the course of the next few years the effects of this will be widely felt as
above average death rates due to the factors. Far above even without anything being done at
all.
In 2009, one of Ferguson's models predicted 65,000 people could die from the Swine Flu
outbreak in the UK -- the final figure was below 500. potential death toll during the 2005
Bird [avian] Flu outbreak. Ferguson estimated 200 million could die. The real number was in
the low hundreds.
The clinical epidemiology tradition cautions that primitive model typically mislead us -- for
instance, by smuggling in unproven assumptions that have not been empirically established in
human populations.
The latter camp has won significant media attention in recent weeks. Bill Gates -- whose
foundation funds the research behind the most visible outbreak model in the United
States, developed by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University
of Washington -- worries that COVID-19 might be a "once-in-a-century pandemic."
A notable detractor from this view is Stanford's John Ioannidis, a clinical epidemiologist,
meta-researcher, and reliable skeptic who has openly wondered whether the coronavirus pandemic
might rather be a
"once-in-a-century evidence fiasco." He argues that better data are needed to justify the
drastic measures undertaken to contain the pandemic in the United States and elsewhere.
Neil Ferguson is the chief hack with an unbroken record of failure in his epidemiological
projections (and therefore always failing upward, as is typical of the system's most useful
propagandists), whose prescriptions have been instrumental in pushing the lockdown ideology
and program.
Now we learn that he himself doesn't believe in his own lies, as he has felt free to flout
the same restrictions he has insisted must become the totalitarian "new normal".
"Professor Neil Ferguson, high priest of liberal hospital management and inventor of the
generalized containment against Covid-19. Professor Ferguson is still the European reference
for epidemic modelling.
- Yet it was he who, in 2001, convinced Prime Minister Tony Blair to have 6 million cattle
slaughtered to stop the foot-and-mouth epidemic (a decision that cost 10 billion pounds and
is now considered an aberration).
- In 2002, he calculated that mad cow disease would kill about 50,000 British people and
another 150,000 when transmitted to sheep. There were actually 177.
- In 2005, he predicted that bird flu would kill 65,000 Britons. There were a total of
457."
His Corona terror-mongering will become known as his ultimate failure and lie.
Update (1045ET): In video of Trump's Tuesday morning scrum with reporters, the president can
be heard telling a reporter that he is allowing Dr. Fauci to testify before the Senate - and
not the House - because the House is "a set up".
REPORTER: Why won't you let Fauci testify before the House?
TRUMP: "Because the House is a set up. The House is a bunch of Trump haters ... they,
frankly, want our situation to be unsuccessful, which means death." pic.twitter.com/G3G5OoV5IV
And Fauci has already been awarded the dunce cap with his 1980s assertion that HIV was going
kill us all. So I guess for his most recent action he gets the dunce cap with slide rule
cluster.
"The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit research group, under the
direction of President Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. NIH canceled the project
just this past Friday, April 24th, Politico reported. Daszak did not immediately respond to
Newsweek requests for comment."
These models are nothing more than curve fitting tools that have limited predictive value.
Basically the models are derived from Neil Ferguson and his modelling group at Imperial
College, in addition to being backed by WHO, receive millions from the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation.
Ferguson was the source of the "prediction" that 2.2 million Americans would likely die if
immediate lockdown of the US economy did not occur. Based on the Ferguson model, Dr Anthony
Fauci of NIAID confronted President Trump and supposedly pressured him to declare a national
health emergency. Much as in the UK, once the damage to the economy , Ferguson's model later
drastically lowered the US fatality estimates to between 100,000 to 200,000 deaths which has
since been reduced further.
Ferguson and his Imperial College modelers have a notorious track record for predicting
dire consequences of diseases. In 2002 Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people in UK
would die from variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, "mad cow disease", possibly to 150,000 if
the epidemic expanded to include sheep. A total of 178 people were officially registered dead
from vCJD. In 2005, Ferguson claimed that up to 200 million (!) people worldwide would be
killed by bird-flu or H5N1. By early 2006, the WHO had only linked 78 deaths to the virus.
Then in 2009 Ferguson's group at Imperial College advised the government that swine flu or
H1N1 would probably kill 65,000 people in the UK. In the end, swine flu claimed the lives of
457 people.
As for China. They need a Fake Cold War. Have to give people an external enemy so people
wont figure out who the real enemy is. To the extent China was involved it was as an equal
partner.
I was on the ground in the US for less than 36 hours, but saw enough to be alarmed. If I
hadn't forcefully volunteered that I had just come from living in China, I don't think
anyone would have checked me for fever before entering the US.
Once I declared myself, I was escorted to a "CDC line" for a cursory temperature check
(with a large group of Mormon missionaries returning from Europe), given a Centres for
Disease Control and Prevention flier about Covid-19 symptoms and asked to stay home and
minimise my trips outside for 14 days.
...
Finally, after we promised not to leave our flat, our passports were returned to us, and
at 4.03am, some 16 hours after landing, we were home. That morning, a young woman in a
hazmat suit knocked on our door and took our temperatures at 10am. She returned at 3pm to
take our temperatures again.
This routine was repeated for 14 days before we would be permitted to circulate in the
general Shanghai population. We chatted occasionally with our temperature takers (they were
a rotating cast of 20-something women). Initially, a man would accompany them to film the
temperature reading, but by the final few days the women came alone.
A few days after our return, we discovered that authorities had placed a sensor on our
door. And more than a week after the start of our quarantine, we received a note informing
us we were not to open our door more than five times a day.
There's a lot more on the epic journey to pass through Chinese airport/immigration/nCOV
control procedures, but just this last bit makes it clear what the difference is.
Has anyone out there seen or heard of any nCOV quarantined people in the US even being
checked on once to see if they are maintaining quarantine? Much less twice a day for 14 days
by a live person, plus a sensor on the door?
Note that this is a much easier setup than contact tracing.
Thanks for this very helpful tracing of US propaganda.
Those projections are very suspect, especially Deaths Per Day, where the model is way off
the mark for Past data on deaths per day! Any decent model would at least account for the
past data, but that one predicted a fifth of the deaths, and shows the rate dramatically
increasing when reported deaths are slowly decreasing.
In the US, some states (Guam, Hawaii, Vermont) have suppressed the virus spread very well,
some (Florida, Washington state) have a slow decline in new cases, and just a few
(Massachusetts, Virginia others) are still increasing in new cases per day. Fortunately, the
rate is increasing in the District of Corruption, but not fast enough to reduce the
corruption much.
"The basis of reassuring the public about re-entry is repeating the facts about the threat
and who it targets . By now, studies from Europe
and the U.S
. all suggest that the overall fatality rate is far lower than early estimates. And we know who
to protect, because this disease – by the evidence – is not equally dangerous
across the population. In Michigan's Oakland County , 75 percent of deaths were in
those over 70 years old; 91 percent were in people over 60, similar to what was noted in
New York . And younger, healthier people have virtually zero risk of death and little
risk of serious disease; as I have noted before, under one percent of New York City's
hospitalizations have
been patients under 18 years of age, and less than one percent of deaths at any age
are in the absence of
underlying conditions.
Here are specific and logical steps to end the lockdown and safely restore normal life:
First , let's finally focus on protection for the most vulnerable -- that means nursing home
patients, who are already living under controlled access. This would include strictly
regulating all who enter and care for nursing home members by requiring testing and protective
masks for all who interact with these highly vulnerable people. Specifically, nursing home
workers should be tested for COVID-19 antibodies, and if negative, for virus to exclude
infection, to ensure safety of senior residents. No COVID-19-positive patient can resume
residence until definitively cleared by testing.
We should continue to inform the public about what they have already successfully learned
regarding the at-risk group. That means issuing rational guidelines advising the highest
standards of hygiene and appropriate social distancing while interacting with elderly friends
and family members at risk, including those with diabetes, obesity and other chronic
conditions.
Second , those with mild symptoms of the illness should strictly self-isolate for two weeks.
It's not urgent to test them -- simply assume they have the infection. That includes
confinement at home, having the highest concern for sanitization and wearing protective masks
when others in their homes enter the same room." Dr. Scott Atlas in The Hill
---------------
It should be mentioned that Dr. John Ioannides, a leading epidemiologist at Stanford agrees
with Dr. Atlas.
I saw Atlas on a news program a day or so ago. The anchor looked frightened by what Atlas
was saying. This is understandable. The COVID panic is now so deeply embedded and pervasive
that to question the rationale for the shut-down of the economy is equivalent to heresy in a
theocratic state.
IMO the road back economically is going to be slow and difficult. I hope I am wrong. pl
I hope you are wrong, too. I am tired of the drama and hysteria.
Still, I do want the investigations into China's culpability for the
result of their "accident" or of their planned upheaval of the rest of the world.
I just want to trust some designated "expert" to tell us when when we can put away the
masks and can take up hugging our friends and shaking hands while smiling and meeting new
acquaintances. What is a church service without that and all the stories of Christs care and
concern for the "untouchables" of the world?
Seems the CCP's MSS's think-tank CICR compiled an Intelligence Report of their own warning
of possible armed conflict with U.S..
IMO it's hoped that our IC will realize that this virus doesn't jump ship into the human
sphere on its own naturally without 'human tweaking in a lab' which then provides a bridge
from which the virus could go from bats to the human sphere. And why would the CCP/MSS play
such a dangerous game? -- Bio-weapons R&D.
There can be little doubt that the fascist/socialist/anti-Trump elements in this country have
seized upon the presence of the virus to attempt to destroy Trump's chances in November and
to bring about greater state control of citizens. This immediately after the lame impeachment
plot failed to remove Trump; which was right after the lame Russian collusion plot failed to
remove Trump.
I don't think it's paranoid to consider that China released the virus on the US at a time
when President Trump is engaging in a major trade war with the Chinese, as a tactic in
fighting that war.
The Ionides/Atlas clinical perspective has been known to be correct - based on data -
since March, yet the Democrat controlled states continue to double down on state control of
their populations and destruction of their economies.
The Left has become a collection of kamikazes. The elites can ride this out. They have
money. They are hoping that when the economy is in ashes, all of the starving little people
will come into their open arms.
In 1968 another Asian virus, known as the Hong Kong flu, arrived in the US. It began
killing Americans noticeably in 1969. As this was occurring, the Woodstock music festival was
planned. The festival went off with now famous record crowd numbers during the peak of the
virus. No one seemed to care. That virus ultimately killed 100,000 Americans (not Woodstock
attendees); more than covid, even if you believe the artificially inflated covid figures.
That was at a time when the population of the US was far less. So a far greater % died than
covid.
We've been here before folks. It's the reaction that is different this time. The reaction
is driven by internal and external political objectives of massive importance for our future
as a free society.
Free people need to be able to make these decisions on their own. Give them clear
information and let them decide their next move. Keep the government "experts" out of the
decision making process. I believe that as the weather improves and the economic hardship
increases, Americans will turn on the fascist/socialist elites and take their lives back. The
vulnerable and the cowards will self-isolate. I further believe Americans will do what they
need to to get the economy going again, buying American made only, patronizing small
businesses beyond what they normally would and voting for pro-American candidates (i.e. the
Democrats lose big time).
What have we done every flu season that has resulted in very similar numbers and
population groups affected. How, in fact, is this one materially different.
Mnuchin said today that it is too early to say whether international travel will open back up
before the end of the year . Coincidentally, I also came across a Twitter poll of
15,000 people with the the following question & results:
"Hypothetically, if everything opens up tomorrow when would you fly again?"
- Immediately 25%
- 2-3 months 20%
- 3-6 months 26%
- 1 year or more 29%
Hardly scientific and I've no idea of the demographic or geographic spread of respondents,
but it seems pretty clear many people remain fearful.
The Democrat-media hysteria HAS been deeply ingrained.
The mass of people have - not surprisingly - turned out to be lambs (baby sheep).
Each person is responsible for managing their own life - which includes risk.
Unfortunately, the population of lambs has been trained over the years to look for mommy
government to manage their risk - mandatory seat belt laws come to mind.
Ben Franklin said it succinctly:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve
neither Liberty nor Safety."
There is widespread criticism of Ioannides two Covid studies, including the use of an
unapproved antibody tests which is known to give false positives; statistical flaws, and
recruiting volunteers for the sampling via Facebook, as well as the wife of a study co-author
to call and recruit parents from her kids school.
Here is an excerpt from an article on the controversy.
""My quick take is that something really odd is going on with Ioannidis," wrote Alexander
Rubinsteyn, a geneticist and computational biologist at the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, in an email to Undark. Rubinsteyn suggested that Ioannidis may simply be "so
attached to being the iconoclast that defies conventional wisdom that he's unintentionally
doing horrible science."
He added: "Pretty much no one with statistical acumen believes these
studies.""https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/23/coronavirus-antibody-studies-california-stanford
In areas where the health system is not under stress this makes perfect sense. I would give
the hugging, handshaking and church services a miss and maintain the social distancing at
work and when out of the house as far as is practical. It needs to be done with lots of
testing, contact tracing and case isolation. Knowledge and common sense on everyone's part
will work. Limited local shutdown may be needed if cases start climbing in some areas.
Our restaurants open today in most of Florida. In spite of needing our hair attended to, we
will eat out both lunch and dinner. Sadly, some of our restaurants are closing for good. My
wife tells me that local Facebook is about evenly divided about going out now. I don't get it
as these folks have been gathering in the supermarkets the whole time.
"I just want to trust some designated 'expert' to tell us when when we can put away the
masks and can take up hugging our friends and shaking hands while smiling and meeting new
acquaintances. What is a church service without that and all the stories of Christs care and
concern for the 'untouchables' of the world?"
I think that "expert" you seek is going to have to be the person you see in the mirror
every morning. The "designated experts" have no interest in encouraging you to go back to
living a life you love. As Eric Newhill stated, it's going to be up to free-thinking adults
to make those decisions for themselves. If you expect or hope for "experts" to protect you
from yourself, then you have too much faith in "experts" and in government. Take sensible
precautions as they relate to your own risk demographic and respect other people making those
choices for themselves. Otherwise let's all get on living like Americans.
Even in blissful 'pre rona' December the Fed's repo market had been sounding the alarms that
a serious bubble recession was coming. Nothing apparently was fixed from the last wall street
megadooshbaggery meltdown. See:
This means that even those who built up real estate equity will have a difficult time
short term liquifying that equity, which means that Chase, Wells Fargo, et al have a lot of
pessimism about the US real estate market, the thing they have made so much money on last few
years, and which they were supposed to have fixed.
well pilgrims ;) not only is the economy enduring sudden searing pandemic pain, it is also
feeling the beginning of a big bubble popping recession, which everybody in the financial
world was already freaking about well before the rona arrived. Perhaps endless Fed QE can
prop up equities markets through November, perhaps, but then it's all bets off into 2021 as
numerous wall street debts scams will have to be deleveraged.
Sir,
In the spirit of fairness, anti-body testing would allow scientists to identify who has the
anti-bodies and then track them to see if they become re-infected and, if so, at what level
of severity. That would shed light on the "herd immunity" theory (i.e. is there such a thing
and, if so, to what extent?).
Otherwise, calls for "universal testing" are just sound bites born of confusion and panic,
at best; another means of violating the rights of Americans at worst (e.g. making people wear
yellow stars, carrying papers that allow them to enjoy full or truncated societal
"privelges").
Widespread antibody testing will show covid-19 is more contagious than a lot of diseases,
but not not near as deadly as most people think. People will see they had it, didn't even
know it and are now immune to it at least in the near term. Fear will be deflated. We will
then have a known large segment of the population known to not capable of further spreading
the virus and a ready supply of antibody serum as an effective treatment for those who do get
infected. That will also diminish fear.
Covid-19 and our response to it is as much a political issue as it is a public health
issue. Trump was going to run on a booming economy. If he wants to get back to that strategy,
he has to banish the fear of the virus. That will get everyone back to work so they can eat
and pay rent, as well as continue to piss away their money on crap they don't need. Our
economy depends on all that. If Trump is smart, he best get to stepping and institute a
nationwide antibody testing program.
And Fauci has already been awarded the dunce cap with his 1980s assertion that HIV was going
kill us all. So I guess for his most recent action he gets the dunce cap with slide rule
cluster.
A cruise passenger interests website offered another informal poll - are you willing to
cruise again: 64% said as much as in the past; 10% said they would cruise even more to help
get the industry back on its feet. Therefore, in this obviously interested sample, 75% want
the cruise industry to start up again. Yesterday. 25% will choose to wait or not cruise
again.
The cruise industry passenger base remains willing and loyal. In fact they are probably
better trained in personal hygiene habits than most having had to deal with noro (aka
tourista ) in the past and a typical URI complaint commonly called" cruise crud" that
was most likely picked up on the air flight to get to the cruise port. The real numbers of
disease and mortality overall within this industry do not support the screaming head llnes
and lurid reporting.
It remains to be seen if one infection makes an individual immune for some time. IMO we
should follow the Atlas/Ioannides formula. I noticed in re-reading "Sharpsburg," that Hunter
McGuire appears therein.
What does an anti-body test do? I just had one last week and awaiting the results - was a
cruise passenger and international air passenger during the month of January in a later
suspected area. (not Asia).
Here is why I did the anti-body test: (Quest Labs - fee service, no RX- 99% accuracy -
drawn blood vial test)
1. Helps substantiate dates and areas of transmission that may not yet be in the data
pool.
2. Tracks the rates of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases occurring among the
"elderly", in order to see if there is an enhanced risk of not in this age group, if there
are no underlying co-morbidities.
3. Adds demographic data specific for the travel industry.
4. Allows possible donation of anti-body serum for research and perhaps mitigation of
those who are affected.
5. Personal peace of mind -been there and done that. Freedom to move about.
6. Provides baseline for duration of immunity; resilience of immunity or data showing
re-infection can be possible.
Primarily it is for data gathering to help stop the hysteria. That was worth the time,
money and blood donation for me. We will never know the true extent of this virus, its
impacts, its initial modeling accuracy until we start plugging facts into the "expert"
hypotheticals.
Taking one for the team is the way I see it. Will I now become a local Typhoid Mary and
our house burned down if this data becomes known? Or will people stop walking out into the
roadway in faux deference to my advanced age as I pass by, from our deliciously virtue
signaling "progressive" population in blue state California.
Am I right or wrong in thinking that when the injected liquidity plus existing cash
exceeds the amount of money that would haven been in the economy at this point then the
currency will begin to inflate?
"Provides baseline for duration of immunity; resilience of immunity or data showing
re-infection can be possible. Primarily it is for data gathering to help stop the hysteria."
Yes
Colonel, you are NOT wrong. The oil business in America is going to take a very long time to
recover. There are complete shutterings of businesses, bankruptcies and more - all while we
were in the middle of a downturn. Personally, I just folded up my tent because my my active
client list went from 21 to zero over this last month (and that includes intl clients).
As the number one buyer of US steel, the oilpatch represents much more than people
realize. We have also been the number one buyer of many other items - where sales have
disappeared as company quietly and reluctantly face the reality of the current induced
glut.
I'm being forced to change livelihoods - interesting for me, as I am short of the age to
get my SS check and too old to employ by most corporate masters....
Yes, I noticed Hunter Holmes when I reread Chancellorsville this time. I knew nothing
about him until you mentioned him a while back. He also founded what is now the VCU Medical
Center and was president of the AMA for a time. There is a statue of him on the State Capitol
grounds, but i haven't seen it yet.
It's likely Fauci's incorrect simply because just as central planners routinely failed when
it came to planning economic outcomes in the 20th century, so does that same central planning
fail now. Fauci once again may be brilliant, but he's no match for a U.S. economy comprised of
hundreds of millions of individuals making infinite informed decisions every second of every
day.
The same applies to Bill Gates. Some believe that his undeniable genius as a businessman
positions him to knowledgeably opine on how we the U.S. and the world can come back from the
virus. Gates has observed that businesses would be troubled with or without the lockdowns,
unemployment would be higher with or without them, so the plan should be to continue them until
we're better situated in terms of a vaccine.
Is Gates right? It's once again difficult to know. For one, his analysis ignores the
"unseen"; as in what would individuals and businesses have done had the response of politicians
to the virus been something like "You're all adults. Be careful."
If so, it's not unreasonable to suggest that Fauci, Gates and other intelligent individuals
would have strongly called for Americans to shelter-in-place, and tens of millions would have
done just that. At the same time, Elon Musk and investors like Michael Burry might have
responded in more intrepid fashion; calling for individuals and businesses to work around a
virus of unknown lethality.
[.] "For lack of a 75-cent piece of equipment, we're losing lives and putting more lives
at risk," said Lisa Lattanza, MD, chair of the Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation
at the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut.
I purchased masks this week that [usually cost] 75 cents per mask that were being sold for
$5.50, $6 on the market. We had to pay it. It's either that or not have the masks," she
said.
Lack of Masks Shows Lack of Value."[.]
That WHO basically fucked up because of Western pressure more than because of China is
obvious. Just look at the most recent idiocy they promoted: masks are useless. China would
never claim that - both because they rely massively on them and because they produce and sell
a lot of them. On the other hand, Western governments who were asleep at the wheel and never
bothered to store or produce facemasks were desperately trying to convince their sheep flock,
I mean, people, that they were all good, managed the crisis as best as anyone could, and that
there wasn't any shortage of masks because these weren't useful to begin with.
Case closed.
And for the eternal record of universal history: China's dictatorship obviously cared more
about its people than self-claimed democratic governments. Let that sink in for a minute.
There's a lot of trash science out there re:Covid- it was founded on trash science.
Maybe next post you could go into the trash science of the fraudulent tests
themselves.
In the mean time this is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand what is
going on- one of the most concise pieces on the subject to date:
The WHO makes gratuitous use of appellations such as "world" and "health" but is
actually a semi-private entity lavishly financed by Bill Gates and Big Pharma, which is owned
by a handful of highly inbred oligarchic entities that include Vanguard, BlackRock, Capital
Group, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Northern Trust and State Street, which in turn own each
other in various convoluted ways.
WHO's main function is to scare people into getting vaccinated and accepting expensive
drug regimens (barely half of which do any good at all), thus funneling resources toward Big
Pharma.
The World Health Organization establishes thresholds to determine whether to declare an
influenza epidemic that range between 2.5% and 5%. The novel coronavirus misses the mark by a
thousand-fold, yet the WHO has declared it to be the cause of a global pandemic.
If this seems like an extreme overreaction, that is because this is an extreme
overreaction.
Some conspiratorially-minded people may surmise that this is a conspiracy, but it
isn't. It is yet another blatant attempt to confiscate a chunk of the world's wealth by
requiring it to buy something worthless, just like this same set of medical/financial
interests did with the relatively worthless Tamiflu antiviral medication during the H1N1
swine flu pandemic of 2009-10 which caused a mere 18,036 deaths worldwide. This is a specific
group pursuing its own group interests.
Last month, the state paid Yaron Oren-Pines $47,656 per ventilator for 1,450
ventilators, three times the normal asking price,.....
...Oren-Pines has no known capability or expertise in making ventilators. According
to BuzzFeed, his social media shows expressions of support for Trump since at least
2015.
He has not provided the ventilators, and New York state is attempting to recover the
money, BuzzFeed reported. Oren-Pines would not comment to the online news site.
An unnamed official for the New York state government said the recommendation to deal
with Oren-Pines came directly from the White House coronavirus task force. A spokeswoman
for Vice President Mike Pence, who heads the task force, denied any involvement in making
the recommendation.
The carpetbaggers are always in the lead if not the instigators. Perhaps he was on the
last flight home.
"The U.S. has had sclerotic political leadership during this crisis. The U.S. is being
offered the "choice" between Trump, 73, and Biden, 77. Its other major political players are
Pelosi, 80, and McConnell, 78 .
Trump of course bears most of the blame for the Covid-19 Crisis.
But the Dems and liberal media also share a lot. Trump dithered for many crucial weeks after
China's CCP very belatedly shut down Wuhan on January 23, many weeks after the virus emerged
What were the Dems and liberal media doing during those crucial weeks? From December 18 to
February 5 they culminated three years of wasting the nation's time trying to impeach Trump for
Russia- and Ukraine-gate, as the virus picked up steam.
The Dems and liberal media held "debates" and primaries through March 17 in which Covid-19
was barely mentioned except in the context of Sanders' Medicare for All, focusing instead on
such issues as Bloomberg's NDA's (Biden's opponents are now using a similar #MeToo attack)."
• "The duty of an opposition party is to oppose."
In the face of a moratorium in the US, Dr Anthony Fauci – the director of the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and currently the leading doctor in the US
Coronavirus Task Force –
outsourced in 2015 the GOF research to China's Wuhan lab and licensed the lab to
continue receiving US government funding.
Dr. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
recently declared the anti-viral drug remdesivir as a "standard of care" based on unpublished
trials. But the judgment was sketchy and has come under question as it seems that the
government
moved the goalposts to achieve this outcome:
Instead of counting how many people taking the drug were kept alive on ventilators or died,
among other measures, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said it would
judge the drug primarily on a different outcome: how long it took surviving patients to
recover.
Death and other negative outcomes were moved to secondary measure status: They would still
be tracked, but they would no longer be the key measure of remdesivir's performance. The
switch -- which specialists said is unusual in major clinical trials but not unheard of --
was publicly disclosed on the government's clinicaltrials.gov website on April 16 but did not
receive much attention at the time.
...
"It raises a lot of flags, and it requires a lot of answers," Walid F. Gellad, a professor of
health policy and management at the University of Pittsburgh's Department of Medicine, said
in an interview, "especially when people start saying it's become the standard of care, and
all we saw was a news release in a trial with an outcome that was changed two weeks ago. It
really is striking."
A Chinese double blind study of remdesivir, previously published
in Lancet , had come to the conclusion that the drug had no statistically noticeable
influence on the length of recovery and the outcome.
One wonders how much White House influence was used to push that drug. White House influence
may also have been used in this ventilator acquisition that was
paid for but never delivered .
Needless to say, you did not need to be entombed in the infectious disease tunnel at the NIH
for 52 years like Dr. Fauci, a pretentious 79-year old windbag who should have himself been put
in a retirement home years ago, to realize that nursing homes are dense-packed with the frail,
disease-afflicted elderly.
So rather than wipe out $4 trillion of GDP via Lockdown Nation they might have started with
say $25 billion of incremental money for Medicare/Medicaid and the state public health agencies
to zero-in on protecting, isolating and treating the nursing home residents.
Hi B,
I think that we don't know if remdesivir works or not. The trial used patients that were very
sick. The virus had done its job and was no longer replicating exponentially. When you look
at these lungs they are full of exudate and superinfection and the damage is done. I am
surprised that there was any effect and the fact that there was is very encouraging. The time
to give a chain terminator like remdesivir is early in the infection as soon as the patient
presents and you have a positive test. You must hit the virus as it is exponentiating in the
nasopharynx. That is when you have to do the clinical trial then the outcome is admission to
ITU or not, then death or survival-- a really big trial.
I agree it is wrong to change the goal posts and it shouldn't have happened --- but the
clinical trial was flawed from the beginning any way.
In defense of remdesivir it works rather well in feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) which is
caused by a corona virus and is 100% lethal in cats. Remdesivir results in 100% survival with
occasional relapse that is still treatable with the drug. In humans, remdesivir will work
only if you give it early-- it is a powerful delayed chain terminator. So I do think the drug
will protect people that are in the early stages of the disease- so everyone will get it and
it will be huge for Gilead.
I think this remdesivir authorization was a genius move by the Trump administration. So
genial even Dr. Fauci must have immediately understood the catch and endorsed it, as it is
probable the drug must not have any grave collateral effects on the patients (as is the case
with hydroxycloroquine).
First of all, remdesivir helps one of America's biggest pharmaceuticals (Gilead).
Therefore, it will also help American capitalist reproduction.
Second, it will trigger a nationwide placebo effect thanks to widespread optimism and
petit-bourgeois euphoria, thus lowering the death rates (though not the infection rates), and
giving Trump an election boost in crucial areas (by the astroturf protests pattern, important
swing states in the Midwest).
Third, by the time the efficacy of remdesivir is debunked, the Trump administration can
simply state they acted with good will, with the "evidence" available at the time, and gently
apologize. It is the perfect plausible deniability.
Fauci should be fired for promoting this crap research on remdesivir. Changing the primary
endpoint is verboten, plain and simple. The only reason to change the primary endpoint is to
cherry-pick data in order to claim "success". Honest journals, if they still exist, will not
publish this rubbish, as it contravenes their industry's "Committee on Publication Ethics"
guidelines. The control arm of the trial was halted, another giant red flag, so there is
nothing to compare their cherry-picked data against.
This trial is now at the quality level of the rubbish research that "proves" homeopathy
"works". How can Fauci not be totally embarrassed by this? There must be powerful financial
forces behind this. No amount of air freshener can cover up the stink...
Trailer Trash,
FAUCI is now prohibited by Trump admin from testifying before Congress on the COVI debacle.
This criminal co-conspirator of Billy Goats owns the patents on the same HIV genes that just
happened to be found as gain-of-function additions to the genome of the Corona virus. PROVING
it is a lab made bioweapon. W/ Fauci's signature all over creation of this WMD. He should get
the electric chair for genocide.
Judy Mikovits gives compelling evidence that Fauci is a criminal that has the power to
retconn virus research. Her new book "Plague of Corruption" should be a great read, but I've
heard parts are hard to underestand.
Posted by: Frank Barnes | May 2 2020 20:28 utc | 12
Judy Mikovits gives compelling evidence that Fauci is a criminal that has the power to
retconn virus research. Her new book "Plague of Corruption" should be a great read, but
I've heard parts are hard to underestand.
Thanks Frank for the info, that is very noble of you!
Fauci did the same with AIDS drugs. Jumped on the first one regardless. Unfortunately, in
those days, people died and HIV was blamed when it likely was the drug. But, he's got almost
the same situation now. If you are deep with the virus, you'll probably die, so the drug used
is excused.
Watch the vaccine the US finally chooses. They are talking already about pushing it out in
this year, when the whole world knows it needs a year of testing.
So was Fauci an enthusiast of "gain of function" research? If so he is probably a criminal.
Notable quotes:
"... Dr. Fauci Backed Controversial Wuhan Lab With Millions Of U.S. Dollars For Risky Coronavirus Research ..."
"... [just] last year, the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses. ..."
"... In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million. ..."
IMHO, if this
Newsweek article date April 28, 2020, is credible, then Trump and cohorts should tread
carefully:
Dr. Fauci Backed Controversial Wuhan Lab With Millions Of U.S. Dollars For Risky
Coronavirus Research
[just] last year, the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the
organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and
other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.
In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7
million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program
followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat
coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating
viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a
risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.[.]
Dr. Fauci did not respond to Newsweek's requests for comment. NIH responded with a
statement that said in part: "Most emerging human viruses come from wildlife, and these
represent a significant threat to public health and biosecurity in the US and globally, as
demonstrated by the SARS epidemic of 2002-03, and the current COVID-19 pandemic....
scientific research indicates that there is no evidence that suggests the virus was created
in a laboratory."[.]
NIH gave a non-denial, avoidance denial. Congressmen were on Foxnews attacking the
funding. Where there is a whiff of smoke?
Additional articles on U.S. funding:
NPR FoxNews
NationalInterest cites Pompeo on Foxnews defending the funding. Also, UK papers repeat
U.S. funding.
Gleaming new tent hospitals sit empty on two suburban New York college campuses, never
having treated a single coronavirus patient. Convention centers that were turned into temporary
hospitals in other cities went mostly unused. And a
Navy hospital ship that offered help in Manhattan is soon to depart. When virus infections
slowed down or fell short of worst-case predictions, the globe was left dotted with dozens of
barely used or unused field hospitals. [ Too bad Cuomo didn't send COVID-19 patients from the
nursing homes to these ships for treatment... ]
In pandemic blame distribution Fauci and the CDC top should get mayor shares.
In financial crash blame distribution the New York FED with its top 5 controller /
bail-out receiver banks have big parts. It still holds the world's other Central Banks
hostage through its reserves and trade in U$ dollars only meme.
In the intelligence area it is not very different: also that branch of the US Deep State
failed.
The jaw-dropping stupidity of the Trump administration regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is
truly mind numbing. There is an old dictum that states that there is no such thing as
'military intelligence.' To that I add there is no such thing as 'intelligence' in Washington
DC either, or the Trump White House for that matter. If you try to look for it, you will only
find hacks, flacks, quacks and certifiable jerks. You would do better to waste your time and
money looking for the Loch Ness Monster, Big Foot, or the Tooth Fairy. The prospect that
Trump could get anther four years as president is depressing indeed. All that would be left
is divine intervention, and I don't think that is any more likely than finding the
aforementioned mythical creatures.
"... Among the reported influenza deaths in the US, how many cases were infected with COVID-19? Did the US government cover up the spread of coronavirus with the flu? When will the US government make public the samples of the US influenza virus and its genetic sequence, or allow experts from the WHO or the United Nations to sample and analyze? ..."
1. Regarding the restarted avian influenza virus modification experiment last year, why
does the US release no more updates?
The Science reported in February 2019 that US authorities had quietly approved the avian
influenza virus modification experiment. The research, aiming to transform the H5N1 virus to
be more capable of infecting mammals, was controversial and considered extremely dangerous.
Some experts believe that the modification may increase the risk of human-to-human
transmission of the virus. The question is why the US government decided to unfreeze the
experiment 4 years after it was halted, and why there are no more updates regarding the
experiment.
2. The United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID)
was previously closed. What is the truth behind ?
The Global Biodefence reported in April that the USAMRIID, US Army's primary institution
and facility for biological research headquartered in Fort Detrick, Maryland, has resumed
full operation. The institution was once ordered to halt the study of biological select
agents and toxins (BSATs) last July. In March, there was a petition on the White House
website demanding the clarification of the shutdown of USAMRIID. Given that these issues have
become a primary public concern, what is the US government's response?
3. The US Department of Health and Human Services ran a scenario last year that was
similar to the COVID-19 outbreak. Is this just a coincidence?
In March, the New York Times quoted a draft report obtained from the US government saying
that from January to August 2019, the US Department of Health and Human Services ran a
scenario called "Crimson Contagion" that simulated the fictional outbreak involving a group
of tourists visiting China. They then became infected and flew to various countries,
including the US. Last October, a high-level pandemic exercise named Event 201 was hosted by
a couple of US organizations. The drill simulated a scenario that a fictional virus called
CAPS, which causes more severe symptoms than SARS and transmits via the respiratory route
like the common flu, had caused a pandemic. Like COVID-19, there is no vaccine for CAPS.
Given the fact that the simulated virus is so much like COVID-19, is this just a
coincidence? Another question is, why did it not take enough preventive measures at the early
stages of the coronavirus outbreak since the US has predicted a similar pandemic?
4. US intelligence officials warned of coronavirus crisis as early as last November. Why
the warning was ignored?
In April, according to the American Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), it was said that, as
early as late November 2019, US intelligence officials had warned the Defense Intelligence
Agency, the Pentagon, and the White House that an infectious disease was sweeping through
Wuhan, China.
Last November, the US National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI) issued a report
detailing the coronavirus pandemic, which was later identified as "COVID-19". Some analysts
believed that the outbreak in Wuhan might have evolved into a catastrophic event. According
to the Washington Post, in more than two months from January to February, Trump had received
intensive warnings from the US intelligence agencies about the coronavirus. Why did the US
government not declare a "National Emergency" until March 13?
5. Among the reported influenza deaths in the US, can the US clarify how many cases are
actually infected with COVID-19?
Japanese Asahi Television reported on February 21 that some of the 14,000 people
reportedly killed by influenza in the US might have died from coronavirus, which became a hot
topic soon after.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report at the end of
February, showing that there have been at least 32 million flu illnesses in the US that
winter.
On March 11, at the House of Representatives, Robert Redfield, the director of the US CDC,
admitted that some in the US who were previously thought to have been killed from the flu may
have been infected with coronavirus.
Among the reported influenza deaths in the US, how many cases were infected with
COVID-19? Did the US government cover up the spread of coronavirus with the flu? When will
the US government make public the samples of the US influenza virus and its genetic sequence,
or allow experts from the WHO or the United Nations to sample and analyze?
6. When did the novel coronavirus first appear in the US? Did community transmission of
the coronavirus start sooner than it was reported?
A report released in late April by local health authorities suggests that a 57-year-old
woman from Santa Clara County of California died from COVID-19 on February 6, some 20 days
earlier than the date the US announced its first death caused by the virus.
The Los Angeles Times quoted Santa Clara County health officer Sara Cody in a piece
saying, "we presume that each of them represents community transmission and that there was
some significant level of virus circulating in our community in early February."
County Executive Officer Jeffrey V. Smith said this is evidence that the coronavirus was
circulating in California as early as January or even earlier.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered all counties in the state to review autopsies of
suspected coronavirus deaths dating back to December.
When did the novel coronavirus first appear in the US? Did community transmission of the
coronavirus start sooner than it was reported?
7. How did the US get the virus strains so soon to start the first human testing of a
vaccine against COVID-19?
The Wall Street Journal on March 16 reported that the first human testing of Moderna
Inc.'s experimental vaccine against the COVID-19 had already begun. Experts immediately
raised questions about the speed of the vaccine development, saying that it would not be
possible unless the US had obtained the virus strains from very early on. So how did the US
start the first human testing of the vaccine so soon? When and how did they get the virus
strains?
8. Why did the US government keep downplaying the pandemic while its officials privately
dumped stocks?
According to the Washington Post, US Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr
and his wife sold up to 1.7 million in 33 different stocks just one week before the market
plunged. Why did these officials at the Committee act so quickly while the government was
continually understating the pandemic?
Why is the vital information kept confidential to the public while the government
officials were taking advantage to practice insider-trading?
9. Why are US experts not allowed to discuss COVID-19 in public?
The New York Times reported that the White House began tightening controls for all
coronavirus messaging from health officials on February 27 after Vice President Mike Pence
led the nation's epidemic prevention and control efforts.
Several scientists and government health officials, including the nation's leading
infectious disease expert Anthony S. Fauci, have been asked to make statements or make public
appearances about the COVID-19 only after consultation with the US vice president's
office.
Why does the United States, which claims free speech, not allow experts and scholars to
discuss the novel coronavirus in public? Does the US want to hide something or fear of
something?
10. What research is being done in the US overseas biological laboratories? Why does the
US keep tight-lipped about it?
Natalia Poklonskaya, deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs, has
proposed verifying the legitimacy of US biological laboratories around the world, according
to Sputnik news agency.
Not long ago, a spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry expressed concern about the
establishment of a biological laboratory in countries from the former Soviet Union.
Grigory Trofimchuk, a Russian expert in the field of internal affairs, foreign affairs,
and national defense, said the work of these biological laboratories was never disclosed to
the outside world, and that they had caused several problems, with widespread outbreaks of
dangerous infectious diseases such as measles at the laboratory site.
What research is being done in these biological laboratories? Why does the US keep
tight-lipped about the function, use, the safety of these biological laboratories?
Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation has injected substantial sums of money into both
groups. This year alone, the Gates Foundation has already given
$79 million to Imperial College, and in 2017 the Foundation announced a $279 million investment into the IHME
to expand its work collecting health data and creating models.
Anthony Fauci, meanwhile, has
become the face of the US government's coronavirus response, echoing Bill Gates' assertion
that the country will not "get back to normal" until "a good vaccine" can be found to insure
the public's safety.
ANTHONY FAUCI : If you want to get to pre-coronavirus . . . You know, that might not ever
happen, in the sense of the fact that the threat is there. But I believe with the therapies
that will be coming online, and with the fact that I feel confident that over a period of
time we will get a good vaccine, that we will never have to get back to where we are right
back now.
Beyond just their frequent collaborations and cooperation in the
past, Fauci has direct ties to Gates projects and funding. In 2010, he was appointed to the
Leadership
Council of the Gates-founded "
Decade of Vaccines " project to implement a Global Vaccine Action Plan, a project to which
Gates committed $10 billion of funding. And in October of last year, just as the current
pandemic was beginning, the Gates Foundation
announced a $100 million contribution to the National Institute of Health to help, among
other programs, Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases' research into
HIV.
... ... ...
AMY GOODMAN : And the charity of billionaire Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife
Melinda is under criticism following the disclosure it's substantially increased its holdings
in the agribusiness giant Monsanto to over $23 million. Critics say the investment in Monsanto
contradicts the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's stated commitment to helping farmers and
sustainable development in Africa.
LAURENCE LEE : The study from the pressure group Global Justice now paints a picture of
the Gates Foundation partly as an expression of corporate America's desire to profit from
Africa, and partly a damning critique of its effects.
POLLY JONES : You could have a case where the initial research is done by a Gates-funded
institution. And the media reporting on how well that research is conducted is done, the
media outlet is a Gates-funded outlet, or maybe a Gates-funded journalist from a media
program. And then the program is implemented more widely by a Gates-funded NGO. I mean . . .
There are some very insular circles here.
LEE : Among the many criticisms, the idea that private finance can solve the problems of
the developing world. Should poor farmers be trapped into debt by having to use chemicals or
fertilizers under written by offshoot of the foundation?
This is no mere theoretical conflict of interest. Gates is held up as a hero for donating
$35.8 billion worth of his Microsoft stock to the foundation, but during the course of his
"Decade of Vaccines," Gates' net worth has actually doubled, from $54
billion to $103.1 billion .
The Rockefeller story provides an instructive template for this vision of
tycoon-turned-philanthropist. When Rockefeller faced a public backlash, he helped spearhead the
creation of a system of private foundations that connected in with his business interests.
Leveraging his unprecedented oil monopoly fortune into unprecedented control over wide swathes
of public life, Rockefeller was able to kill two birds with one stone: moulding society in his
families' own interests even as he became a beloved figure in the public imagination.
Similarly, Bill Gates has leveraged his software empire into a global health, development
and education empire, steering the course of investment and research and ensuring healthy
markets for vaccines and other immunisation products. And, like Rockefeller, Gates has been
transformed from the feared and reviled head of a formidable hydra into a kindly old man
generously giving his wealth back to the public.
But not everyone has been taken in by this PR trick. Even The Lancet observed this
worrying transformation from software monopolist to health monopolist back in 2009, when the
extent of this Gates-led monopoly was becoming apparent to all:
The first guiding principle of the [Bill & Melinda Gates] Foundation is that it is
"driven by the interests and passions of the Gates family." An annual letter from Bill Gates
summarises those passions, referring to newspaper articles, books, and chance events that
have shaped the Foundation's strategy. For such a large and influential investor in global
health, is such a whimsical governance principle good enough?
This brings us back to the question: Who is Bill Gates? What are his driving interests? What
motivates his decisions?
These are not academic questions. Gates' decisions have controlled the flows of billions of
dollars, formed international partnerships pursuing wide-ranging agendas, ensured the creation
of "healthy markets" for big pharma vaccine manufacturers. And now, as we are seeing, his
decisions are shaping the entire global response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Next week, we will further explore Gates' vaccination initiatives, the business interests
behind them, and the larger agenda that is beginning to take shape as we enter the "new normal"
of the Covid-19 crisis.
In pandemic blame distribution Fauci and the CDC top should get mayor shares.
In financial crash blame distribution the New York FED with its top 5 controller /
bail-out receiver banks have big parts. It still holds the world's other Central Banks
hostage through its reserves and trade in U$ dollars only meme.
In the intelligence area it is not very different: also that branch of the US Deep State
failed.
Evil intent and premeditation are perfectly compatible with bad planning and gross
incompetence.
Look at every US war of aggression: It fails utterly at every affirmative goal, but so far
always accomplishes the purely negative goals of mass murder, gross physical destruction and
generating failed states. Same for disaster responses like with Katrina: They couldn't save
any lives or help poor people rebuild, but they could complete the destruction of social
infrastructure which the hurricane hadn't finished off.
That's the US, domestically and around the world. And people really think any kind
of intensive response to an epidemic would have any other kind of outcome?
... it wouldn't surprise me if they deployed this virus in China without assuming, or
caring about, blowback in the US.
karlof1 has speculated along the same lines weeks ago.
My understanding of karlof1's argument is as follows: China turned the "weapon" (assuming
it was a deliberate attack) back on USA by revealing the virus instead of keeping the
outbreak quiet. The result has been the destabilizing of US society because USA leadership
had never planned to respond to the virus in any way that is appropriate to a new virus.
The people need science. The teaching is a legacy of pathologist Rudolph Virchow who was at
the barricades in Berlin in 1848. A journal entry in that year of revolutions reads, "
Medicine is a social
science , and politics nothing but medicine on a grand scale." The pioneering Virchow first
pronounced upon the biological importance of cells in health and disease. He was the "
chief founder of
modern scientific medicine." (William H. Welch, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine 1902),
Virchow inspires today's imperative that the entitled classes not abandon science in the
face of danger nor twist science to fit proprietary uses. This is the Virchow whose study of a
typhus outbreak in Upper Silesia convinced him that class-based oppression – poverty and
lack of education – was responsible for the epidemic, the Virchow who helped form the
German
Radical Party in 1884 and served in the Prussian and German parliaments.
Ask immunologist and virologist Rick Bright about science serving the people. That expert in
preventing viral disease, particularly influenza, on April 21 was removed from his position in
the Department of Health and Human Services. Bright was in charge of the Biomedical Advanced
Research and Development Authority and of efforts to develop an anti-COVID 19 vaccine. He had
63 scientific
articles to his credit.
Bright told the press that, "I believe
this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of
dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically
vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit.
I am speaking out because to combat this deadly virus, science -- not politics or cronyism --
has to lead the way."
He added that, "contrary to misguided directives, I limited the broad use of chloroquine and
hydroxychloroquine, promoted by the Administration as a panacea, but which clearly lack
scientific merit."
Science has been a bit player in the U.S. government's confrontation with the pandemic.
President Trump's anti-science attitudes are far from the whole story, although his cut-off of
U.S. funding for the World Health Organization was as dangerous as it was symbolic.
That government failed to take steps that would have allowed scientific inquiry during the
early stages of the pandemic Early case-finding and tracking of contacts did not take place.
Investigators lacked the raw material that might have allowed them to define the contours of an
evolving epidemic, its special characteristics.
The fact of delay was clear on April 21 when a California medical examiner announced that
COVID 19 had accounted for one death on February 6 and another on February 17. Neither victim
had traveled outside the United States. The onset of their infections was presumably in
mid-January. All along, authorities had regarded a Washington-state patient who tested positive
on February 26 as the first U.S. victim of community-acquired infection. Yet CDC director
Robert Redfield, testifying before a congressional committee on March 11, revealed that some
patients assumed to have died from influenza did die from COVID 19 infection.
Also, the administration's China-bashing and even conspiracy theories about the origins of
the pandemic testify to its dismissal of useful scientist research, particularly the findings
of scientists throughout the world who know about the beginnings of the pandemic, in China.
British and German scientists " reconstructed the early
'evolutionary paths' of COVID-19 in humans." A Cambridge University team "mapped some of the
original spread of the new coronavirus through its mutations, which creates different viral
lineages." Virus genomes were studied " from across the world between 24 December 2019 and 4
March 2020."
The researchers categorized three types of COVID 19. The original Wuhan virus was type A;
its mutated versions showed up in the United States and Australia. Type B, predominating in
Wuhan, stayed put in East Asia. Type C appeared only in Europe, Singapore, Hong Kong and South
Korea. The researchers "traced established infection routes: the mutations and viral lineages
joined the dots between known cases." Such information about the virus's biologic behavior
might have enabled public health officials to identify at-risk populations within the United
States and abroad.
Lead author Peter Forster suggested to a reporter that in Wuhan "the first infection and
spread among humans of COVID-19 occurred between mid-September and early December." His
disclosure has implications for U.S. military athletes participating in the "World Military
Games" in Wuhan in late October. They were among 9308 military
athletes on hand from 100 countries. The athletes might have carried the virus with them on
their return to the various nations.
Zoologist Peter Daszak, president of the New York – based EcoHealth Alliance, does
research in China on inter-species sharing of viruses. He pointed out in 2013 that,
"Coronaviruses evolve very rapidly [and] are exquisitely evolved to jump from one species to
another." At the time, he was reflecting on the SARS
coronavirus epidemic of 10 years earlier.
He offered a suggestion that, if acted upon, might have prevented the COVID 19 pandemic. The
cost, Daszak estimated, would have been "about $1.5bn to discover all the viruses in mammals. I
think that would be a great investment because once you have done it, you can develop vaccines
and get ready with test kits to find the first stage of emergence and stop it."
This story of the U.S. government's abuse of science ends with lessons learned. They are:
(1) science must exist for the benefit of all people and not be left to the mercies of the rich
and powerful, (2) a government restricting and disrespecting scientists, like Dr. Bright, is
dangerous to the people, and (3) a capability to plan is of the essence to a state that would
assure the safety and flourishing of all its people. These basic standards, it seems here, will
be identifying features for those societies that do emerge relatively intact from the pandemic.
The odds favor the socialist ones.
Apr 16, 2020 Dr. Ron Paul Interview: Bill Gates & Tony Fauci Are Determined To Run The
World by Vaccines
Dr. Paul and Spiro discuss the current coronavirus crisis and the political, social and
economic fallout effecting millions of Americans, as people begin to display resistance to
the government lockdown response.
2.3 TRillion Dollars Missing from DOD Day before 9/11/ 2001
SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 Defense Business Practices
Secretary Rumsfeld and other officials talked with reporters about the need to refine the
Defense Department's business practices. An opening ceremony will kick off Acquisition
and Logistics Excellence Week. They answered questions from members of the media
Watch this RT interview with Robert Kennedy to see how corrupt the CDC is. We cannot trust
this corrupt organization with our health. The CDC has a large financial interest in pushing
untested vaccines on the public.
WHO is even more under the control of Big Pharma. The organization is corrupt beyond the
meaning of the word. "The WHO is a sock puppet for the pharmaceutical industry." -- Robert F.
Kennedy Jr.
""Back in 2014, the Obama administration prohibited the U.S. from giving any money to any
laboratory, including in the U.S., that was fooling around with these viruses. Prohibited!
Despite that, Dr. Fauci gave $3.7 million to the Wuhan laboratory -- and then even after the
State Department issued reports about how unsafe that laboratory was, and how suspicious they
were in the way they were developing a virus that could be transmitted to humans,"Giuliani
claimed
So, the guy who is heading up the Corona response personally oversaw the funding of the lab
that created it......COME ON!
xxx 2 hours ago
I am a consistent complainer over the Obama administration's policies but this is one policy
where I admire them. THIS is what I mean when I keep complaining about the scientific
community. Obama had it right and should have been even more vocal in their opposition to
misguided research. If the reports on Fauci funding this are true it should be exposed and
LOUDLY vilified. WHEN are we going to hold the scientific community accountable? Do you know
how many brilliant and decent scientists are being muted because of the likes of these type
scientists that want free reign to do whatever they want?
Here's my point: If a scientist lower in prestige than Dr. Fauci had written a paper
defining "playing with viruses as important research" as unnecessary and dangerous, he/she
would be putting their very careers at risk due to Fauci's power. They've been doing it to any
scientist that disputes climate change models, to the point of even firing editors that allow
varying opinions. I'm not saying scientists are bad, just the opposite. Good Scientists are
being stifled by a small powerful few within their leagues.
These lockdowns have ended life as we know it, no matter which position you take. I do think
it has been a mistake not to quarantine nursing homes, ltc facilities, hospitals, etc..
Including the docs, nurses, workers. Those are the vectors & 50% of covid deaths could
have been prevented, esp in NY, like that. At year-end, we can look at all-cause mortalities
trends, see how this year stacks up. I hope these measures make sense given the extreme
poverty, violence, death they will cause. There will be no permanent vaccine, they've been
trying w/Coronav's for a long time. This thing is a fact of life going forward. It will
mutate like any other cold or flu. Are we going to shut down & go Orwell every time it
pops up? We're f'ed.
Neil Ferguson hasn't been part of b's coronavirus narrative, but his bad statistics (he has a
history) are key to the whole story. Great opinion piece by R.R. Reno
:
"On March 16, Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London predicted a coronavirus death toll
of more than two million in the United States alone. He arrived at this number by assuming
that infection would be nearly universal and the fatality rate would be high -- a terrifying
prospect. The next day, Stanford epidemiologist John Ioannidis sifted through the data and
predicted less widespread infection and a fatality rate of between 0.05 and 1.0 percent --
not that different from the common flu. The coronavirus is not the common flu. It has
different characteristics, afflicting the old more than the young, men more than women.
Nevertheless, all data trends since mid-March show that Ferguson was fantastically wrong and
Ioannidis was largely right about its mortal threat. [fairleft: Reno goes too far here: data
indicates Covid-19 is worse than the flu for the vulnerable, possibly much worse depending on
age and the severity of their vulnerability.]
"But Ferguson's narrative has triumphed, helped by our incontinent and irresponsible
media. ...
"Our entire ruling class, which united behind catastrophism and the untested methods of
mass shutdown, is implicated in the unfolding fiasco.
"Journalists continue to sustain the pandemic narrative. Ioannidis is still ignored,
though the evidence I outlined above has been building for weeks. ..."
[[U of Oxford prediction: "Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data,
increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of
misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR somewhere between
0.1% and 0.36%." All studies so far are flawed and not all are within that range, but here
are basically ALL of them, which generally point to the Oxford prediction being about
right:
NYC shopping center: 0.6%
Santa Clara County: 0.1 - 0.2%
LA County: 0.1 - 0.3%
Oise, France high school: 0.0%
Gangelt, Germany: 0.37%
Bergamo, Italy: 0.57%
Lombardio, Italy: 0.87%
Iceland: 0.05%
UK: 0.9%
China: 0.66%
Boston homeless shelter: 0.0%
US Navy ship: 0.07% ]]
R.R. Reno concludes:
"We've been stampeded into a regime of social control that is unprecedented in our
history. Our economy has been shattered.... As unemployment numbers skyrocket and Congress
spends trillions, the political stakes rise.
"The experts, professionals, bureaucrats, and public officials who did this to us have
tremendous incentives to close ranks and say, 'It is not wise to tell people that the danger
was never grave and now has passed.' Sustaining the coronavirus narrative will require many
lies. It will be up to us to insist on the truth."
I cannot suggest more strongly for anyone seeking the truth about this Corona Virus that you
HAVE to listen to an interview with Dr Mikovits who had originally worked on the discovery of
the Aids Virus and who was bullied and threatened by Fauci. YOU HAVE TO listen to this
Scientist!!!
I am NOT connected to this site in any way but I think this interview HAS to spread
throughout the World because this Scientist knows what she is talking about. AND, it is very
scary.
...This interview with Dr Mikovits tells us what this is all about and why Fauci cannot be
trusted. Only goes for 15 mins. But this is the most damning insight yet to be shared on the
CV
"... As of Thursday, 23 employees at the 4,000-employee VA hospital, had tested positive, according to an update the hospital director emailed to employees. Another 45 employees are home awaiting test results. The hospital declined to say how many of the employees who are positive or are awaiting results are nurses, or name which parts of the hospital they work in. ..."
"... Three VA nurses said they were given N95 respirators for several days early in the crisis in March, but after that they were given surgical masks, which provide less protection from the coronavirus. Another nurse reported wearing only a surgical mask the entire time caring for coronavirus patients. The nurses, who work in a unit that treats COVID-19 positive patients or patients awaiting test results who are suspected to be positive, spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to news media and their job security could be at risk if they spoke publicly. ..."
"... The hospital had 73 confirmed coronavirus cases among patients as of Friday, and four inpatient deaths. "Currently every health care system is taking steps to conserve PPE. VA is no different," Hodge wrote in a series of responses by email to questions. Hodge also said that the hospital is issuing surgical masks to all staff who work in non-COVID-19 units. ..."
"... "Those staff are provided one surgical mask weekly to assist in protecting high-risk patients who are asymptomatic," he wrote. ..."
"... Since the number of COVID-19 tests are limited nationwide, there is no COVID-19 testing capability at our CBOC locations. Please call your provider to determine whether you would be a candidate for testing. If so, then you may proceed to the Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center in Richmond, Virginia where Monday – Friday, 8:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m., a Drive-Thru Clinic is available for screening and testing (if you need it); you will be triaged according to your symptoms. Also, Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m., you may be directed to be seen in the medical center's High Consequence Infections (HCI) Clinic. Last, depending on your symptoms, you may go to the hospital's Emergency Department or to an Urgent Care Center or Emergency Department in your area. ..."
"... Much of the federal stockpile of PPE sent to the states had passed their expire dates, 2010 for some, and was either useless or had to be repaired. I blame the failure on the person, or persons, charged with monitoring the wharehoused stockpiles. The president only knows what he's told. He can't micromanage the nation. He needs Jack Webb directing him to stick with the facts. ..."
"... I read somewhere the V.A. ordered the masks but F.E.M.A expropriated them on the directions of Jared Kushner, who will later decide who receives the masks...something about the National Emergency Stockpile...what a mess. ..."
Colonel Lang sent me an eye opening link last night concerning the Hunter Holmes McGuire VA
hospital in Richmond. Here are some excerpts from the Richmond Times-Dispatch article.
-- -- -- --
As of Thursday, 23 employees at the 4,000-employee VA hospital, had tested positive,
according to an update the hospital director emailed to employees. Another 45 employees are
home awaiting test results. The hospital declined to say how many of the employees who are
positive or are awaiting results are nurses, or name which parts of the hospital they work
in.
Three VA nurses said they were given N95 respirators for several days early in the
crisis in March, but after that they were given surgical masks, which provide less protection
from the coronavirus. Another nurse reported wearing only a surgical mask the entire time
caring for coronavirus patients. The nurses, who work in a unit that treats COVID-19 positive
patients or patients awaiting test results who are suspected to be positive, spoke on condition
of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to news media and their job security
could be at risk if they spoke publicly.
The hospital had 73 confirmed coronavirus cases among patients as of Friday, and four
inpatient deaths. "Currently every health care system is taking steps to conserve PPE. VA is no
different," Hodge wrote in a series of responses by email to questions. Hodge also said that
the hospital is issuing surgical masks to all staff who work in non-COVID-19 units."Those staff are provided one surgical mask weekly to assist in protecting high-risk
patients who are asymptomatic," he wrote. (Richmond Times-Dispatch)
-- -- --
I'm not surprised by the numbers. Richmond, itself, is a virus hot spot although that is
mostly due to several deadly assisted living/nursing home outbreaks. What shocks me is the PPE
situation. The fact that nurses have to treat known Covid-19 patients with hospital masks
rather than the N95 respirators is only moderately better than third world conditions in my
view. Hospital masks offer the wearer no protection against the aerosolized virus. If the
patients were wearing those masks, it would be more helpful than the nurses wearing them.
Here's a tip. If you can still smell odors like onions or bacon while wearing the mask, the
aerosolized virus can get into your lungs. Hospital masks and other improvised masks protect
those around the wearer, not the mask wearer. The concept behind the universal wearing of such
masks is mutual protection. For any of you who spent time in the infantry, it's the same
concept behind the DePuy fighting positions where you are not defending yourself. You are
forming interlocking fields of fire to protect your comrades to the left and right of you.
Protecting those around you actually provides the best protection for all of you. We wear masks
in grocery stores and other such places to protect the entire community, not just our own sorry
asses.
But back to the situation at McGuire. In the early days of the pandemic in America, the
hospital instituted a screening program at the hospital entrances consisting of temperature and
health interview. We were told to expect delays and to be given a mask for wear in the
hospital. Not long after that, we were called to reschedule our appointments to May or beyond.
By mid-April, this was the COVID-19 testing situation.
Since the number of COVID-19 tests are limited nationwide, there is no COVID-19
testing capability at our CBOC locations. Please call your provider to determine whether you
would be a candidate for testing. If so, then you may proceed to the Hunter Holmes McGuire VA
Medical Center in Richmond, Virginia where Monday – Friday, 8:30 a.m. – 1:00
p.m., a Drive-Thru Clinic is available for screening and testing (if you need it); you will
be triaged according to your symptoms. Also, Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 4:00
p.m., you may be directed to be seen in the medical center's High Consequence Infections
(HCI) Clinic. Last, depending on your symptoms, you may go to the hospital's Emergency
Department or to an Urgent Care Center or Emergency Department in your area.
McGuire seems to have had all its ducks in a row. It's what I expect. This VA medical center
is well run. The professionalism, pride and morale among the staff is astoundingly high. It
shows among us broke down old vets who show up for care. We are proud of McGuire. That this
fine facility is now forced to ration out PPE to its staff is a travesty. The VA dropped the
ball. The federal government dropped the ball for several administrations. PPE should have been
stockpiled at all levels and those stockpiles should have been replenished by a push logistics
system.
That's the long term screw up. In the more immediate term, the federal government should
have been acquiring that PPE and forcing industry to massively produce supplies back in
January. Trump should have invoked and used the Defense Production Act robustly in January
rather than waiting until March and April to weakly wield that executive authority. Every
hospital and every first responder should have had all the PPE needed. Every household could
have been sent a dozen disposable masks with a note from President Trump telling us to keep
these in case we need them. What a galvanizing message that would have sent across the nation.
Even if Covid-19 proved to be a non-problem, it would have been a message of Churchillian
defiance in the face of a potential threat. A missed opportunity for both the American people
and Trump.
"The proning and the high-flow nasal cannulas combined have brought patient oxygen levels
from around 40% to 80% and 90%, so it's been fascinating and wonderful to see," Spiegel
said."
It isn't just the VA, hospitals all over the country are short of PPE. And that is one of the
problems with opening up the country too soon. Unprotected staff in suddenly flooded
hospitals become ill themselves risking the viability of local health systems.
I read a while back that the key supply chain issue with N-95 masks is that their
essential core material is a synthetic spun fiber that we are completely reliant on China for
sourcing. In addition. the machines that make this fiber are complex, quite expensive and
there is no capability to quickly and significantly ramp up their production. Further they
are challenging to set up and operate.
And for perspective, of the 200 million masks China currently makes a day, only 600,000
are N95 standard masks, used by medical personnel,
So yet another "essential supply chain" item for a critical health system need that simply
can't be ramped up out of this air.
Hopefully some one in the Federal system is looking for all similar needs and working on a
plan to facilitate onshore manufacturing.
I see this as a long term "lack of US preparedness" problem vs. something that could have
been easily addressed if the administration had moved a couple on months earlier..
We have the same problems here in the UK. With people, mainly it seems like in the MSM,
blaming the Government's leadership for the supply issues.
Ignoring totally the management of our respective national health organizations who knew,
at the latest in mid January, that there was probably a nasty contagious problem coming down
the tracks, that would, based on already clear Chinese actions, need more PPE than was on
their shelves.
Bear in mind that, in the UK at least, hundreds of these NHS bureaucrats earn twice what a
Government minister earns and a few twice the PM's salary. In both nations they have failed
their people dismally, seemingly like rabbits trapped in the headlights. None will be
punished of course for failure, they are just pleased that the Government steps up and takes
the blame.
Then we have the academics and think tank personnel. All accepted as impartial and
offering honest opinions based on state of the art models. Again the Governments take what
they are offered as gospel and acts on it. Only to discover that the models are more of the
garbage in garbage out variety, not fit for purpose. Then we find how much funding the
impartial academics are receiving from potentially very interested parties, as there are $Bs
at stake. In the UK there was a Pandemic 2016 exercise to check things out. Result everything
in NHS under control. In the real world under four years later, a shambles. Did you have a
similar last autumn?
The real heroes and heroines in this saga are the doctors, nurses and their support and
ancillary staff who are actually at the sharp end. Many working in appallingly unsafe
conditions. Hats off to them.
For 200 plus years our hospitals utilized laundries to cleanse their medical protection gear
(PPE) until the advent of synthetic PPE. The present generation is taught to utilize the N95
mask and other gear once and then trash it. This was derived as a manner in reducing Sepsis
and MRSA in hospitals and an effective one though those diseases are still present.
Our hearts went out to these young medical personnel without the plastic masks and gear as
they were working outside of what they were taught and they were much more susceptible to the
Covid-19.
Now we all saw every Chinaman walking around Wuhan with a N-95 mask in January and
unfortunately those were our masks that were re-routed to the Chinese people. Hopefully we
have now learned a very hard lesson that Just in Time Inventory does not work for medical
diseases or viruses and that the USA needs to manufacture all PPE and medicine in the USA
amongst other things.
Regarding the political implications I can only say that the guy in the hot seat made things
happen when the chips were down something his predecessors nor his competitor had/have the
ability to do in a timely manner. Coercion worked.
Much of the federal stockpile of PPE sent to the states had passed their expire dates, 2010
for some, and was either useless or had to be repaired. I blame the failure on the person, or
persons, charged with monitoring the wharehoused stockpiles. The president only knows what
he's told. He can't micromanage the nation. He needs Jack Webb directing him to stick with
the facts.
We have two groups of psychopaths vying for political power.
I read somewhere the V.A. ordered the masks but F.E.M.A expropriated them on the directions of Jared Kushner, who will
later decide who receives the masks...something about the National Emergency Stockpile...what a mess.
It is becoming clearer with each passing day that the death toll from the Wuhan virus is not
rising exponentially as the "experts" predicted but only modestly in some places while
levelling off or even declining almost everywhere else in the country --
as well as the world . The incidence of infection borders on nil in the hot and humid
countries, where the number of deaths remains in the double or very low triple digits
four months after the virus emerged from the Wuhan province of China.
Common sense alone indicates that the number of deaths will ultimately be nowhere near the 2
million without "mitigation" or a best case 100,000 to 240,000 with "mitigation" as predicted
by "Tony and Deborah" at the White House press briefings that have fueled nationwide panic.
Tony and Deb have
since revised their "models" downward to predict 40,000 to 178,000 deaths. And that
prediction has already been lowered again as the IMHE model Tony and Deb have been touting
during the briefings now "predicts" 81,766 deaths by August 4. That prediction
would require some 18,000 people to die every month between now and then, even though at 10,000
deaths
since February 29 -- a number consistent with a heavy flu season -- we appear to have
reached the peak and a decline is already evident .
At some point, Tony and Deb will be "predicting" precisely what has already happened, as we
saw with the "models" that first predicted Hillary Clinton was certain to win the Presidency.
And when the final death toll fails even to approach what they first predicted in order to
panic the whole country into a nationwide lockdown never before seen in human history, they
will make the unprovable, non-falsifiable, junk science claim that "mitigation worked."
But it is becoming increasingly clear that "mitigation" has done nothing but cause a
pointless, catastrophic disruption of social and economic life. This seems to delight the lying
media and their Democrat partners, who are striving to keep fear alive, avoid or minimize any
good news about the numbers, overstate the burden on local hospitals (without any unedited
video or other reliable evidence), argue against curative treatment by hydroxychloroquine or
otherwise, get everybody into masks after months of "expert" advice that masks are ineffective,
and generally prolong the economic damage and loss of civil liberties for months to come.
As the actual numbers belie the pseudo-scientific prophecies of doom, however, the lockdown
of America that began with Democrat governors and mayors now exhibits a curious and hardly
coincidental fissure along party lines. As of today, nine states, all headed by Republican
governors, refuse to join the lockdown regime and now provide embarrassing counterfactuals
demonstrating that officially mandated lockdowns were never necessary and have probably made
the situation worse by preventing the development of "herd immunity" to this virus, like all
the others, from the normal interaction of large populations.
The following are the nine states that have refused to impose lockdowns. All of them have
minimal death tolls from the Wuhan virus, including the populous South Carolina, and five of
them have not enacted even local lockdowns:
Arkansas – 14 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Iowa – 14 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Nebraska – 8 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
North Dakota – 3 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Oklahoma – 42 deaths.
South Carolina – 40 deaths.
South Dakota – 2 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Utah – 8 deaths.
Wyoming – 0 deaths.
[Data as of this writing on April 6 at 9 p.m.]
Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas told the Fake News
New York Times what we have been saying on these pages since the stupid lockdowns began:
"the typical stay-at-home order was a misleading 'illusion' because it includes so many
exemptions allowing people to go out in public, such as for groceries or exercise ordering
people to stay at home would simply leave thousands jobless."
The Times demands to
know why these nine states have seceded from the United States of Mitigation: "Holdout
States Resist Calls for Stay-at-Home Orders: 'What Are You Waiting For?' screams the indignant
headline. Editorial desperation leaps from the page, for the Fake News combine as a whole knows
that these nine Republican-led holdout states are all counterfactual to the panic narrative,
and that what they are waiting for is the rest of the country to discover that they have been
had by the cheerleaders of "mitigation," who live in luxury and job security while the masses
suffer. First and foremost, Deb and Tony, intimate associates of Bill Gates, whose "models"
keep lowering predictions to catch up with the growing embarrassment of the real numbers.
Another embarrassing counterfactual is the Commonwealth of Virginia, now being suffocated by
Democrat Governor Ralph ("Infanticide") Northam's absurd executive orders, which have ruined
the state's economy while attempting to place its entire population under a fake quarantine
that does nothing but create instant unemployment and bankruptcy. The Northam lockdown will
remain in effect until June 10 unless Northam calculates he cannot get away with prolonging his
virus-themed dictatorship past Trump's new control date of April 30. Yet, as of the week of
March 28, the
Virginia Department of Health "has received report of 1,352 pneumonia and
influenza-associated deaths," including five pediatric deaths, during the 2019-20 flu season,
while purported deaths from the Wuhan virus and related pneumonia stand at 54 as of today at 9
p.m., with no pediatric deaths.
Based on the example of Virginia alone, which provides an all-but-irrefutable
counterfactual, it is time to call this fiasco what it is: Coronagate. In my view, Coronagate
will go down as the single biggest fraud in the fraud-ridden history of American politics --
outside of the fraudulent inducement of America's belated entry into World War I, which
sacrificed
116,000 American lives to an epochal disaster that destroyed the last remnants of
Christendom, guaranteed World War II, and led to the rise of the Third Reich and the Soviet
Union.
Meanwhile, the White House press briefings have devolved into a black comedy with the same
script every day: Trump recites a litany of statistics on the number of COVID-19 tests
performed, the mass production and distribution of ventilators and N95 respirators, surgical
masks, surgical gowns and surgical gloves; praises the captains of industry for pitching in
with massive contributions of product; and lauds the branches of the military for their massive
logistical operations, including the building of entire hospitals that remain almost empty.
Pence then delivers another sermon on how to "slow the spread in 30 days." Then Deb drones
on about her ever-evolving models, followed by a very hoarse Tony, who croaks the same
statements he made the day before about "the curve" and "mitigation, mitigation, mitigation"
while assiduously avoiding any suggestion that the "pandemic" could be over any time soon or
that there could be any proven effective treatment.
Then it's the media jackals' turn. Day after day these morons jabber at Trump with
accusations disguised as questions: Why has governor so-and-so or such-and-such hospital not
received enough test kits/ventilators/masks/gowns/gloves/breath mints?
... ... ...
At today's briefing, one reporter attempted to elicit from Fauci a declaration that, no
matter what Trump might think, America cannot "return to normal" without a vaccine whose
development is, conveniently enough for the media-DNC complex, at least a year away. Fauci's
meandering response was a dog whistle that, if he has anything to say about it, the country
will remain under some level of lockdown until there is a largely ineffective or even harmful
vaccine, like the one he advocated
for the swine flu of 2009.
The Fake News media are laboring to elevate Fauci, a star in the Leftist galaxy whose center
is Bill Gates, to the status of Recovery Czar whose "medical opinion" will determine the fate
of the nation
The US is the biggest funder of the World Health Organization and his announcement drew
widespread criticism. Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, whose foundation was the second-biggest
funder
of the WHO in 2018-19, called the decision " as dangerous as it sounds ."
Halting funding for the World Health Organization during a world health crisis is as
dangerous as it sounds. Their work is slowing the spread of COVID-19 and if that work is
stopped no other organization can replace them. The world needs @WHO now more than ever.
Trump also faces a battle with Congress, which is actually responsible for allocating
funding. I'm not a fan of Trump, but to some extent he has a point.
There have been plenty of critics of the WHO's handling of the outbreak. The organization's
initial response is now seen as far too accepting of the official Chinese government line in
the first few weeks. In particular, a single social media message has come back to haunt it. On
January 14, the organization said on Twitter: " Preliminary investigations conducted by the
Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel
#coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China. "
Defenders of the WHO point to guidance sent to governments on January 10 and 11, outlining
the way the virus spreads and asking health officials to be alert to any 'evidence of amplified
or sustained human-to-human transmission.' Those WHO supporters also note that Trump himself
had tweeted support for Beijing's handling of the situation in the early days of the outbreak.
For many observers, Trump's attacks on the WHO are self-serving, designed to deflect criticism
away from his initially slow and skeptical response to what he calls the "Chinese
virus."
While the WHO was perhaps too slow on the uptake, we should be wary of critics' implication
that it should be given the job of policing national governments. For now, the WHO is in an
awkward position of having to deal with the politics of different member countries while
responding to health emergencies. Moreover, the WHO 'cried wolf' over the 2009 swine flu
pandemic. The WHO's director general at the time, Margaret Chan, famously said " All of
humanity is under threat " from the outbreak, but it proved to be far less deadly than
feared. A bit more caution over the new coronavirus was probably sensible.
Goldman Sachs
predicts that the economy will shrink 34 percent in the second quarter, with unemployment
leaping to 15 percent.
Notable quotes:
"... Across the US, millions of businesses have been shut down by "executive order" and the unemployment rate has skyrocketed to levels not seen since the Great Depression. ..."
"... What if the "cure" is worse than the disease? ..."
From California to New Jersey, Americans are protesting in the streets. They are demanding
an end to house arrest orders given by government officials over a virus outbreak that even
according to the latest US government numbers will claim fewer lives than the seasonal flu
outbreak of 2017-2018.
Across the US, millions of businesses have been shut down by "executive order" and the
unemployment rate has skyrocketed to levels not seen since the Great Depression.
Americans, who have seen their real wages decline thanks to Federal Reserve monetary
malpractice, are finding themselves thrust into poverty and standing in breadlines. It is like
a horror movie, but it's real.
Last week the UN Secretary General warned that a global recession resulting from the
worldwide coronavirus lockdown could cause "hundreds of thousands of additional child deaths
per year." As of this writing, less than 170,000 have been reported to have died from the
coronavirus worldwide.
Many Americans have also died this past month because they were not able to get the medical
care they needed. Cancer treatments have been indefinitely postponed. Life-saving surgeries
have been put off to make room for coronavirus cases. Meanwhile hospitals are laying off
thousands because the expected coronavirus cases have not come and the hospitals are partially
empty.
This prophecy does not correlate well with his complete inability to predict how coronavirus epidemic unfolded in the USA and
blunders around the road along with sleeping for two months after China informed the WHO about new coronavirus.
Fauci is a pretty sinister, not so much comical figure is we remembers his role in Gain of Function experiments
proliferation
Anthony S. Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases, said there is "no doubt" Donald J. Trump will be confronted with a surprise
infectious disease outbreak during his presidency.
Fauci has led the NIAID for more than 3 decades, advising the past five United States
presidents on global health threats from the early days of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s
through to the current Zika virus outbreak.
During a forum on pandemic preparedness at Georgetown University, Fauci said the Trump
administration will not only be challenged by ongoing global health threats such as influenza
and HIV, but also a surprise disease outbreak.
"The history of the last 32 years that I have been the director of the NIAID will tell the
next administration that there is no doubt they will be faced with the challenges their
predecessors were faced with," he said.
While observers have speculated since his election about how Trump will respond to such
challenges, Fauci and other health experts said Tuesday that preventing disease pandemics
often starts overseas and that a proper response means collaboration between not only the
U.S. and other countries, but also the public and private health sectors.
"We will definitely get surprised in the next few years," he said. 'Risks have never
been higher'
Trump, the real estate developer-turned-Republican politician, has worried some infectious
disease experts with controversial and sometimes unclear views on certain health issues.
Ronald Klain, who coordinated the U.S.'s Ebola response for the Obama administration, said
Trump's virtual silence about the Zika outbreak and harsh comments about American volunteers
infected during the West African Ebola outbreak is "not the kind of leadership we need in our
next president."
Experts speculated about the infectious disease threats Donald Trump will face as
president.
"It's hard to think of a more important time to show a willingness to speak out in the
public health community and the global health community than it is right now on the eve of
Donald Trump becoming our next president," Klain said. "The risks have never been higher, and
the question of his perspective on these issues has never been more dubious than it is with
Donald Trump."
Fauci and others noted some of the disease outbreaks that recent administrations have
faced, including current President Barack Obama, whose administration was tested early on
with an H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009. More recently, the administration was forced to
repurpose almost $600 million in federal funds set aside for the Ebola outbreak when
Republicans rejected Obama's request for $1.9 billion to fund the nation's Zika response.
Current Deputy Homeland Security Advisor Amy Pope, JD, said it was "typical" of the U.S.
government that money meant for the Ebola epidemic was appropriated for Zika because of the
proclivity of populations to worry about what is currently threatening them.
"We shouldn't ask the American public to make those choices in the future," she said. "It
doesn't keep them safe."
Klain said pandemic preparedness should be approached from a nonpartisan angle. A
Democrat, he referenced Republican President George W. Bush founding the U.S. President's
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and said Republican Senators Mitch McConnell and
Lindsey Graham collaborated with the Obama administration on the Ebola response.
"The mosquitoes don't know if they're biting Democrats or Republicans," Klain said. "They
don't know what party you are."
Other highlights
According to some of the experts who spoke on Tuesday, preparing the U.S. for pandemics
requires proper funding and starts by battling disease outbreaks overseas. This is not just
the right thing to do, but the best way to keep Americans safe, Klain said.
"There is no safety for us and our populace when infectious diseases rage," he said. "The
only way the American people can have safety and security in their lives is to promote safety
and security around the world."
Some other highlights from the forum:
Hamid Jafari, MD, acting director of the Division of Global Health Protection at the CDC,
said the CDC has been productive during past presidential transitions and expects the same
will be true as control of the White House passes from Obama to Trump: "We have room for
optimism that there will be continuing support," he said.
Pope said there is no playbook for fighting emerging infectious diseases: "We never know
what's going to hit us, so we need to be prepared as possible," she said.
According to Pope, some in the health community are wary about working with the security
community because they think it will be detrimental to their work, when the opposite is true:
"Marrying these communities actually leads to more resources and more attention," she
said.
Bill Steiger, PhD, chief program officer of Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon and former director of
the HHS Office of Global Health Affairs, said his first piece of advice for the incoming
administration would be to budget time for HHS to focus on things other than domestic health
issues, because a larger problem is inevitable: "Some international global health crisis will
happen that will divert that attention. It has happened over and over again," he said.
Steiger said the global health agenda, including programs like PEPFAR, is an "easy win"
for the new administration: "Expand the funding if available, but at a minimum keep it
going," he said.
Fauci said he is in favor of a public health emergency fund that would be used to combat
outbreaks like those involving Ebola and Zika: "It's tough to get it but we need it. What we
had to go through with Zika was very, very painful when the president asked for $1.9 billion
in February and we didn't get [funding] until September."
Near the end, Fauci speculated about the possibility that there will be a resurgence of
Zika this summer. The virus has caused many travel-related cases in the U.S. and some locally
acquired cases in Florida and Texas. Fauci said other concerns for the Trump administration
include the potential for a new influenza pandemic and outbreaks of diseases that are not yet
on anyone's radar.
"What about the things we are not even thinking about?" he said. "No matter what, history
has told us definitively that [outbreaks] will happen because [facing] infectious diseases is
a perpetual challenge. It is not going to go away. The thing we're extraordinarily confident
about is that we're going to see this in the next few years." – by Gerard Gallagher
Disclosures: Fauci, Jafari and Pope report no relevant financial disclosures. Infectious
Disease News was unable to confirm relevant financial disclosures for Klain and Steiger at
the time of publication.
"... "No matter what you do for the Do Nothing Democrats, no matter how GREAT a job you are doing, they will only respond to their Fake partners in the Lamestream Media in the negative, even in a time of crisis," ..."
"... "rude and nasty" ..."
"... "He gave them everything that they would have wanted to hear in terms of gaining ground on the CoronaVirus, but nothing that anyone could have said, including 'it's over,' could have made them happy," ..."
"... "They were RUDE and NASTY. This is their political playbook, and they will use it right up to the election on November 3rd," ..."
"... "America will not be fooled!!!" ..."
"... "never been so mad about a phone call" ..."
"... "the administration still doesn't have a plan to track daily testing capacity in every lab in the country, publicly release that data, and put forward a plan and timeline for identifying gaps." ..."
Donald Trump slammed Democrats for a "rude and nasty" phone call with the vice president
over the Covid-19 pandemic, and theorized nothing will satisfy them as they try to "fool"
America in November's election.
"No matter what you do for the Do Nothing Democrats, no matter how GREAT a job you are
doing, they will only respond to their Fake partners in the Lamestream Media in the negative,
even in a time of crisis," Trump tweeted on Saturday.
He added that his working relationship with Democrats during the Covid-19 pandemic has been
"even worse" than before and revealed senators held a "rude and nasty"
conference call with Vice President Mike Pence, who heads the White House Coronavirus Task
Force, on Friday where little progress was made.
"He gave them everything that they would have wanted to hear in terms of gaining ground
on the CoronaVirus, but nothing that anyone could have said, including 'it's over,' could have
made them happy," the president vented.
"They were RUDE and NASTY. This is their political playbook, and they will use it right
up to the election on November 3rd," he continued, adding that "America will not be
fooled!!!"
No matter what you do for the Do Nothing Democrats, no matter how GREAT a job you are
doing, they will only respond to their Fake partners in the Lamestream Media in the negative,
even in a time of crisis. I thought it would be different, but it's not. In fact, it's even
worse...
....them happy, or even a little bit satisfied. They were RUDE and NASTY. This is their
political playbook, and they will use it right up to the election on November 3rd. They will
not change because they feel that this is the only way they can win. America will not be
fooled!!!
Some lawmakers have expressed just as much animosity over the talk as the president. Maine
Sen. Angus King (I) said he has "never been so mad about a phone call" in his
life.
A point of contention appears to be Trump's desire to begin rolling back stay-at-home orders
and reopening the US economy next month, while many Democrats insist more Covid-19 testing must
be done first.
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-New Hampshire) tweeted after the call that she is concerned "the
administration still doesn't have a plan to track daily testing capacity in every lab in the
country, publicly release that data, and put forward a plan and timeline for identifying
gaps."
Various governors, such as New York's Andrew Cuomo, continue to insist more thorough testing
and tracing of the virus is needed before they consider reopening their states and easing back
lockdown orders, while places like Texas, Minnesota, and Florida have already begun dropping
restrictions as more and more citizens take to demonstrating and protesting against the
measures.
Level of mismanaging of epidemic in Trump administration is staggering. Initially they
ignored it, but then switch to full panic mode facilitated by such questionable experts as Fauci.
Panic reaction with "one size fits all" quarantine measures created record unemployment.
BTW NIH fiscal year 2020 budget totals $41.6 billion.
The fact that Fauci did nothing to protect NY metropolitan areas means that he is incompetent
to hold this position.
More than a dozen U.S. researchers, physicians and public health experts, many of them from
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, were working full time at the Geneva
headquarters of the World Health Organization as the novel coronavirus emerged late last year
and transmitted real-time information about its discovery and spread in China to the Trump
administration, according to U.S. and international officials.
A number of CDC staffers are regularly detailed to work at WHO in Geneva as part of a
rotation that has operated for years. Senior Trump-appointed health officials also consulted
regularly at the highest levels with the WHO as the crisis unfolded, the officials said.
The presence of so many U.S. officials undercuts President Trump's charge that the WHO's
failure to communicate the extent of the threat, born of a desire to protect China, is largely
responsible for
the rapid spread of the virus in the United States.
There is hope. The coronavirus crisis has exposed the relative merits of nations, so the
entire world can see, for example, how broken and corrupt the US is, with no leadership to
speak of. Dawdling, it failed to prevent needless deaths, then shut down much of the
country, bankrupting thousands of businesses and throwing millions out of work. As a fix,
it throws mere crumbs at desperate citizens, while bailing out the big banks, again.
Texans flocked to the state's Capitol in Austin to protest Covid-19 lockdown measures,
refusing to practice social distancing and cheering for Dr. Anthony Fauci to be fired by
President Donald Trump. In attendance at Saturday's 'You Can't Close America' Rally were
InfoWars founder Alex Jones and host Owen Shroyer, who led the crowd of some 200 people in
chants against the mainstream media and officials like Fauci.
Shroyer, who referred to the doctor as "fascist Fauci," asked the crowd: "Do
you think Anthony Fauci should be fired?" , before leading them in chants of "Fire
Fauci."
Parts of that Wired.com story read like a stenographed PR release so I am not sure really what to make of it. The story seems
to make light of the safety breaches that were occurring at the Fort Detrick lab. While it is likely that most breaches (apart
from the waste disposal issue and the use of chemical rather than thermal treatment of waste) appeared to be minor OHS-type breaches
and appropriate staff training was all that was required, I did get an impression while reading the article that the CDC had its
arms twisted to grant re-accreditation to the facility due to pressure from the White House to get a vaccine ready in time before
November this year.
"... FEMA and Homeland Security are but the most glaring example of departments stocked with hacks capable only of crippling the organizations that they are supposed to direct. They even corrupted the Center for Disease Control. ..."
"... The readiness of executives to do anything necessary to protect against exposure of their own failures or illicit actions has become commonplace within our institutions. ..."
"... As to the Crozier scandal, let's be clear: it is not a matter of ethics alone, but also of ability to meet critical obligations. ..."
"... Naval Secretary Thomas Motly – who missed his calling as a political commissar in the old Red Army, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Miley and Chief of Naval Operations Mike Gilday who both are testament to the Peter Principle that determines promotion in today's military. ..."
"... An [neoliberal] "oligarchy" has no interest in the long-term prosperity and strength of the nation - or perhaps, they simply have no faith in it. They are motivated to strip-mine the nation of all wealth while it lasts, because if they don't someone else will. They can live in walled compounds and go to private doctors, and if it all falls apart they can just gather up their loot and sail away on their yachts. ..."
"... After all the agony and hysteria surrounding the election of Trump for 3 years, they will nominate an elderly warmonger with obvious signs of dementia, who can't seem to keep his hands off women in a creepy fashion - as the alternative. It's as if there was a contest on how extreme a "lesser of two evils" can get. Tack on Covid and financial ruin. It's astounding. ..."
"... Come this epidemic and what do we see? What we see is that at least the UK government, the US government and the Canadian government were lying. It is quite clear that they were NOT expecting to be attacked. How do I know they were not expecting to be attacked? They had NO stores of hand sanitizer, NO stores of masks, NO goggles, NO stores of PPE, No factories for making any of them. NO troops of Bio/Chem warfare soldiers ready to spring into action and NO PLANS, as far as I can see. Are we to assume that if they were attacked by, say, the Russians, they were going to rely on the Chinese to supply them? (Sarcasm!) ..."
"... Lol. Trump has under 4 years working for the federal gov. It isn't his system. It is the typical repugs and dingbats system. He is an idiot for leaving his cushy life to join these idiots. It certainly doesn't speak well of his judgement. The people who work there and the people he has hired... Pompeo, Bolton, Esper, etc have worked there for decades. Bolton is an especially rotten character that seems to just keep popping up. ..."
"... i would like to emphasize a key point you make - accountability, and how there is none.. that to me is the number uno issue in the world today and it is very stark with regard to the usa - accountability... of course obama kicked that concept down the road too... no accountability.. it sucks big time.. we need it desperately... ..."
"... Okay... he's not a psychoapath, Don. I'll settle malignant sociopathic narcissist, which means by definition and demonstration that he would not know empathy were it to leap up and smack him in the face. Liar? We can soften that too. He is a serial fantasists living in the worlds he creates and like a spoiled child demands, raging when his wishes are not instantly gratified. ..."
"... When I was young I was always looking up for US, don't know why, maybe I have been fascinated by a culture, lifestyle, innovations.. when I got older and started to read about what actually happens in the world, I realized that US is not what it seemed to be anymore and I think its just getting worse.. ..."
"... Basically, no matter if is there Trump, Obama, Bush, Biden, Hillary or Easter Bunny.. your government to its core is really sick.. ..."
"... Everytime i read about decision US made, how is profit driven at expense of regular people, its a disgrace.. and more and more people in the world can see it.. just Trump himself exposed more the whole thing, chaotic, selfish, rude and arrogant government, not ashamed of anything. ..."
Collective tragedy is always a learning experience. So it has been for great wars, natural
disasters, economic collapses, political revolutions. The COVID-19 pandemic is such a tragedy.
Although the number of casualties may pale compared to the carnage of war, there are ancillary
effects that leave us shocked and sobered. Most obviously, there is sudden onset of a severe
economic depression with attendant social distress whose toll we will be registering for years
to come. Then, there is the exposure of how incompetent our public institutions have become
– the callous inhumanity of those who rule in Washington matched only by their clownish
ineptitude. It is in the realm of these latter intangibles that we should look first for morals
and lessons.
Overriding all else is the spectacle of a President, duly elected by the American people,
who is a malicious psychopath with not a single redeeming trait. A physical, intellectual and
emotional spectre who would defy our imaginative powers were he not on display before our eyes.
He has gathered around him a witch's coven of scoundrels, crooks and crackpots as bereft of
mind and ethics as he is. They also are inveterate liars; Trump himself is a congenital liar
since clinical narcissism is inborn. Yet, we refer to this motley assemblage as an
'administration' – in our impulse to 'normalize' the abominable. No dry bill of
particulars is necessary, nor could it do justice, to the squalid theater we see played out
before us on a daily basis. This man, at this moment, is viewed favorably by 46% of the public.
That reality eclipses everything else.
There is no organized opposition worthy of the name. This is the second great failure of our
democracy. The Democratic Party creaks under the weight of geriatric nominal leaders –
plodding along without conviction, without will, without the integrity to free itself from the
monied interests and the self-serving careerists who have dragged it into the mire. Yes, they
may succeed, come November, in sparing the Republic the coup de grace of four more Trumpian
years. This despite their suicidal instinct in choosing Joe Biden to bear the standard –
a man barely robust enough to keep the banner from dragging in the dust on his slog along the
campaign trail. This bunch can't even get themselves to a microphone for a news clip at a time
of historic crisis aggravated by the atrocious sins of the existing government. Surely, a
first. Worried about Covid-19 contagion? Order a box of alcohol wipes from China. Instead,
Biden makes a call to Trump for what both agree was a 'nice conversation.' What does that get
him?
Cuomo has to placate Trump with soothing words – even at the expense of lying about
how much aid New York actually received from Washington – since the lives of his people
are at stake. For Biden, the opposite is true; avoiding soothing words is crucial since the
November election is dependent on undercutting Trump and discrediting him.
Three, the United States is a poorly governed country. Manifest ineptitude in performing
collective functions is by no means limited to Washington under Trump. It has become a feature
of the institutional landscape. True, the Trumpites have launched a dedicated campaign to
realize the anti-government fanatics' wet dream of disabling all public agencies. FEMA and
Homeland Security are but the most glaring example of departments stocked with hacks capable
only of crippling the organizations that they are supposed to direct. They even corrupted the
Center for Disease Control. Its leaders, evidently eager to curry favor with the madman in the
Oval Office, gave its stamp of approval to the unproven – and dangerous drug HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE that Trump's been promoting as the Silver Bullet to cure Covid-19. (April
4-6) Luckily, saner heads prevailed, or a conscience was pricked, and these panting spaniels
withdrew the recommendation from their website.
... ... ...
At local levels, just look at the condition of infrastructure, of pension funds – of
public health. The extremity – and, frankly, the absurdity - of what's happening in the
health sector is highlighted by what we see elsewhere in the world. Face masks, including ones
that actually provide protection, are readily available throughout East Asia – and
elsewhere. A personal anecdote: relatives in Tunisia are mailing me N95 masks which they
purchased in their neighborhood pharmacies. Indeed, as of April 8, Tunisia had produced by
their own resources, and distributed 30 million masks to a population of 11 million. The
equivalent here would be 1 billion masks! (Minus the 1 million sent express to Israel by the
Pentagon as a ritual gift of fealty.) In America, we are offered instructions on how to sew a
(probably useless) mask out of discarded T-shirts. MAGA!! Hospital directors fire nurses who
buy their own equipment out of concern that they will be upstaged and exposed as the callous,
profit obsessed bozos they are. Yet, we blind ourselves to the realities of other nations
– because to do so is embarrassing, because our so-called leaders are protecting their
behinds, and because we compulsively retain our dogmatic faith in American superiority.*
The readiness of executives to do anything necessary to protect against exposure of their
own failures or illicit actions has become commonplace within our institutions. The current
Corona crisis puts that reality into the headlines – as with the despicable act of the
Pentagon in dismissing summarily Captain Brett Crozier whose petition made known that his
superiors were prepared to sacrifice his crew's lives to the imperative of hiding their own
errors. Is this notion that 'anything goes except accountability' any different from Harvard's
studied silence about its embrace of Jeffrey Epstein or its abrupt sacking of a professor who
dared reveal that the President was sweeping under the academic rug rampant sexual abuses? We
all have personal experience of similar stories.
As to the Crozier scandal, let's be clear: it is not a matter of ethics alone, but also of
ability to meet critical obligations. In the event that the country found itself at war against
a serious enemy, it is a dangerous liability to have in positions of command people like
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper (hack lobbyist for Raytheon and the
Aerospace Industries Association ), Naval Secretary Thomas Motly – who missed his
calling as a political commissar in the old Red Army, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Miley
and Chief of Naval Operations Mike Gilday who both are testament to the Peter Principle that
determines promotion in today's military. They would either be washed out in the wake of gross
failures, or continue to be albatrosses dragging out pointless missions like the 17 bemedaled
but clueless U.S. generals who have proven so useless in Afghanistan. As it is, they seem
unable to keep their warships from slamming into inanimate objects in placid waters.
Here are Motly's last remarks before riding off to join corporate boards: "The men and women
of the Department of the Navy deserve a continuity of civilian leadership befitting our great
Republic, and the decisive naval force that secures our way of life he acknowledged that he
"lost situational awareness" during his address to the Roosevelt's crew." "There is no excuse,
but perhaps a glimpse of understanding, and hopefully empathy. I am deeply sorry for some of
the words and for how they spread across the media landscape like a wildfire." (The New York
Times – ever twisting its hat with eyes averted in the presence of intimidating
Presidential authority – features a long letter from Motly justifying his actions, 4/7.
Only 3, 1 Republican, 2 Democrats, protested Crozier's mistreatment. Among the silent chorus
were the 22/23 aspirants to the Democratic nomination who bored us stiff for fifteen months
with their unceasing calls for "LEADERSHIP!" 'Profiles In Courage' is not a best-seller at the
Capitol. Even Dr. Fauce doesn't have a copy.
Absence of accountability is incompatible with good governance. That is especially true in
democracies where accountability is ultimately downwards. In a country like China, where
accountability is primarily upward, the circle can be squared by the occasional resort to
putting some miscreant up against the wall. We don't have that luxury. Here, it is only the
weak, the indigent and the naïve who need fear punishment – of any kind. The
powerful and well-connected worry less about a last cigarette than about their first.
In compiling a list of factors that have contributed to the drastic decline in the
performance of American institutions, this parochialism figures prominently among them. We put
up with levels of dereliction matched in the developed world only by Britain. Think of the
debate over Medicare-for-All and like proposals. As alluded to in an earlier commentary, the
best national medical insurance systems (as confirmed by the WHO and other independent bodies)
are in Western Europe, Canada and Japan – France topping the list. Yet, their expenditure
on those systems is only 2/3 of what we pay for our own ramshackle non-system. That fact is
ignored. Instead, the political class agonizes over the specious issue of whether we can afford
it. Joe Biden has pledged to veto any such plan on grounds that it would cost $35 trillion
– or whatever number has floated into his fog-bound mind. This lethal combination of
ignorance, dogmatism and fidelity to special interests has come to be a hallmark of how we
approach government and the meeting of collective needs.
A full treatment of the several intertwined, mutually reinforcing elements that have led us
along the path of decline is well beyond the limits of a brief commentary. A few, though, do
deserve to be mentioned for what – one hopes – might be future reference. One is
the 'privatization ' craze. It has become the preferred method for transferring public assets
to private profiteers. The effects are degraded services, the loss of expertise in public
bodies, the exploitation of workers and the abandonment of intelligent planning (ventilators
anyone?). With the COVID-19 affair, we've reached the ultimate privatization: the Federal
Reserve has hired BlackRock to conduct its operations on the bond market as the central
component of its $4 trillion Quantitative Easing strategy (BlackRock itself being the dominant
player on that market). The same effects have been produced by the swarm of hedge funds and
private equity who are parasites feeding on the prostrate host that is the real economy and its
dependents. American society celebrates, and empowers, these critters. Then there are the '
consultants ' – the locust hordes which our culture designates as vital contributors to
the good works of government, of business, of universities, of charities, of sports teams, of
hospitals, of failing marriages, of the US Army that puts guns in their hands. They, too, add
to the toll on public competence and collective services.
Another anecdote: the city of Austin, Texas has hired a consulting firm to advise them on
designs for a reconfiguration of the street that runs in front of the University of Texas.
Should the sidewalks be 8' wide or 10' wide? Curbed or uncurbed? With bicycle racks or without?
These matters evidently are beyond the competence of the city government, and of the
University's 3,000 strong expert faculty.
'My Kingdom for a tape measure!' How about a 69-cent face mask?
*Consider this. During WW II, the Kaiser shipyard in Richmond, CA – along with its 17
counterparts - were able to construct 2,710 Liberty ships between 1941 and 1945 (an average of
three ships every two days), In other words, it took each yard just twelve days to put a ship
in the water. That was the work of Rosie the Riveter and her colleagues. Today, we struggle to
produce a few thousand $1 face masks - much less reliable COVID-19 test kits. Of course, back
then the country was led by responsible adults – not the bunch of clods and delinquents
we're stuck with nowadays.
Posted by b on April 17, 2020 at 14:00 UTC | Permalink
If this virus is not a nasty flu, then what is it? A plague? Similar in effect as the Black
Death? Had 2 members of my family and a dear friend catch this thing. 2 of them suffered just
3 days of a fluctuating fever and cold symptoms. After that it disappeared. Only one, my
aunt, in her early seventies, had to be put on a respirator. But is recovering well. Is it
worth it to bring our economy to absolute devastation, where good people lose everything, end
up destitute, having to live in the streets, with no where to go? \
And rely on bureaucrats,
our government, whether state or federal, Democrat or Republican or Socialist, for their
daily bread? What about people with severe mental health, who need to be away from home, need
a job to maintain their stability, now with no work or money, will fall off the deep end,
even commit suicide because they have no where to turn? Is it worth it ? Everything we've
been doing? Why in other periods in history, with similar diseases, nothing was shut down as
profoundly as being done these days, and life went on? People did die, not to mock their
passing. But it brings me back. If not a nasty flu, is it worth it?
Agree with #1. Our leader, as imperfect as he is, as we all are, is the only leader we have.
If he fails to lead us through this crisis, we all fail. IMHO aside from occasional
politic-ing, answering charges of one kind or another against him, often the opposite from
day to day (e.g. one day he's trying to control everything, now he's abandoned control to the
overwhelmed governors), is doing an acceptable job, considering the problems he;'s
facing.
Couldn't agree more with Don in comment 1, the newfound lust for censorship and evangelism
for official right think found here is disappointing, this seems no longer to be a place to
ask questions and seek truth sincerely.
What is now obvious has for a long time been concealed: the U.S. is not a democracy, there is
no such thing as a "free market", capitalism has proved incapable of meeting the most basic
needs during a crisis, there are no leaders accountable to anyone other than our ruling
oligarchs, the U.S. is anything but a "bastion of freedom", and most other nations have
plenty of justifiable reasons to hate the U.S.
The only question remaining is how long will folks in the U.S. hide from these truths and
do nothing about them?
I agree this is ridiculous. Trump may be a lot of things, but the last thing he would EVER
want to do/happen in this election year where was cruising along home-free, is to have this
horrible pandemic blow up in front of him.
Also, he would NEVER have taken along and risked his entire family on a useless state
visit to India where all they did was attend meaningless photo-op events and watch Indian
kids dance the Hindi cha-cha.
Not even his chief of staff Mike Mulvaney went alond (unheard-of for CoS to not accompany
a potus on official state visits).
This tells me Trump was (kept?) in the dark about true depth of pandemic risk brewing.
An honest economist (back in the day when there actually were still a few) once said that
the key to a nation is whether it ruled by an establishment, or an oligarchy.
An "establishment" is old-money connected etc., but has some sense of ownership and duty.
An establishment is willing to forgo short-term profits in favor of long-term strength,
because they expect that they or their heirs will be around to have a piece of it.
"Establishment" leaders would be FDR, Eisenhower, DeGaulle, Bismarck, Lee Kuan Yew...
An [neoliberal] "oligarchy" has no interest in the long-term prosperity and strength of the nation - or
perhaps, they simply have no faith in it. They are motivated to strip-mine the nation of all
wealth while it lasts, because if they don't someone else will. They can live in walled
compounds and go to private doctors, and if it all falls apart they can just gather up their
loot and sail away on their yachts.
For Trump, Brenner can thank the silver-tongued Obama and his murderous secretary of state,
both of whom are worst kind of liars - the kind that tell people what they want to hear while
doing the opposite.
Thank you for posting this. The US seems to be like coming to your home and finding Bigfoot
seated in a living room chair - with no one expressing any surprise or even interest in his
presence.
After all the agony and hysteria surrounding the election of Trump for 3 years, they will
nominate an elderly warmonger with obvious signs of dementia, who can't seem to keep his
hands off women in a creepy fashion - as the alternative. It's as if there was a contest on
how extreme a "lesser of two evils" can get. Tack on Covid and financial ruin. It's
astounding.
The only positives I can find are evidence that the elite aren't totally in control ( or
there would be no Biden or Trump running) AND that the US is too big and dominant to collapse
anytime soon - a sort of geo-political inertia. Same goes for the dollar, even if they turn
it into high grade toilet paper.
This is the first time I have commented on your site but read daily. This is one of the best
reads I have seen. It defines the failure of the country so clearly, to bad Don was unable to
hear the criticism of his fearless leader and move beyond it. This failure has long roots and
the writer nails it. I remember a few years back sitting down with our commissioner and
having her explain to us why they were getting nothing done. city and state moneys were lower
and the federal government that had always provided grants no longer did. This was under
Obummer.
The long strip mining of the US and the rest of the world by the elite should have made
itself completely obvious under trump but I am beginning to think that we humans are no more
than a plague upon the earth. We seem to be so intent on sticking to our team the Rs or Ds we
are no different then sports fans, who's obsessed behavior and willingness to spend thousands
to watch sports is mind boggling, when often the same people bitch about teachers pay.
Or during the healthcare debates I went to hear the town hall that my congressmen had. 2000
people showed up most screaming about Obama and free hand outs. The 2000 people where mostly
over 65, and in this case military so all these people had theirs but didn't think their own
kids or grandkids should have medical care.. what the hell! The Republican Party built the
montra of evil government well and the Democratic Party used it the build up the pentagon to
the point it takes over 70% of the discretionary budget, to slaughter people in 3rd world
countries so we can strip mine them or threaten Russia and China . The virus shows one thing
the elites have lots of money to build military stuff that they fleece , so what we have is
crap. What the poor soldiers in this country are is fodder for the wealthy.
lol. - Some partisans mount a partisan defense of Trump. I didn't know such incredibly
partisan dummies read MoA. You guys are more than welcome to leave.
Thinking about the Covid-19, it occurred to me that the governments of the UK, the USA, of
Canada and probably many other countries that have had biological warfare labs have all said
to their people "We have to do this research because the USSR, the Russians The Chinese, The
North Koreans or thr Terrorists may use biological/chemical weapons against us and WE MUST BE
PREPARED!!. If they were telling the truth they should have been well prepared as they have
spent billions on this research. So, now we can see they were lying because, THERE WAS NO
PREPARATION WHEN IT WAS NEEDED? Precisely NONE!
Come this epidemic and what do we see? What we see is that at least the UK government, the US
government and the Canadian government were lying. It is quite clear that they were NOT
expecting to be attacked. How do I know they were not expecting to be attacked? They had NO
stores of hand sanitizer, NO stores of masks, NO goggles, NO stores of PPE, No factories for
making any of them. NO troops of Bio/Chem warfare soldiers ready to spring into action and NO
PLANS, as far as I can see. Are we to assume that if they were attacked by, say, the
Russians, they were going to rely on the Chinese to supply them? (Sarcasm!)
The Chinese government which may or may not be developing biological weapons, (I have no
way of knowing) obviously, was relatively well prepared. This is hardly surprising; as they
think they have been under biological attack, on and off since the Korean war when they were
so attacked. They had factories making the kit they needed and it took only days to ramp up
production and get other factories to join in. They had medical troops who were trained and
ready to take an important part in controlling the outbreak. They had plans that enabled them
to build hospitals for mass intensive care in a matter of days and (I would imagine) plans to
turn other structures into holding areas for less serious cases. It also looks as though they
had either very versatile organizers or well laid plans for feeding and monitoring people
under lock down.
You may understandably reject criticism to Your chosen party of faith, but i believe the
essence of his message was not about partisanship, rather an honest appraisal of the current
sad state of affairs, which, if you had bothered reading further, was just as scathing about
Obama et al. as it was about your beloved Stable Genius.
I'm afraid your choice to not read further was a far stronger statement of partisanship
than anything the author laid out. Your loss, and ours too.
Yep, exactly. What they have is the CCP, an army that can be called on command, which
thinks it's job is to govern, not just get paid extra. And legitimacy, the Chinese people
accept their governing, mostly, because they try to do a good job. It's like all this unity
bullshit they feed us here (see above), but it's real.
Lol. Trump has under 4 years working for the federal gov. It isn't his system. It is the
typical repugs and dingbats system. He is an idiot for leaving his cushy life to join these
idiots. It certainly doesn't speak well of his judgement. The people who work there and the
people he has hired... Pompeo, Bolton, Esper, etc have worked there for decades. Bolton is an
especially rotten character that seems to just keep popping up.
If Trump did win another term
I wouldnt be surprised to see him back. Remember when that nutjob from Israel that delights
in murdering defenseless people came over and gave a speech to Congress? He received an
enthusiastic standing ovation. What more needs to be investigated or discussed? It needs to
fail and the people will have to suffer in order for more responsible leadership to
emerge. The US has waged war on the people of Iraq for 30 fucking years.
Everytime the system
is about to collapse from its own corruption they just create more money and threaten other
countries with destruction if they attempt to divorce themselves from the IMF "global"
economy. The idea that the empire exists to help the average citizen is insane and rather
childish thinking. The empire exists to maintain power, control, and a dominant position. By
the way... during all this crazyness has anybody bothered to follow what is going on with
US/China trade? There was a much publicized 1st stage agreement over the easy issues but CNN
warned it might collapse putting the global economy at severe risk. Has the US lost billions
of dollars worth of economic inputs the last couple months? What is the USA going to look
like if that continues? Without China propping up the US economy the US will have to rely on
its own resources. As you mention the US cant produce N95 masks let alone coronavirus test
kits. Testing might allow the powers that be to not feel frightened about coming into contact
with the drooling masses. They might let us out of our cages so we can start foraging for
food.
Your real objection to this, extremely reasonable, statement:
" ...They even corrupted the Center for Disease Control. Its leaders, evidently eager to
curry favor with the madman in the Oval Office, gave its stamp of approval to the unproven
– and dangerous drug HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE that Trump's been promoting as the Silver
Bullet to cure Covid-19. (April 4-6) Luckily, saner heads prevailed, or a conscience was
pricked, and these panting spaniels withdrew the recommendation from their website..."
It is an indication of your general irresponsibility, also exemplified in your casual use
of the internet to give, potentially dangerous, medical advice, that you pretend to be
dissenting from Brenner because he critiques government. You imply that by doing so he is
urging people to support one or other political party. In fact his is a comprehensive
critique of the entire political system, whose purpose, for 230+ years has been to prevent
the people from governing themselves.
It is a pity to see those tireless and sincere campaigners the Yellow Vests of France drafted
into an argument for apathy and defeatism.
thanks michael... i can apply some of these ideas directly to other countries.. i don't care
for the usa centric world point view, but i am sure many readers will get into it.. i would
like to emphasize a key point you make - accountability, and how there is none.. that to me
is the number uno issue in the world today and it is very stark with regard to the usa -
accountability... of course obama kicked that concept down the road too... no
accountability.. it sucks big time.. we need it desperately...
Okay... he's not a psychoapath, Don. I'll settle malignant sociopathic narcissist, which
means by definition and demonstration that he would not know empathy were it to leap up and
smack him in the face. Liar? We can soften that too. He is a serial fantasists living in the
worlds he creates and like a spoiled child demands, raging when his wishes are not instantly
gratified.
His dictatorial moments would be familiar to anyone who ever worked at his jumped
up mom 'n pop real estate shop. His blustering, bullying, blaming, bragging, bloviating, and
berating are on display each day now at the late afternoon campaign commercial
live-from-the-White-House. He's all yours Don.
When I was young I was always looking up for US, don't know why, maybe I have been fascinated
by a culture, lifestyle, innovations.. when I got older and started to read about what
actually happens in the world, I realized that US is not what it seemed to be anymore and I
think its just getting worse..
Im not speaking about regular people, of course not, they have
worries, goes thru hardships in life, same as me here in Europe.. Basically, no matter if is
there Trump, Obama, Bush, Biden, Hillary or Easter Bunny.. your government to its core is
really sick..
Everytime i read about decision US made, how is profit driven at expense of
regular people, its a disgrace.. and more and more people in the world can see it.. just
Trump himself exposed more the whole thing, chaotic, selfish, rude and arrogant government,
not ashamed of anything.
I wish you all.. you good and smart people of the US, to win this struggle, get back on
track and have a better future, god bless you in your fight.
The USA government was paralyzed by Ukrainegate and impeachment in January.
Notable quotes:
"... Another factor was that any real measures against the virus were a huge blow to the neoliberal globalization and the USA as the central force that pushed neoliberal globalization was vary to implement them. ..."
"... Pentagon treatment of the USS Theodor Roosevelt epidemic was worse than incompetent because clearly, this was just the tip of the iceberg. Instead of looking into the core problem, they decided to find a scapegoat. Why they did not react as soon as problems on Diamond Princess surfaced are unclear to me. They failed even to provide masks. That's simply incredible. I think a bunch of perfumed princes of Pentagon needs to be fired. I wonder what is the situation on submarines. ..."
The WHO provided validated working test kits on 16th of January.
Even if I am not happy with the Chinese policy overall, the main problem in most advanced
western countries was and still is that the response of the governments are often poor:
Not implementing a coherent communication strategy. It does not make sense when one
minister tells that the virus situation is an real issue and another minister tell you at
the same time that everything is not so bad.
Downplaying the infection numbers for domestical political reasons. Complete lack of
understanding of an exponential function or more precise the combination of an virus
operating on an exponential function, while the own resources are more or less a
constant.
Too late start of testing, be it a result of faulty administrative structures, rooky
mistakes during test kit development or combination of both.
Fighting a virus is like warfare on the operational level, you start with incomplete
information, but have to make important decisions, time is a very important resource, lost
time is almost impossible to regain.
Fighting a virus is like warfare on the operational level, you start with incomplete
information, but have to make important decisions, time is a very important resource, lost
time is almost impossible to regain.
Very true. But we should not forget the role of Pelosi in this mess: Trump administration was
partially paralyzed in January by impeachment proceedings. She acted like the fifth column in
this respect.
Another factor was that any real measures against the virus were a huge blow to the
neoliberal globalization and the USA as the central force that pushed neoliberal
globalization was vary to implement them.
IMHO, Trump demonstrated some level of courage by closing flights from China on Jan 31. I
guess pressure to postpone this measure further was tremendous. But they missed the time, and
it was too late.
3) Too late start of testing, be it a result of faulty administrative structures, rooky
mistakes during test kit development, or a combination of both.
That's true, and the CDC needs to be investigated for this blunder. But also implementing
social distancing measures and the obligatory wearing of masks in large cities was completely
botched.
Retired persons can be quarantined without a major blow to the economy. And that should
have been done first. The nursing homes are starkly vulnerable to the coronavirus. It was
clear from the beginning. That means that the medical personnel in them need to be provided
with full protection gear and isolated with patients. That was not done. On the contrary,
they became hotspots that spread the disease.
Treatment of medical personnel, who along with patients in nursing homes are the most
vulnerable category, was abysmal. No free hotel stay (for those without children), no special
transportation and free meals were provided for them. Even basic protection equipment was
absent in home hospitals until late March.
The USA did not have strategic storage of masks and, which is more important, equipment to
make them and materials from which they are made. That was a big blunder for which previous
administrations also share responsibility.
Pentagon treatment of the USS Theodor Roosevelt epidemic was worse than incompetent
because clearly, this was just the tip of the iceberg. Instead of looking into the core
problem, they decided to find a scapegoat. Why they did not react as soon as problems on
Diamond Princess surfaced are unclear to me. They failed even to provide masks. That's simply
incredible. I think a bunch of perfumed princes of Pentagon needs to be fired. I wonder what
is the situation on submarines.
People will forget all that populism nonsense, and just be grateful for whatever McJobs
they can get to be able to pay the interest on their debts, because, hey global capitalism
isn't so bad compared to living under house arrest!
Hard to imagine that happening in Americastan, where the economy has been completely
destroyed by the lockdown. We'll be lucky 'merely' to have Great Depression levels of
unemployment when this madness finally ends.
For all the MAGApedes out there: Trump had better be seen to be fighting the
lockdown-shysters, not acquiescing to them, if he wants to get re-elected. If he spends the
summer continuing to genuflect before Dr. Falsie, Trump is toast come November.
"... "For this, we scared the hell out of the American people, we lost 17 million jobs, we put a major dent in the economy, we closed down the schools... shut down the churches," ..."
"... "You know, this was not, and is not a pandemic. But we do have panic and pandemonium as a result of the hype of this." ..."
"... "aggressively stupid" ..."
"... "Bill Bennett may be a self-proclaimed ethics expert, but he obviously knows very little about logic and cause-and-effect," ..."
"... "It is deeply irresponsible to air this view on national television," ..."
"... "the hell out of the American people." ..."
"... " crucial" ..."
"... "no need to change anything you're doing on a day-to-day basis." ..."
Former education secretary Bill Bennett has been savaged online for suggesting that the
coronavirus is "not a pandemic," calling for the lifting of lockdown measures, as the debate
rages over reopening the shuttered US economy. More than half a million Americans have caught
the coronavirus, with just over 22,000 deaths. While the numbers are dire, the University of
Washington's forecasters revised their total predicted Covid-19 deaths down to 60,000 last
week, a number comparable to deaths from influenza in 2017-2018, and
significantly lower than the six-figure death toll floated by
President Donald Trump's top medical adviser, Dr Anthony Fauci, last month.
"For this, we scared the hell out of the American people, we lost 17 million jobs, we
put a major dent in the economy, we closed down the schools... shut down the churches,"
Bennett said on Monday's edition of Fox and Friends. "You know, this was not, and is not a
pandemic. But we do have panic and pandemonium as a result of the hype of this."
Fox News contributor Bill Bennett compares coronavirus to the flu, claiming that "this was
not and is not a pandemic." pic.twitter.com/Q4oBcXKISV
The World Health Organization declared the coronavirus a pandemic on March 11 and it has
been reported in almost every country around the world. Bennett was flayed online for his
"aggressively stupid" statement.
"Bill Bennett may be a self-proclaimed ethics expert, but he obviously knows very little
about logic and cause-and-effect," wrote author Ward Carroll.
Aggressively stupid Bill Bennett may be a self-professed ethics expert, but he obviously
knows little about logic or cause-and-effect.Hey, Billy Boy, do you think there's any
relationship between actions taken and the number of #COVID19
fatalities?And get a haircut, old man.
"It is deeply irresponsible to air this view on national television,"tweeted CNN's
Chris Cillizza, while neoconservative pundit Bill Kristol suggested the low death toll was a
direct result of the government scaring "the hell out of the American people."
Needless to say, if we have "only" 60,000 deaths, it's BECAUSE "we scared the hell out of
the American people," and they radically changed behavior. Or rather: "We" didn't scare
anyone. People were alarmed by the facts and adjusted -- despite dangerous happy talk from
our president. https://t.co/yTeivjA82F
My doctor told me he presumes I had #COVID19 and then
related #coronavirus
pneumonia. I can assure Bill Bennett that even though I exercised and ate well, covid kicked
my ass. It was terrifying. I couldn't breathe and thought I was dying.It was nothing like the
flu, fool. https://t.co/9BjQvC2yyU
Bill Bennett doesn't understand that the only reason my "only" 60,000 people will die is
because we're all stuck at home.I've said before. If the GOP thinks this is a hoax then go
throw a huge party and invite yours entire family and Trump, and see how it goes. https://t.co/6TR3I0MyXC
Modeling the spread of infectious diseases is an imprecise science. While the University of
Washington's researchers attribute their revised predictions to "
crucial" social distancing measures and recommend they remain in place until the end
of May, many initial predictions about the virus were wrong. When it first entered the US in
January, media outlets urged Americans not to panic, warning them that the flu was a more
imminent threat. These same outlets now tell a
different story .
Likewise, Fauci himself said in February that there was "no need to change anything
you're doing on a day-to-day basis." On Sunday, he told CNN's Jake Tapper that the
government "could have saved lives" if social distancing started earlier.
With commentators on the right demanding a relaxation of lockdown rules, and Trump's
advisers telling the president – to quote Fauci – that "the virus decides"
when things return to normal, no clear path forward is obvious.
A distinct aspect of the shift in debate from framing in terms of "dual-use research" to
"gain-of-function research" has been focus on biosafety concerns -- e.g., that a devastating
pandemic could potentially result from a laboratory accident involving an especially dangerous
pathogen created via GOFR. In light of Ron Fouchier's claim that the ferret-transmissible
strain of H5N1 he produced is "probably one of the most dangerous viruses you can make"
(Enserink 2011 ) and (previous) NSABB
chair Paul Keim's claim that "I can't think of another pathogenic organism as scary as this one
[created by Fouchier's team] I don't think anthrax is scary at all compared to this" (Enserink
2011
), for example, some critics argued that the study in question should have been, and/or that
future similar research should be, conducted in laboratories with the highest bio-containment
level -- i.e., biosafety level 4 (BSL-4), as opposed to BSL-3 ("enhanced") in which this
research was done (Swazo 2013 ). Fouchier has, in
response, pointed out that his research received necessary institutional biosafety
review/approval; and others have argued that his research (given employment of safety measures
beyond ordinary BSL-3, including vaccination of lab workers against H5N1) in effect involved
safety equivalent to BSL-4 (Roos 2012 ). Anthony Fauci
(Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) has concluded that
"the scientists who triggered this debate [including Fouchier] have conducted their research
properly and under the safest and most secure conditions" (Fauci 2012 , p. 1).
No church on Easter for the faithful. The illuminati must feel like they are in heaven.
Their goal of achieving a godless society is in reach. Well, not exactly godless since they
think the elites among them have a mission to become like God, as man was made in Gods image
for the purpose of knowing himself through man. We shall all worship God, which are our
elites, and the priests of this Man-God religion are technocratic scientists. Some call it
scientism or gnosticism or transhumanism
The idea is to transhumanistly "upgrade" humanity, create an Internet of Us, and to
geocybernically control the processes of the earth system (this is known as the Fourth
Industrial Revolution 4IR)
Capitalism. How strange so many here recognize the evils of Bad capitalism, more properly
defined as Monopoly Capitalism, or Neoliberalism to distinguish it from good Capitalism
-which is competitive capitalism well regulated in the interests of society as a whole, with
a dash of socialism and monopoly (state or private) capitalism in certain industries as
needed.
When we talk of Bad Capitalism of the sort Marx no doubt had in mind, we must look back
and recall something Marx never envisioned, perhaps because it was a reaction to the
globalist socialist theories he espoused. That was Mussolini's and then later Hitlers
National Socialism, or economic Fascism. This was more accurately defined as a public private
partnership (P3) that is so often referred to by the Gates funded WOrld Economic Forum and
those talking about UN Sustainable Development Projects, and has become a religion of sorts
in the West and also in China (more about that in a separate comment when I have time) and is
really the essence of todays neoliberalism (not the propaganda you read about neoliberalism
from its supporters)
Back in the 30's Mussolini's economic fascism was greatly admired by the Capitalists of
that day, even FDR who has been mislabelled as socialist and anti-capitalist despite coming
from the financial elite (much like Trump who is mislabelled as nationalist snd
antiestablishment despite being a globalist and financial elite in private life).
Indeed just before and after Hitler took over in Germany with his partnership with German
companies - the Capitalists in the US and UK/France rushed in via cartel agreements with
German companies to invest and transfer technology. FDR did little to stop this.
FDR if we recall was the father of NRA which was his first priority after confiscating the
peoples gold and devaluing the dollar. Fortunately his fascist NRA economy was struck down by
the Supreme Court only to later reemerge during WWII. This is when P3 really crystallized in
the US although it would take decades to morph into todays beast, and required another Pearl
Harbor to gain acceptance for the purpose of keeping us safe from Islamic Terrorism and now
the virus terrorists
One might argue that the difference between Mussolini's and Hitlers P3 and today is the
government was the dominant power then, and today its at best an equal partner or more likely
dominated by the corporate side (in China the private ownership is largely in the hands of
the party elite as individuals and not the state which serves to subsidize their enterprises
while socializing losses and privatizing profits-like the West) . Those in government, after
public retirement go on to lucrative employment on the private side as their reward.
Regulatory agencies are all captured by the private side of this public private
partnership
This is apparent in many industries. Many of you see it with Military, intelligence and
homeland security, Big Tech/Data, finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE), etc.
However, when it comes to Medical -Pharma Industry and other "science" based industries
like the Climate Industry you are blinded by scientism promoted by the MSM spinmeisters
supporting the Green-Virus Globalist Agenda. Yet both of these industries are driven by
Public Private Partnerships to achieve Global Capitalist and Global Government Control
objectives.
As Eisenhower said in his 1961 exit speech where he warned of the dangers of the MIC he
also said "we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could
itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."
So looking specifically at the actors involved in the latest Pandemic, and one sees many
of them are the same players behind the Climate Terror Industry, one sees a tremendous amount
of collaboration between Big Pharma, UN agencies, national health agencies, military,
academia and tax free philanthropic foundations (Gates, Rockefeller, etc).
Government funds basic science via military and health/science agencies to search for new
viruses or enhancing known viruses with gain of function research, that Big Pharma then
exploits to develop vaccines with government and philanthropic funds in the event such
viruses are released. All kinds of money gets spent in preparing for a pandemic, stockpiling
supplies , medicines, vaccines in advance of a pandemic, studying ways to control people once
a pandemic arrives, and studying more ways to control people to prevent another pandemic
(digital id, health certificates, mandatory vaccines) . When a pandemic does arrive, all
those exercises and simulations (Crimson Orange, Event 201, Dark Winter, etc) pay off,
trillions of dollars are unleashed out of thin air thanks to the Fed Reserve and handed out
to the private partners.
Disaster Capitalism at its finest, public private partnership working toward total control
of people and earning plenty of money while doing so. Companies having nothing to do with the
Pandemic but affected (Airlines, hotels) , some of which are already in trouble (Boeing) are
bailed out. Small business owners get crushed.
Trump failed to respond. But in January and February, it was clear coronavirus would hit
NY. Cuomo and de Blasio could have instituted full lockdowns by early March when first cases
appeared. Meanwhile, Washington State and California moved more quickly and saved many
lives.
Countless other state governors didn't close things down as quickly as Newsom in California
and other governors. Florida let spring break go one and once finished no state put kids in
quarantine. The blame for this response falls on many shoulders. And the lack of response is
hiding the biggest transfer of wealth in history. Not here of course. As usual the blue blog
has been on top of most issues and way ahead of others.
I'm very concerned about how this country will look once it's open again. I think it's going
to be unrecognizable because of how many businesses will have permanently closed down and how
many people will stay unemployed. Lots of businesses are going to be bought out at Fire sale
prices by those who got all the money. Like usual. Workers desperate for a job might have to
take less than minimum wage cuz of the demand for jobs. But whoboy congress better be thinking
about that or they will be in for a big surprise. OWS will look like just a warmup for what
might be coming.
Hospitals have been closed down for decades or been asset stripped after they were bought
out by hedge funds. Obama and Biden didn't replenish the supplies for epidemics after they
dealt with the H1N1 flu. Blame goes to both parties and especially their embrace of
neoliberalism.
He's thinking of reopening the country. Hardily and bigly.
"I don't know that I've had a bigger decision. But I'm going to surround myself with the
greatest minds. Not only the greatest minds, but the greatest minds in numerous different
businesses, including the business of politics and reason," Trump told reporters.
Trump's labor leader doesn't want people to get used to being on government assistance and
is trying to restrict who can get unemployment benefits and for how long. Now it takes brass
balls for little Anthony Scalia to say that to desperate people after the corrupt and
especially the banks have gotten trillions! This guy should be embarrassed to show his face in
public ever again. But he isn't.
up 25 users have voted. --
"I will be the best, the best, you know, you know the thing!"
@snoopydawg They
decided to go with their own unnecessarily complex kit instead of going with the Qiagen kit
or some variant (RT-PCR is a pretty routine procedure in labs). They initially stuck with the
influenza model of having the samples sent to Atlanta for analysis. This is fine if you are
just monitoring the flu, but useless for trying to stop a pandemic. Tens of thousands of
people in the US have died and will die unnecessarily.
but he isn't the only one solely responsible for how many people have gotten sick and
have died.
Trump failed to respond. But in January and February, it was clear coronavirus would
hit NY. Cuomo and de Blasio could have instituted full lockdowns by early March when
first cases appeared. Meanwhile, Washington State and California moved more quickly and
saved many lives.
Countless other state governors didn't close things down as quickly as Newsom in
California and other governors. Florida let spring break go one and once finished no
state put kids in quarantine. The blame for this response falls on many shoulders. And
the lack of response is hiding the biggest transfer of wealth in history. Not here of
course. As usual the blue blog has been on top of most issues and way ahead of
others.
I'm very concerned about how this country will look once it's open again. I think it's
going to be unrecognizable because of how many businesses will have permanently closed
down and how many people will stay unemployed. Lots of businesses are going to be bought
out at Fire sale prices by those who got all the money. Like usual. Workers desperate for
a job might have to take less than minimum wage cuz of the demand for jobs. But whoboy
congress better be thinking about that or they will be in for a big surprise. OWS will
look like just a warmup for what might be coming.
Hospitals have been closed down for decades or been asset stripped after they were
bought out by hedge funds. Obama and Biden didn't replenish the supplies for epidemics
after they dealt with the H1N1 flu. Blame goes to both parties and especially their
embrace of neoliberalism.
He's thinking of reopening the country. Hardily and bigly.
"I don't know that I've had a bigger decision. But I'm going to surround myself with
the greatest minds. Not only the greatest minds, but the greatest minds in numerous
different businesses, including the business of politics and reason," Trump told
reporters.
Trump's labor leader doesn't want people to get used to being on government assistance
and is trying to restrict who can get unemployment benefits and for how long. Now it
takes brass balls for little Anthony Scalia to say that to desperate people after the
corrupt and especially the banks have gotten trillions! This guy should be embarrassed to
show his face in public ever again. But he isn't.
This is a case study of bureaucratic incompetence, when conflicting institutions and agenda paralyze any efforts. Trump
incompetence is only the tip of the iceberg. the whole Deep State proved to be too rigid to properly react to the epidemic, because
each measure looked too drastic until it was late to implement it. and then it was implemented anyway. One effect of any large
bureaucracy is that rare oasises of reliable and timely information that exist are to be suppressed. and this is not
Trump fault. This is iron logic of any large bureaucracy.
What is interesting is that the epidemic is localized in few hot spots with the largest being New York metropolitan areas. So
governments could took measures immediately even without federal government prompting them. And that would be much better that
nationwide shutdown. And FBI and CIA have the local governments in pocket anyway (this is a national security state, not something
else after all). So where was the CIA boss when we
needed her ? Or she is just capable of running Russiagate gaslighting operation type of operations? CIA honchos used to have
audacity to launch the efforts to depose Trump. Can we believe that they can't bypass Trump when they need to?
Notable quotes:
"... The National Security Council office responsible for tracking pandemics received intelligence reports in early January predicting the spread of the virus to the United States, and within weeks was raising options like keeping Americans home from work and shutting down cities the size of Chicago. Mr. Trump would avoid such steps until March. ..."
"... Despite Mr. Trump's denial weeks later, he was told at the time about a Jan. 29 memo produced by his trade adviser, Peter Navarro, laying out in striking detail the potential risks of a coronavirus pandemic: as many as half a million deaths and trillions of dollars in economic losses. ..."
"... By the last week of February, it was clear to the administration's public health team that schools and businesses in hot spots would have to close. But in the turbulence of the Trump White House, it took three more weeks to persuade the president that failure to act quickly to control the spread of the virus would have dire consequences. ..."
"... It was becoming apparent that the administration had botched the rollout of testing to track the virus at home, and a smaller-scale surveillance program intended to piggyback on a federal flu tracking system had also been stillborn. ..."
"... A 20-year-old Chinese woman had infected five relatives with the virus even though she never displayed any symptoms herself. The implication was grave -- apparently healthy people could be unknowingly spreading the virus -- and supported the need to move quickly to mitigation. ..."
"... These final days of February, perhaps more than any other moment during his tenure in the White House, illustrated Mr. Trump's inability or unwillingness to absorb warnings coming at him. He instead reverted to his traditional political playbook in the midst of a public health calamity, squandering vital time as the coronavirus spread silently across the country. ..."
"... Over nearly three weeks from Feb. 26 to March 16, the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the United States grew from 15 to 4,226. ..."
"... The earliest warnings about coronavirus got caught in the crosscurrents of the administration's internal disputes over China. It was the China hawks who pushed earliest for a travel ban. But their animosity toward China also undercut hopes for a more cooperative approach by the world's two leading powers to a global crisis. ..."
An examination reveals the president was warned about the
potential for a pandemic but that internal divisions, lack of planning and his faith in his own instincts led
to a halting response.
"Nobody knew there would be a pandemic or epidemic
of this proportion," President Trump said last month. He has repeatedly said that no one could have seen
the effects of the coronavirus coming.
Credit...
Erin
Schaff/The
WASHINGTON -- "Any way you cut it, this is going to be bad," a senior medical
adviser at the Department of Veterans Affairs, Dr. Carter Mecher, wrote on the night of Jan. 28, in an email
to a group of public health experts scattered around the government and universities. "The projected size of
the outbreak already seems hard to believe."
A week after the
first coronavirus
case had been identified in the United States, and six long weeks before President
Trump finally took aggressive action to confront the danger the nation was facing -- a pandemic that is now
forecast to take tens of thousands of American lives -- Dr. Mecher was urging the upper ranks of the nation's
public health bureaucracy to wake up and prepare for the possibility of far more drastic action.
His was hardly a lone voice. Throughout January, as Mr. Trump repeatedly
played down the seriousness of the virus and focused on other issues, an array of figures inside his
government -- from top White House advisers to experts deep in the cabinet departments and intelligence
agencies -- identified the threat, sounded alarms and made clear the need for aggressive action.
The president, though, was slow to absorb the scale of the risk and to act
accordingly, focusing instead on controlling the message, protecting gains in the economy and batting away
warnings from senior officials. It was a problem, he said, that had come out of nowhere and could not have
been foreseen.
Even after Mr. Trump took his first concrete action at the end of January --
limiting travel from China
-- public health often had to compete with economic and political
considerations in internal debates, slowing the path toward belated decisions to seek more money from
Congress, obtain necessary supplies, address shortfalls in testing and ultimately move to keep much of the
nation at home.
Unfolding as it did in the wake of his impeachment by the House and in the
midst of his Senate trial, Mr. Trump's response was colored by his suspicion of and disdain for what he
viewed as the "Deep State" -- the very people in his government whose expertise and long experience might
have guided him more quickly toward steps that would slow the virus, and likely save lives.
Decision-making was also complicated by a long-running dispute inside the
administration over how to deal with China. The virus at first took a back seat to a desire not to upset
Beijing during trade talks, but later the impulse to score points against Beijing left the world's two
leading powers further divided as they confronted one of the first truly global threats of the 21st century.
The shortcomings of Mr. Trump's performance have played out with remarkable
transparency as part of his daily effort to dominate television screens and the national conversation.
But dozens of interviews with current and former officials and a review of
emails and other records revealed many previously unreported details and a fuller picture of the roots and
extent of his halting response as the deadly virus spread:
The National Security Council office responsible for tracking pandemics
received intelligence reports in early January predicting the spread of the virus to the United States,
and within weeks was raising options like keeping Americans home from work and shutting down cities the
size of Chicago. Mr. Trump would avoid such steps until March.
Despite Mr. Trump's
denial
weeks later, he was told at the time about a Jan. 29
memo
produced by his trade adviser, Peter Navarro, laying out in striking detail the potential risks
of a coronavirus pandemic: as many as half a million deaths and trillions of dollars in economic losses.
The health and human services secretary, Alex M. Azar II, directly warned
Mr. Trump of the possibility of a pandemic during a call on Jan. 30, the second warning he delivered to
the president about the virus in two weeks. The president, who was on Air Force One while traveling for
appearances in the Midwest, responded that Mr. Azar was being alarmist.
Mr. Azar publicly
announced
in February that the government was establishing a "surveillance" system in five American
cities to measure the spread of the virus and enable experts to project the next hot spots. It was
delayed for weeks. The slow start of that plan, on top of the well-documented
failures to develop the nation's testing capacity
, left administration officials with almost no
insight into how rapidly the virus was spreading. "We were flying the plane with no instruments," one
official said.
By the third week in February, the administration's top public health
experts concluded they should recommend to Mr. Trump a new approach that would include warning the
American people of the risks and urging steps like social distancing and staying home from work. But the
White House focused instead on messaging and crucial additional weeks went by before their views were
reluctantly accepted by the president -- time when the virus spread largely unimpeded.
When Mr. Trump finally
agreed in mid-March
to recommend social distancing across the country, effectively bringing much of the
economy to a halt, he seemed shellshocked and deflated to some of his closest associates. One described him
as "subdued" and "baffled" by how the crisis had played out. An economy that he had wagered his re-election
on was suddenly in shambles.
He only regained his swagger, the associate said, from conducting his daily
White House briefings, at which he often seeks to rewrite the history of the past several months. He
declared at one point that he
"felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic,"
and insisted at another that he had to be
a
"cheerleader for the country,"
as if that explained why he failed to prepare the public for what was
coming.
Mr. Trump's allies and some administration officials say the criticism has
been unfair. The Chinese government misled other governments, they say. And they insist that the president
was either not getting proper information, or the people around him weren't conveying the urgency of the
threat. In some cases, they argue, the specific officials he was hearing from had been discredited in his
eyes, but once the right information got to him through other channels, he made the right calls.
"While the media and Democrats refused to seriously acknowledge this virus in
January and February, President Trump took bold action to protect Americans and unleash the full power of
the federal government to curb the spread of the virus, expand testing capacities and expedite vaccine
development even when we had no true idea the level of transmission or asymptomatic spread," said Judd
Deere, a White House spokesman.
There were key turning points along the way, opportunities for Mr. Trump to
get ahead of the virus rather than just chase it. There were internal debates that presented him with stark
choices, and moments when he could have chosen to ask deeper questions and learn more. How he handled them
may shape his re-election campaign. They will certainly shape his legacy.
The Containment Illusion
By the last week of February, it was clear
to the administration's public health team that schools and businesses in hot spots would have to close. But
in the turbulence of the Trump White House, it took three more weeks to persuade the president that failure
to act quickly to control the spread of the virus would have dire consequences.
When Dr. Robert Kadlec, the top disaster response official at the Health and
Human Services Department, convened the White House coronavirus task force on Feb. 21, his agenda was
urgent. There were deep cracks in the administration's strategy for keeping the virus out of the United
States. They were going to have to lock down the country to prevent it from spreading. The question was:
When?
There had already been an
alarming spike in new cases
around the world and the virus was spreading across the Middle East. It was
becoming apparent that the administration had botched the rollout of testing to track the virus at home, and
a smaller-scale surveillance program intended to piggyback on a federal flu tracking system had also been
stillborn.
In Washington, the president was not worried,
predicting
that by April, "when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away." His White House had
yet to ask Congress for additional funding to prepare for the potential cost of wide-scale infection across
the country, and health care providers were growing increasingly nervous about the availability of masks,
ventilators and other equipment.
What Mr. Trump decided to do next could dramatically shape the course of the
pandemic -- and how many people would get sick and die.
With that in mind, the task force had gathered for a tabletop exercise -- a
real-time version of a full-scale war gaming of a flu pandemic the administration had run the previous year.
That earlier exercise
, also conducted by Mr. Kadlec and called "Crimson Contagion,"
predicted 110 million infections
, 7.7 million hospitalizations and 586,000 deaths following a
hypothetical outbreak that started in China.
Facing the likelihood of a real pandemic, the group needed to decide when to
abandon "containment" -- the effort to keep the virus outside the U.S. and to isolate anyone who gets
infected -- and embrace "mitigation" to thwart the spread of the virus inside the country until a vaccine
becomes available.
Among the questions on the agenda, which was reviewed by The New York Times,
was when the department's secretary, Mr. Azar, should recommend that Mr. Trump take textbook mitigation
measures "such as school dismissals and cancellations of mass gatherings," which had been identified as the
next appropriate step in
a Bush-era pandemic plan
.
The exercise was sobering. The group -- including Dr. Anthony S. Fauci of the
National Institutes of Health; Dr. Robert R. Redfield of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and
Mr. Azar, who at that stage was leading the White House Task Force -- concluded they would soon need to move
toward aggressive social distancing, even at the risk of severe disruption to the nation's economy and the
daily lives of millions of Americans.
If Dr. Kadlec had any doubts, they were erased two days later, when he
stumbled upon an email from a researcher at the Georgia Institute of Technology, who was among the group of
academics, government physicians and infectious diseases doctors who had spent weeks tracking the outbreak
in the Red Dawn email chain.
A 20-year-old Chinese woman had infected five relatives with the virus even
though she never displayed any symptoms herself. The implication was grave -- apparently healthy people could
be unknowingly spreading the virus -- and supported the need to move quickly to mitigation.
"Is this true?!" Dr. Kadlec wrote back to the researcher. "If so we have a
huge whole on our screening and quarantine effort," including a typo where he meant hole. Her response was
blunt: "People are carrying the virus everywhere."
The following day, Dr. Kadlec and the others decided to present Mr. Trump
with a plan titled "Four Steps to Mitigation," telling the president that they needed to begin preparing
Americans for a step rarely taken in United States history.
But over the next several days, a presidential blowup and internal turf
fights would sidetrack such a move. The focus would shift to messaging and confident predictions of success
rather than publicly calling for a shift to mitigation.
These final days of February, perhaps more than any other moment during his
tenure in the White House, illustrated Mr. Trump's inability or unwillingness to absorb warnings coming at
him. He instead reverted to his traditional political playbook in the midst of a public health calamity,
squandering vital time as the coronavirus spread silently across the country.
Dr. Kadlec's group wanted to meet with the president right away, but Mr.
Trump was on a trip to India, so they agreed to make the case to him in person as soon as he returned two
days later. If they could convince him of the need to shift strategy, they could immediately begin a
national education campaign aimed at preparing the public for the new reality.
A memo dated Feb. 14, prepared in coordination with the National Security
Council and titled "U.S. Government Response to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus," documented what more drastic
measures would look like, including: "significantly limiting public gatherings and cancellation of almost
all sporting events, performances, and public and private meetings that cannot be convened by phone.
Consider school closures. Widespread 'stay at home' directives from public and private organizations with
nearly 100% telework for some."
The memo did not advocate an immediate national shutdown, but said the
targeted use of "quarantine and isolation measures" could be used to slow the spread in places where
"sustained human-to-human transmission" is evident.
Within 24 hours, before they got a chance to make their presentation to the
president, the plan went awry.
Mr. Trump was walking up the steps of Air Force One to head home from India
on Feb. 25 when Dr. Nancy Messonnier, the director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory
Diseases,
publicly issued
the blunt warning they had all agreed was necessary.
But Dr. Messonnier had jumped the gun. They had not told the president yet,
much less gotten his consent.
On the 18-hour plane ride home, Mr. Trump fumed as he watched the
stock market crash
after Dr. Messonnier's comments. Furious, he called Mr. Azar when he landed at around
6 a.m. on Feb. 26, raging that Dr. Messonnier had scared people unnecessarily. Already on thin ice with the
president over a variety of issues and having overseen the failure to quickly produce an effective and
widely available test, Mr. Azar would soon find his authority reduced.
The meeting that evening with Mr. Trump to advocate social distancing was
canceled, replaced by a news conference in which the president announced that the White House response would
be put under the command of Vice President Mike Pence.
The push to convince Mr. Trump of the need for more assertive action stalled.
With Mr. Pence and his staff in charge, the focus was clear: no more alarmist messages. Statements and media
appearances by health officials like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Redfield would be coordinated through Mr. Pence's
office. It would be more than three weeks before Mr. Trump would announce serious social distancing efforts,
a lost period during which the spread of the virus accelerated rapidly.
Over nearly three weeks from Feb. 26 to March 16, the number of
confirmed coronavirus cases
in the United States grew from
15
to 4,226. Since then, nearly half a million Americans have tested positive for the virus and
authorities say hundreds of thousands more are likely infected. The China Factor
The earliest warnings about coronavirus got
caught in the crosscurrents of the administration's internal disputes over China. It was the China hawks who
pushed earliest for a travel ban. But their animosity toward China also undercut hopes for a more
cooperative approach by the world's two leading powers to a global crisis.
It was early January, and the call with a Hong Kong epidemiologist left
Matthew Pottinger rattled.
Mr. Pottinger, the deputy national security adviser and a hawk on China, took
a blunt warning away from the call with the doctor, a longtime friend: A ferocious, new outbreak that on the
surface appeared similar to the
SARS epidemic of 2003
had emerged in China. It had spread far more quickly than the government was
admitting to, and it wouldn't be long before it reached other parts of the world.
Mr. Pottinger had worked as a Wall Street Journal correspondent in Hong Kong
during the SARS epidemic, and was still scarred by his experience documenting the death spread by that
highly contagious virus.
Now, seventeen years later, his friend had a blunt message: You need to be
ready. The virus, he warned, which originated in the city of Wuhan, was being transmitted by people who were
showing no symptoms -- an insight that American health officials had not yet accepted. Mr. Pottinger declined
through a spokesman to comment.
It was one of the earliest warnings to the White House, and it echoed the
intelligence reports making their way to the National Security Council. While most of the early assessments
from the C.I.A. had little more information than was available publicly, some of the more specialized
corners of the intelligence world were producing sophisticated and chilling warnings.
In a report to the director of national intelligence, the State Department's
epidemiologist wrote in early January that the virus was likely to spread across the globe, and warned that
the coronavirus could develop into a pandemic. Working independently, a small outpost of the Defense
Intelligence Agency, the National Center for Medical Intelligence, came to the same conclusion. Within weeks
after getting initial information about the virus early in the year, biodefense experts inside the National
Security Council, looking at what was happening in Wuhan, started urging officials to think about what would
be needed to quarantine a city the size of Chicago.
By mid-January there was growing evidence of the virus spreading outside
China. Mr. Pottinger began convening daily meetings about the coronavirus. He alerted his boss, Robert C.
O'Brien, the national security adviser.
The early alarms sounded by Mr. Pottinger and other China hawks were
freighted with ideology -- including a push to publicly blame China that critics in the administration say
was a distraction as the coronavirus spread to Western Europe and eventually the United States.
And they ran into opposition from Mr. Trump's economic advisers, who worried
a tough approach toward China could scuttle a trade deal that was a pillar of Mr. Trump's re-election
campaign.
With his skeptical -- some might even say conspiratorial -- view of China's
ruling Communist Party, Mr. Pottinger initially suspected that President Xi Jinping's government was keeping
a dark secret: that the virus may have originated in one of the laboratories in Wuhan studying deadly
pathogens. In his view, it might have even been a deadly accident unleashed on an unsuspecting Chinese
population.
During meetings and telephone calls, Mr. Pottinger asked intelligence
agencies -- including officers at the C.I.A. working on Asia and on weapons of mass destruction -- to search
for evidence that might bolster his theory.
They didn't have any evidence. Intelligence agencies did not detect any alarm
inside the Chinese government that analysts presumed would accompany the accidental leak of a deadly virus
from a government laboratory. But Mr. Pottinger continued to believe the coronavirus problem was far worse
than the Chinese were acknowledging. Inside the West Wing, the director of the Domestic Policy Council, Joe
Grogan, also tried to sound alarms that the threat from China was growing.
Mr. Pottinger, backed by Mr. O'Brien, became one of the driving forces of a
campaign in the final weeks of January to convince Mr. Trump to impose limits on travel from China -- the
first substantive step taken to impede the spread of the virus and one that the president has repeatedly
cited as evidence that he was on top of the problem.
In addition to the opposition from the economic team, Mr. Pottinger and his
allies among the China hawks had to overcome initial skepticism from the administration's public health
experts.
Travel restrictions were usually counterproductive to managing biological
outbreaks because they prevented doctors and other much-needed medical help from easily getting to the
affected areas, the health officials said. And such bans often cause infected people to flee, spreading the
disease further.
But on the morning of Jan. 30, Mr. Azar got a call from Dr. Fauci, Dr.
Redfield and others saying they had changed their minds. The World Health Organization had
declared a global public health emergency
and American officials had discovered the
first confirmed case
of person-to-person transmission inside the United States.
The economic team, led by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, continued to
argue that there were big risks in taking a provocative step toward China and moving to curb global travel.
After a debate, Mr. Trump came down on the side of the hawks and the public health team. The limits on
travel from China were publicly
announced on Jan. 31
.
Still, Mr. Trump and other senior officials were wary of further upsetting
Beijing. Besides the concerns about the impact on the trade deal, they knew that an escalating confrontation
was risky because the United States relies heavily on China for pharmaceuticals and the kinds of protective
equipment most needed to combat the coronavirus.
But the hawks kept pushing in February to take a critical stance toward China
amid the growing crisis. Mr. Pottinger and others -- including aides to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo --
pressed for government statements to use the term "Wuhan Virus."
Mr. Pompeo tried to hammer the anti-China message at every turn, eventually
even urging leaders of the Group of 7 industrialized countries to use "Wuhan virus" in a joint statement.
Others, including aides to
Mr.
Pence, resisted taking a hard public line, believing that angering Beijing might lead the Chinese government
to withhold medical supplies, pharmaceuticals and any scientific research that might ultimately lead to a
vaccine.
Mr. Trump took a conciliatory approach through the middle of March, praising
the job Mr. Xi was doing.
That changed abruptly, when aides informed Mr. Trump that a Chinese Foreign
Ministry spokesman had publicly spun a new conspiracy about the origins of Covid-19: that it was brought to
China by U.S. Army personnel who visited the country last October.
Mr. Trump was furious, and he took to his favorite platform to broadcast a
new message. On March 16, he
wrote on Twitter
that "the United States will be powerfully supporting those industries, like Airlines
and others, that are particularly affected by the Chinese Virus."
Mr. Trump's decision to escalate the war of words undercut any remaining
possibility of broad cooperation between the governments to address a global threat. It remains to be seen
whether that mutual suspicion will spill over into efforts to develop treatments or vaccines, both areas
where the two nations are now competing.
One immediate result was a free-for-all across the United States, with state
and local governments and hospitals bidding on the open market for scarce but essential Chinese-made
products. When the state of Massachusetts managed to procure 1.2 million masks, it fell to the owner of the
New England Patriots, Robert K. Kraft, a Trump ally, to cut through extensive red tape on both sides of the
Pacific to
send his own plane to pick them up.
The Consequences of Chaos
The chaotic culture of the Trump White House
contributed to the crisis. A lack of planning and a failure to execute, combined with the president's focus
on the news cycle and his preference for following his gut rather than the data cost time, and perhaps
lives.
Inside the West Wing, Mr. Navarro, Mr. Trump's trade adviser, was widely seen
as quick-tempered, self-important and prone to butting in. He is among the most outspoken of China hawks and
in late January was clashing with the administration's health experts over limiting travel from China.
So it elicited eye rolls when, after initially being prevented from joining
the coronavirus task force, he circulated a
memo on Jan. 29
urging Mr. Trump to impose the travel limits, arguing that failing to confront the
outbreak aggressively could be catastrophic, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths and trillions of
dollars in economic losses.
The uninvited message could not have conflicted more with the president's
approach at the time of playing down the severity of the threat. And when aides raised it with Mr. Trump, he
responded that he was unhappy that Mr. Navarro had put his warning in writing.
From the time the virus was first identified as a concern, the
administration's response was plagued by the rivalries and factionalism that routinely swirl around Mr.
Trump and, along with the president's impulsiveness, undercut decision making and policy development.
Faced with the relentless march of a deadly pathogen, the disagreements and a
lack of long-term planning had significant consequences. They slowed the president's response and resulted
in problems with execution and planning, including delays in seeking money from Capitol Hill and a failure
to begin broad surveillance testing.
Even after Mr. Azar first briefed him about the potential seriousness of the
virus during a phone call on Jan. 18 while the president
was at his
Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Mr. Trump projected confidence that it would be a passing
problem.
"We have it totally under control,"
he told an interviewer
a few days later while attending the World Economic Forum in Switzerland. "It's
going to be just fine."
Back in Washington, voices outside of the White House peppered Mr. Trump with
competing assessments about what he should do and how quickly he should act.
The efforts to sort out policy behind closed doors were contentious and
sometimes only loosely organized.
That was the case when the National Security Council convened a meeting on
short notice on the afternoon of Jan. 27. The Situation Room was standing room only, packed with top White
House advisers, low-level staffers, Mr. Trump's social media guru, and several cabinet secretaries. There
was no checklist about the preparations for a possible pandemic, which would require intensive testing,
rapid acquisition of protective gear, and perhaps serious limitations on Americans' movements.
Instead, after a 20-minute description by Mr. Azar of his department's
capabilities, the meeting was jolted when Stephen E. Biegun, the newly installed deputy secretary of state,
announced plans to issue a "
level
four
" travel warning, strongly discouraging Americans from traveling to China. The room erupted into
bickering.
A few days later, on the evening of Jan. 30, Mick Mulvaney, the acting White
House chief of staff at the time, and Mr. Azar called Air Force One as the president was making the final
decision to go ahead with the restrictions on China travel. Mr. Azar was blunt, warning that the virus could
develop into a pandemic and arguing that China should be criticized for failing to be transparent.
Mr. Trump rejected the idea of criticizing China, saying the country had
enough to deal with. And if the president's decision on the travel restrictions suggested that he fully
grasped the seriousness of the situation, his response to Mr. Azar indicated otherwise.
Stop panicking, Mr. Trump told him.
That sentiment was present throughout February, as the president's top aides
reached for a consistent message but took few concrete steps to prepare for the possibility of a major
public health crisis.
During a briefing on Capitol Hill on Feb. 5, senators urged administration
officials to take the threat more seriously. Several asked if the administration needed additional money to
help local and state health departments prepare.
Derek Kan, a senior official from the Office of Management and Budget,
replied that the administration had all the money it needed, at least at that point, to stop the virus, two
senators who attended the briefing said.
"Just left the Administration briefing on Coronavirus," Senator Christopher
S. Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, wrote in a
tweet
shortly after. "Bottom line: they aren't taking this seriously enough."
The administration also struggled to carry out plans it did agree on. In
mid-February, with the effort to roll out widespread testing stalled, Mr. Azar announced a plan to repurpose
a flu-surveillance system in five major cities to help track the virus among the general population. The
effort all but collapsed even before it got started as Mr. Azar
struggled to win approval
for $100 million in funding and the
C.D.C. failed to make reliable tests available
.
The number of infections in the United States started to surge through
February and early March, but the Trump administration did not move to place large-scale orders for masks
and other protective equipment, or critical hospital equipment, such as ventilators. The Pentagon
sat on standby
, awaiting any orders to help provide temporary hospitals or other assistance.
As February gave way to March, the president continued to be surrounded by
divided factions even as it became clearer that avoiding more aggressive steps was not tenable.
Mr. Trump had agreed to give an Oval Office address on the evening of March
11 announcing restrictions on travel from Europe, where the virus was ravaging Italy. But responding to the
views of his business friends and others, he continued to resist calls for social distancing, school
closures and other steps that would imperil the economy.
But the virus was already multiplying across the country -- and hospitals were
at risk of buckling under the looming wave of severely ill people, lacking masks and other protective
equipment, ventilators and sufficient intensive care beds. The question loomed over the president and his
aides after weeks of stalling and inaction: What were they going to do?
The approach that Mr. Azar and others had planned to bring to him weeks
earlier moved to the top of the agenda. Even then, and even by Trump White House standards, the debate over
whether to shut down much of the country to slow the spread was especially fierce.
Always attuned to anything that could trigger a stock market decline or an
economic slowdown that could hamper his re-election effort, Mr. Trump also reached out to prominent
investors like Stephen A. Schwarzman, the chief executive of Blackstone Group, a private equity firm.
"Everybody questioned it for a while, not everybody, but a good portion
questioned it," Mr. Trump said
earlier this month
. "They said, let's keep it open. Let's ride it."
In a tense Oval Office meeting, when Mr. Mnuchin again stressed that the
economy would be ravaged, Mr. O'Brien, the national security adviser, who had been worried about the virus
for weeks, sounded exasperated as he told Mr. Mnuchin that the economy would be destroyed regardless if
officials did nothing.
Soon after the Oval Office address, Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the former
commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration and a trusted sounding board inside the White House,
visited Mr. Trump, partly at the urging of Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law. Dr. Gottlieb's role
was to impress upon the president how serious the crisis could become. Mr. Pence, by then in charge of the
task force, also played a key role at that point in getting through to the president about the seriousness
of the moment in a way that Mr. Azar had not.
But in the end, aides said, it was Dr. Deborah L. Birx, the veteran AIDS
researcher who had joined the task force, who
helped to
persuade Mr. Trump. Soft-spoken and fond of the kind of charts and graphs Mr. Trump prefers, Dr. Birx did
not have the rough edges that could irritate the president. He often told people he thought she was elegant.
On Monday, March 16, Mr. Trump
announced new social distancing guidelines
, saying they would be in place for two weeks. The subsequent
economic disruptions were so severe that the president repeatedly suggested that he wanted to lift even
those temporary restrictions. He frequently asked aides why his administration was still being blamed in
news coverage for the widespread failures involving testing, insisting the responsibility had shifted to the
states.
During the last week in March, Kellyanne Conway, a senior White House adviser
involved in task force meetings, gave voice to concerns other aides had. She warned Mr. Trump that his
wished-for date of Easter to reopen the country likely couldn't be accomplished. Among other things, she
told him, he would end up being blamed by critics for every subsequent death caused by the virus.
Within days, he watched images on television of a calamitous situation at
Elmhurst Hospital Center, miles from his childhood home in Queens, N.Y., where
13 people had died
from the coronavirus in 24 hours.
CB on Sat, 04/11/2020
- 4:46pm Timeline on how Donald Trump completely failed America.
This expose by the New York Times is the best reporting I have seen on Trump's complete
inability and subsequent failure to lead during this time of acute crisis.
An examination reveals the president was warned about the potential for a pandemic but
that internal divisions, lack of planning and his faith in his own instincts led to a halting
response.
April 11, 2020
Updated 4:33 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON -- "Any way you cut it, this is going to be bad," a senior medical adviser at
the Department of Veterans Affairs, Dr. Carter Mecher, wrote on the night of Jan. 28, in an
email to a group of public health experts scattered around the government and universities.
"The projected size of the outbreak already seems hard to believe."
A week after the first coronavirus case had been identified in the United States, and six
long weeks before President Trump finally took aggressive action to confront the danger the
nation was facing -- a pandemic that is now forecast to take tens of thousands of American
lives -- Dr. Mecher was urging the upper ranks of the nation's public health bureaucracy to
wake up and prepare for the possibility of far more drastic action.
...
The Containment Illusion
By the last week of February, it was clear to the administration's public health team that
schools and businesses in hot spots would have to close. But in the turbulence of the Trump
White House, it took three more weeks to persuade the president that failure to act quickly
to control the spread of the virus would have dire consequences.
...
The China Factor
The earliest warnings about coronavirus got caught in the crosscurrents of the
administration's internal disputes over China. It was the China hawks who pushed earliest for
a travel ban. But their animosity toward China also undercut hopes for a more cooperative
approach by the world's two leading powers to a global crisis.
...
The Consequences of Chaos
The chaotic culture of the Trump White House contributed to the crisis. A lack of planning
and a failure to execute, combined with the president's focus on the news cycle and his
preference for following his gut rather than the data cost time, and perhaps lives.
Award-winning journalist John Pilger has revealed that the NHS staged an exercise in London in
2016 which proved it was unable to cope with a pandemic like Covid-19, but its findings were
suppressed.
Speaking to RT's
Going Underground
, Pilger said that back in 2016, the UK government ran a
drill in London that showed the health service was incapable of dealing with an outbreak.
He described the failure as a
"crime"
and told host Afshin Rattansi that the findings
from the exercise, titled Cygnus, had been concealed by the government.
"The result of the drill was that the health service was overwhelmed, there weren't enough
beds, there weren't enough ventilators, there weren't enough clinicians in the right places. The whole
system, which had been battered by cuts and privatization for years, failed,"
he said.
The journalist explained that the NHS had been
"devastated"
by the Tory-led government's
decision to bring in the Health and Social Care Act in 2012.
Pilger's scathing comments come a day after the UK recorded its most deaths in a single day since
the crisis began. The 854 fatalities took the total to 6,159.
Projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Seattle, US, warned that the UK
could become the European country worst-hit by Covid-19, possibly accounting for 40 percent of the
continent's deaths.
The documentary film maker, whose most recent works include 'The Dirty War on the NHS,' also
blasted successive British governments since the 1980s for slashing NHS funding and pursuing a policy
of privatization by
"stealth."
If I comprehend, the issue was that they knew there was a problem in November rather than
December.
Not sure the point really, we are awash in examples of U.S. government incompetence - look up
incompetence on Wikipedia has Pompous' photo (OK but it should).
Realistically:
- the government is slow to respond
- the government is bad at planning
- the government is around 1 million people all pulling in different directions
- it is only when problem is obvious and damaging that the government gets somewhat
focused
- the virus is invisible
- the extent of damage was uncertain
Posted by b on April 8, 2020 at 7:43 UTC | Permalink
The Jpost article that b links to says that a million masks from China (donated by the US
Department of Defense) arrived in Tel Aviv on Tuesday night. But Israel should have already
had two million masks if this report from last weekend is correct: The shipment will include two million masks, landing in Israel on Monday morning, https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-april-4-2020/
So that appears to be three million masks from China, plus those seized from American
hospitals. Or are they fiddling the figures and pretending that those seized masks were
legally purchased in China?
It appears that Mossad and others have recently acquired about two surgical masks per
Israeli:
"5 April 2020,
(...)Last week, the Health Ministry said that security services and government ministries had
managed to obtain 27 ventilators and a hoard of other medical equipment from abroad.
Hebrew media reported that the Mossad intelligence service, which has been tasked with
securing medical equipment from abroad from unspecified countries amid worldwide shortages,
helped obtain 25,000 N95 respiratory masks , 20,000 virus test kits, 10 million
surgical masks , and 700 overalls for ambulance workers who usually carry out the initial
testing for the virus.
One million masks for the IDF.
Eat your heart out US Theodore Roosevelt and Guam.
US sailors right at the bottom of the Pentagon's priorities, thats for sure.
American military?.
Have one duty - die as required for Israel.
Including death by coronavirus by looks of things.....
More fool them.
Bloody hell. The Pentagon procures a million masks from China, then gives them to Israel -
when US doctors are running low in almost every city - not to mention that the military
itself has soaring coronavirus cases it can't handle.
You gotta know some rich Jewish corporate billionaire was behind that crap and Kushner was
just the conduit to get Trump to agree to it - probably in exchange for a big donation to
Trump's campaign.
If there was ever a country that deserved to be on the end of a US bombing campaign - it's
Israel - a racist, fanatical. colonialist, fascist, illegal terrorist state. Zionists - the
biggest scumbags on the planet. But instead the US bombs everyone else Israel doesn't
like.
But cheer up. Israel is a doomed nation. There is no way they can continue their path
forever, historically speaking. I suspect they won't exist within another fifty years.
They'll either be annihilated by their own nuclear weapons, or transformed into a bi-national
state that is no longer primarily Jewish. And I don't particularly care which.
The U.S. government's efforts to clean up Cold War-era waste from nuclear research and bomb
making at federal sites around the country has lumbered along for decades, often at a pace
that watchdogs and other critics say threatens public health and the environment.
Now, fallout from the global coronavirus pandemic is resulting in more challenges as the
nation's only underground repository for nuclear waste finished ramping down operations
Wednesday to keep workers safe.
Over more than 20 years, tons of waste have been stashed deep in the salt caverns that
make up the southern New Mexico site. Until recently, several shipments a week of special
boxes and barrels packed with lab coats, rubber gloves, tools and debris contaminated with
plutonium and other radioactive elements were being trucked to the remote facility from South
Carolina, Idaho and other spots.
That's all but grinding to a halt.
Shipments to the desert outpost will be limited for the foreseeable future while work at
the country's national laboratories and defense sites shift to only those operations
considered "mission critical."
Officials at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant warned state regulators in a letter Tuesday
that more time would be needed for inspections and audits and that work would be curtailed or
shifts would be staggered to ensure workers keep their distance from one another.
BTW, the Al Quds Post (aka Jerusalem Post to Zionists) has changed the headline on that
article to "Israel brings 1 million masks from China for IDF soldiers" Looks like the "New
York Purchasing and Logistics Division" is part of the Israeli Ministry Of War All The Time.
So the original was a nice story but fake news. Since there was no correction attached to the
new version, it could be that Washington/Tel Aviv reckoned that this was a step to far even
for Trump and the new version is the fake news.
- This news simply confirms again that the US, under Trump, has become more corrupt. But this
is a development that already started years, decades ago before Trump became president.
I think the possibility should be considered that Trump just made preexisting corruption
more visible rather than adding significantly to it. There are elaborate protocols and
circuitous speech that professional politicians learn to use to obfuscate the corruption and
make their own participation in that corruption seem not only acceptable but necessary or
even in the public interest. Trump is either ignorant of these protocols or he just doesn't
care.
Even with all this help (of which most go to the military sector), the Isreali economy can
barely keep itself afloat:
[...] inequality of income and wealth is huge in Israel, the second worst in the 36 nation
OECD group. The relative poverty rate for Haredim and Arabs (25% of the population) is near
50%, and even for other Israelis, it is higher than the OECD average. The gap in median
wage levels from skilled to unskilled; from Haredim/Arabs to others is huge - and yet the
former will constitute 50% of the population by 2060.
And this mask fiasco is the lesser problem for the American working class right now. A
significant portion of its people
is going hungry . That magic USD 1,200 check is not coming soon:
"the checks are not in the mail."
And the problem isn't just in the USA. The periphery of Western Civilization is also going
to suffer:
Germany's economy will shrink almost 10 per cent in the three months to June, according to
the country's top economic research institutes, the sharpest decline since quarterly
national accounts began in 1970 and double the size of the biggest drop in the 2008
financial crisis.
The shutdown of vast swaths of economic activity to contain the spread of the pandemic
is knocking 1.5 percentage points off French growth for every two weeks that it continues,
the Banque de France warned on Wednesday.
After more than three weeks in lockdown, French economic output is expected to have
fallen by the sharpest rate since the second world war, the central bank said, forecasting
that gross domestic product contracted 6 per cent in the first three months of the
year.
Get everyone you know to read "Against Our Better Judgment" by Alison Weir. Absolutely the
best short, supereasy read to open eyes of those who are unaware that they are unaware, I
promise. If you can afford to, buy copies to give away.
Very brief, "b", but one of your best posts. This is an unmitigated outrage. The arrogance of
the ruling class knows no bounds, and they are acting with impunity. Seems the ruling class
doesn't even care anymore how widely known it is that the US has little sovereignty.
This guy is really a fearmonger who after sleeting for two months greatly contributed with
his idiotic interviews to the botched reaction of the US government to this crisis. He should
go
Notable quotes:
"... And now, after the Trump Administration scrambled to ramp up testing capacity and the states worked with the Feds, private entities, and others (including in some cases foreign nations) to distribute ventilators as Gov. Andrew Cuomo painted a horrifying portrait of sickened New Yorkers suffocating to death in hospital hallways because there were no ventilators available. ..."
"... Well, yesterday, NYC Mayor de Blasio said that, after a few days of near capacity numbers, hospitalizations have dropped by such a steep degree that the city believes it has enough ventilators on hand, and won't need any more. ..."
And now, after the Trump Administration scrambled to ramp up testing capacity and the states
worked with the Feds, private entities, and others (including in some cases foreign nations) to
distribute ventilators as Gov. Andrew Cuomo painted a horrifying portrait of sickened New
Yorkers suffocating to death in hospital hallways because there were no ventilators
available.
Well, yesterday, NYC Mayor de Blasio said that, after a few days of near capacity numbers,
hospitalizations have dropped by such a steep degree that the city believes it has enough
ventilators on hand, and won't need any more.
Now on Thursday, Dr. Fauci is taking to cable news to spread the message of optimism that
has lifted US stocks over the past few days: Instead of the 240k figure used by President Trump
as recently as two weeks ago, Dr. Fauci told NBC News that if the public continued to stick to
the "mitigation efforts", that the death toll might be as low as 60k.
The WHO had been made aware of Covid-19 by December last year. In January, it posted a tweet
saying: "Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear
evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in
Wuhan, China."
Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear
evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus
(2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan , #China
🇨🇳. pic.twitter.com/Fnl5P877VG
Then in February, Ghebreyesus declared that there was no need for travel bans, saying the
spread of the virus outside China was "minimal and slow." Fast forward to March 11, and
Dr Tedros was telling the world that coronavirus was officially a pandemic and that he was
"deeply concerned by alarming levels of inaction" as it spread. Days later, he tweeted
that the "pandemic is accelerating."
Then, at a press conference, he said that "all countries should be able to test all
suspected cases" because "they cannot fight this pandemic blindfolded." Perhaps if
countries had been warned about the need for widespread testing sooner; they would have been
better placed to implement such measures?
The #COVID19 pandemic
is accelerating. It took 67 days from the 1st reported case to reach the first 100K cases, 11
days for the second 100K cases & just 4 days for the third 100K cases.These numbers
matter, these are people, whose lives & families have been turned upside down. https://t.co/VydhLBNq36
-- Tedros Adhanom
Ghebreyesus (@DrTedros) March 23,
2020
Obviously, hindsight is 20/20 and it is very easy to criticize a person or an organization
for not predicting something after it has happened. But the WHO should have been better
prepared for this, not least because it already had experience of the spread of SARS, MERS,
H5N1 and swine flu in recent years to draw on. Admittedly, none spread as virulently as
Covid-19, but it was obvious from those outbreaks that measures such as testing and restricting
travel would help slow the spread.
Perhaps it was concerned about again being accused of overreacting, as it had been by some
in response to the 2009 swine flu outbreak. Possibly, it too readily believed the low figures
being reported by China during the early part of this year. Maybe it assumed countries were
more prepared to deal with pandemics than they turned out to be. Whatever the reasons may or
may not be, the fact remains that when the world turned to the WHO, it failed. No amount of
publicity stunts, like today's appearance by Lady Gaga, will change that.
WHO will have a special guest at today's #COVID19 press
conference: @ladygaga will be joining us to
announce the One World: #TogetherAtHome
virtual global special on 18 April 2020. 📺 at 15.30 GMT
-- World Health
Organization (WHO) (@WHO) April 6, 2020
Exactly where in the organization's structure the blame lies is impossible for an
outsider to say, but surely the buck must stop eventually with Dr Tedros. His messaging early
on in this crisis hugely downplayed the risks and has without question led to a situation that
at least had a chance of being avoided. When the dust has settled, and the virus is finally
brought under control, a serious question will have to be asked: who can trust the WHO?
"... The US for decades has as a matter of policy tried to reduce the number of hospital beds, which among other things has led to the shuttering of hospitals, particularly in rural areas. Hero of the day, New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo pursued this agenda with vigor, as did his predecessor George Pataki. ..."
"... In a functional system, much of the preparation and messaging would have been undertaken by the CDC. In this case, it chose not to simply adopt the World Health Organization's COVID-19 test kits -- stockpiling them in the millions in the months we had between the first arrival of the coronavirus in China and its widespread appearance here -- but to try to develop its own test. Why? It isn't clear. But they bungled that project, too, failing to produce a reliable test and delaying the start of any comprehensive testing program by a few critical weeks. ..."
"... Thomas Hobbes argued that life apart from society would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." Outside poor countries and communities, advances in science and industrialization have largely proven him right. ..."
"... Come quietly to The Gap ..."
"... "notions about parenting changed very drastically in the 80's" ..."
"... "the too-common belief that it is possible to run an operation, any operation, by numbers, appears to be a root cause." ..."
"... A sound banker, alas! is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional and orthodox way along with his fellows, so that no one can really blame him. ..."
"... it didn't matter ..."
"... our identities as academics are unavoidably embedded in a form of neoliberal hyperglobalisation. We rely on unrestricted flows of (wealthy) bodies across borders. ..."
"... Variable coronavirus outcomes by nation could suggest a combination of elite incompetence, poor individual judgment, a lack of appreciation of risk in all its Rumsfeldian forms, corruption, a desire by oligarchs for autocratic control and being insulated and divorced from actual operations; or underlying cultural and economic factors. ..."
"... My own view is that we can trace the root cause of policy failure back to the dominant values of leadership and the values of the society/culture which spawned them regarding the relative importance of money in determining policy choices regarding public health and safety. ..."
Leaders in the public and private sector in advanced economies, typically highly
credentialed, have with very few exceptions shown abject incompetence in dealing with
coronavirus as a pathogen and as a wrecker of economies. The US and UK have made particularly
sorry showings, but they are not alone.
It's become fashionable to blame the failure to have enough medical stockpiles and hospital
beds and engage in aggressive enough testing and containment measures on capitalism. But as I
will describe shortly, even though I am no fan of Anglosphere capitalism, I believe this focus
misses the deeper roots of these failures.
Even though there are plenty of examples of capitalism gone toxic, such as hospitals and Big
Pharma sticking doggedly to their price gouging ways or rampant production disruptions due to
overly tightly-tuned supply chains, that isn't an adequate explanation. Government dereliction
of duty also abound. In 2006, California's Governor Arnold Schwarznegger reacted to the avian
flu by creating MASH on steroids.
From the LA Times :
They were ready to roll whenever disaster struck California: three 200-bed mobile
hospitals that could be deployed to the scene of a crisis on flatbed trucks and provide
advanced medical care to the injured and sick within 72 hours.
Each hospital would be the size of a football field, with a surgery ward, intensive care
unit and X-ray equipment. Medical response teams would also have access to a massive
stockpile of emergency supplies: 50 million N95 respirators, 2,400 portable ventilators and
kits to set up 21,000 additional patient beds wherever they were needed
"In light of the pandemic flu risk, it is absolutely a critical investment," he [Governor
Schwarznegger] told a news conference. "I'm not willing to gamble with the people's
safety."
They were dismantled in 2011 by Governor Jerry Brown as part of post-crisis belt
tightening.
The US for decades has as a matter of policy tried to reduce the number of hospital beds,
which among other things has led to the shuttering of hospitals, particularly in rural areas.
Hero of the day, New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo pursued this agenda with vigor, as did his
predecessor George Pataki.
And even though Trump has made bad decision after bad decision, from eliminating the CDC's
pandemic unit to denying the severity of the crisis and refusing to use government powers to
turbo-charge state and local medical responses, people better qualified than he is have also
performed disastrously. America's failure to test early and enough can be laid squarely at the
feet of the CDC. As New
York Magazine pointed out on March 12:
In a functional system, much of the preparation and messaging would have been
undertaken by the CDC. In this case, it chose not to simply adopt the World Health
Organization's COVID-19 test kits -- stockpiling them in the millions in the months we had
between the first arrival of the coronavirus in China and its widespread appearance here --
but to try to develop its own test. Why? It isn't clear. But they bungled that project, too,
failing to produce a reliable test and delaying the start of any comprehensive testing
program by a few critical weeks.
The testing shortage is catastrophic: It means that no one knows how bad the outbreak
already is, and that we couldn't take effectively aggressive measures even we wanted to.
There are so few tests available, or so little capacity to run them, that they are being
rationed for only the most obvious candidates, which practically defeats the purpose. It is
not those who are very sick or who have traveled to existing hot spots abroad who are most
critical to identify, but those less obvious, gray-area cases -- people who may be carrying
the disease around without much reason to expect they're infecting others Even those who are
getting tested have to wait at least several days for results; in Senegal, where the per
capita income is less than $3,000, they are getting results in four hours. Yesterday,
apparently, the CDC conducted zero tests
[O]ur distressingly inept response, kept bringing to mind an essay by Umair Haque, first
published in 2018 and prompted primarily by the opioid crisis, about the U.S. as the world's
first rich failed state
And the Trump Administration has such difficulty shooting straight that it can't even manage
its priority of preserving the balance sheets of the well off. Its small business bailouts,
which are as much about saving those enterprises as preserving their employment,
are off to a shaky start . How many small and medium sized ventures can and will maintain
payrolls out of available cash when they aren't sure when and if Federal rescue money will hit
their bank accounts?
How did the US, and quite a few other advanced economies, get into such a sorry state that
we are lack the operational capacity to engage in effective emergency responses? Look at what
the US was able to do in the stone ages of the Great Depression.
As Marshall Auerback wrote of the New Deal programs :
The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation
projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America,
and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state
capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York's Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge
complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown. It
also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800
bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers,
rebuilt the country's entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians,
sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock.
What are the deeper causes of our contemporary generalized inability to respond to
large-scale threats? My top picks are a lack of respect for risk and the rise of symbol
manipulation as the dominant means of managing in the private sector and government.
Risk? What Risk?
Thomas Hobbes argued that life apart from society would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish
and short." Outside poor countries and communities, advances in science and industrialization
have largely proven him right.
It was not long ago, in historical terms, that even aristocrats would lose children to
accidents and disease. Only four of Winston Churchill's six offspring lived to be adults.
Comparatively few women now die in childbirth.
But it isn't just that better hygiene, antibiotics, and vaccines have helped reduce the
scourges of youth. They have also reduced the consequences of bad fortune. Fewer soldiers are
killed in wars. More are patched up, so fewer come back in coffins and more with prosthetics or
PTSD. And those prosthetics, which enable the injured to regain some of their former function,
also perversely shield ordinary citizens from the spectacle of lost limbs. 1
Similarly, when someone is hit by a car or has a heart attack, as traumatic as the spectacle
might be to onlookers, typically an ambulance arrives quickly and the victim is whisked away.
Onlookers can tell themselves he's in good hands and hope for the best.
With the decline in manufacturing, fewer people see or hear of industrial accidents, like
the time a salesman in a paper mill in which my father worked stuck his hand in a digester and
had his arm ripped off. And many of the victims of hazardous work environments suffer from
ongoing exposures, such as to toxic chemicals or repetitive stress injuries, so the danger
isn't evident until it is too late.
Most also are oddly disconnected from the risks they routinely take, like riding in a car (I
for one am pretty tense and vigilant when I drive on freeways, despite like to speed as much as
most Americans). Perhaps it is due in part to the illusion of being in control while
driving.
Similarly, until the coronavirus crisis, even with America's frayed social safety nets, most
people, particularly the comfortably middle class and affluent, took comfort in appearances of
normalcy and abundance. Stores are stocked with food. Unlike the oil crisis of the 1970,
there's no worry about getting petrol at the pump. Malls may be emptying out and urban retail
vacancies might be increasing, but that's supposedly due to the march of Amazon, and not
anything amiss with the economy. After all, unemployment is at record lows, right?
Those who do go to college in America get a plush experience. No thin mattresses or only
adequately kept-up dorms, as in my day. The notion that kids, even of a certain class, have to
rough it a bit, earn their way up and become established in their careers and financially,
seems to have eroded. Quite a few go from pampered internships to fast-track jobs. In the
remote era of my youth, even in the prestigious firms, new hires were subjected to at least a
couple of years of grunt work.
So the class of people with steady jobs (which these days are well-placed members of the
professional managerial class, certain trades and those who chose low-risk employment with
strong civil service protections) have also become somewhat to very removed from the risks
endured when most people were subsistence farmers or small town merchants who served them.
The coronavirus is spreading a dangerous strain of inequality. Better-off Americans are
still getting paid and are free to work from home, while the poor are either forced to risk
going out to work or lose their jobs.
Generally speaking, the people who are positioned to be least affected by coronavirus are
the most rattled. That is due to the gap between expectations and the new reality. Poor people
have Bad Shit Happen on a regular basis. Wealthy people expect to be able to insulate
themselves from most of it and then have it appear in predictable forms, like cheating spouses
and costly divorces, bad investments (still supposedly manageable if you are diversified!),
renegade children, and common ailments, like heart attacks and cancer, where the rich better
the odds by advantaged access to care.
The super rich are now bunkered, belatedly realizing they can't set up ICUs at home, and
hiring guards to protect themselves from marauding hordes, yet uncertain that their mercenaries
won't turn on them.
The bigger point is that we've had a Minksy-like process operating on a society-wide basis:
as daily risks have declined, most people have blinded themselves to what risk amounts to and
where it might surface in particularly nasty forms. And the more affluent and educated classes,
who disproportionately constitute our decision-makers, have generally been the most
removed.
The proximity to risk goes a long way to explaining who has responded better. As many have
pointed out, the countries that had meaningful experience with SARS 2 had a much
better idea of what they were up against with the coronavirus and took aggressive measures
faster.
But how do you explain South Korea, which had only three cases of SARS and no deaths? It
doesn't appear to have had enough experience with SARS to have learned from it.
A related factor may be that developing economies have fresh memories of what life was like
before they became affluent. I can't speak for South Korea, but when I worked with the
Japanese, people still remembered the "starving times" right after World War II. Japan was
still a poor country in the 1960s. 3 South Korea rose as an economic power after
Japan. The Asian Tigers were also knocked back on their heels with the 1997 emerging markets
crisis. And of course Seoul is in easy nuke range of North Korea. It's the only country I ever
visited, including Israel, where I went through a metal detector to enter and saw lots of
soldiers carrying machine guns in the airport. So they likely have a keen appreciation of how
bad bad can be.
The Rise and Rise of the Symbol Economy
Let me start with an observation by Peter Drucker that I read back in the 1980s, but will
then redefine his take on "symbol economy," because I believe the phenomenon has become much
more pervasive than he envisioned.
The most significant transformation for Drucker was the changed relationship between the
symbolic economy of capital movements, exchange rates, and credit flows, and the real economy
of the flow of goods and services:
in the world economy of today, the 'real economy' of goods and services and the 'symbol
economy' of money, credit, and capital are no longer bound tightly to each other; they are
indeed, moving further and further apart (1986: 783)
The rise of the financial sphere as the flywheel of the world economy, Drucker noted, is
both the most visible and the least understood change of modern capitalism.
What Drucker may not have sufficiently appreciated was money and capital flows are
speculative and became more so over time. In their study of 800 years of financial crises,
Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff found that high levels of international capital flows were
strongly correlated with more frequent and more severe financial crises. Claudio Borio and
Petit Disyatat of the Banks of International Settlements found that on the eve of the 2008
crisis, international capital flows were 61 times as large as trade flows, meaning they were
only trivially settling real economy transactions.
Now those factoids alone may seem to offer significant support to Drucker's thesis. But I
believe he conceived of it too narrowly. I believe that modeling techniques, above all,
spreadsheet-based models, have removed decision-makers from the reality of their decisions. If
they can make it work on paper, they believe it will work that way.
When I went to business school and started on Wall Street, financiers and business analysts
did their analysis by hand, copying information from documents and performing computations with
calculators. It was painful to generate financial forecasts, since one error meant that
everything to the right was incorrect and had to be redone.
The effect was that when managers investigated major capital investments and acquisitions,
they thought hard about the scenarios they wanted to consider since they could look at only a
few. And if a model turned out an unfavorable-looking result, that would be hard to rationalize
away, since a lot of energy had been devoted to setting it up.
By contrast, when PCs and Visicalc hit the scene, it suddenly became easy to run lots of
forecasts. No one had any big investment in any outcome. And spending so much time playing with
financial models would lead most participants to a decision to see the model as real, when it
was a menu, not a meal.
When reader speak with well-deserved contempt of MBA managers, the too-common belief that it
is possible to run an operation, any operation, by numbers, appears to be a root cause. For
over five years, we've been running articles from the Health Renewal Blog decrying the rise of
"generic managers" in hospital systems (who are typically also spectacularly overpaid) who
proceed to grossly mismanage their operations yet still rake in the big bucks.
The UK version of this pathology is more extreme, because it marries managerial
overconfidence with a predisposition among British elites to look at people who work hard as
"must not be sharp." But the broad outlines apply here. From Clive,
on a Brexit post, when Brexit was the poster child of UK elite incompetence :
What's struck me most about the UK government's approach to the practical day-to-day
aspects of Brexit is that it is exemplifying a typically British form of managerialism which
bedevilles both public sector and private sector organisations. It manifests itself in all
manner of guises but the main characteristic is that some "leader" issues impractical,
unworkable, unachievable or contradictory instructions (or a "strategy") to the lower ranks.
These lower ranks have been encouraged to adopt the demeanour of yes-men (or yes-women). So
you're not allowed to question the merits of the ask. Everyone keeps quiet and takes the
paycheck while waiting for the roof to fall in on them. It's not like you're on the
breadline, so getting another year or so in isn't a bad survival attitude. If you make a fuss
now, you'll likely be replaced by someone who, in the leadership's eyes is a lot more can-do
(but is in fact just either more naive or a better huckster).
Best illustrated perhaps by an example -- I was asked a day or two ago to resolve an issue
I'd reported using "imaginative" solutions. Now, I've got a a vivid imagination, but even
that would not be able to comply with two mutually contradictory aims at the same time
("don't incur any costs for doing some work" and "do the work" -- where because we've
outsourced the supply of the services in question, we now get real, unhideable invoices which
must be paid).
To the big cheeses, the problem is with the underlings not being sufficiently clever or
inventive. The real problem is the dynamic they've created and their inability to perceive
the changes (in the same way as swinging a wrecking ball is a "change") they've wrought on an
organisation.
May, Davies, Fox, the whole lousy lot of 'em are like the pilot in the Airplane movie --
they're pulling on the levers of power only to find they're not actually connected to
anything. Wait until they pull a little harder and the whole bloody thing comes off in their
hands.
Americans typically do this sort of thing with a better look: the expectations are usually
less obviously implausible, particularly if they might be presented to the wider world. One of
the cancers of our society is the belief that any problem can be solved with better PR, another
manifestation of symbol economy thinking.
I could elaborate further on how these attitudes have become common, such as the ability of
companies to hide bad operating results and them come clean every so often as if it were an
extraordinary event, short job tenures promoting "IBG/YBG" opportunism, and the use of lawyers
as liability shields (for the execs, not the company, natch).
But it's not hard to see how it was easy to rationalize away the risks of decisions like
globalization. Why say no to what amounted to a transfer from direct factory labor to managers
and execs? Offshoring and outsourcing were was sophisticated companies did. Wall Street liked
them. Them gave senior employees an excuse to fly abroad on the company dime. So what if the
economic case was marginal? So what if the downside could be really bad? What Keynes said about
banker herd mentality applies:
A sound banker, alas! is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he
is ruined, is ruined in a conventional and orthodox way along with his fellows, so that no
one can really blame him.
It's not hard to see how a widespread societal disconnect of decision-makers from risk,
particularly health-related risks, compounded with management by numbers as opposed to kicking
the tires, would combine to produce lax attitude toward operations in general.
I believe a third likely factor is poor governance practices, and those have gotten
generally worse as organizations have grown in scale and scope. But there is more
country-specific nuance here, and I can discuss only a few well, so adding this to my theory
will have to hold for another day. But it isn't hard to think of some in America. For instance,
40 years ago, there were more midsized companies, with headquarters in secondary cities like
Dayton, Ohio. Executives living in and caring about their reputation in their communities
served as a check on behavior.
Before you depict me as exaggerating about the change in posture toward risks, I recall
reading policy articles in the 1960s where officials wrung their hands about US dependence on
strategic materials found only in unstable parts of Africa. That US would never have had China
make its soldiers' uniforms, boots, and serve as the source for 80+ of the active ingredients
in its drugs. And America was most decidedly capitalist in the 1960s. So we need to look at how
things have changed to explain changes in postures towards risk and notions of what competence
amounts to.
_____ 1 One of my early memories was seeing a one-legged man using a crutch, with the
trouser of his missing leg pinned up. I pointed to him and said something to my parents and was
firmly told never to do anything like that again.
3 Japan has had a pretty lame coronavirus response, but that is the result of
Japan's strong and idiosyncratic culture. While Japanese are capable of taking action
individually when they are isolated, in group settings, no one wants to act or even worse take
responsibility unless their is an accepted or established protocol.
Ian Walsh has a good take on it – he ascribes it to a new aristocracy, which has
all the vices of the old aristocracy.
Let's chalk this up to aristocratic elites. Aristocrats, unlike nobles, are decadent,
but don't stop with that word; understand what it means.
Elites who are not aligned with the actual productive activities of society and are
engaged primarily in activities which are contrary to production, are decadent. This was
true in Ancien Regime France (and deliberately fostered by Louis XIV as a way of
emasculating the nobility). It is true today of most Western elites; they concentrate on
financial numbers, and not on actual production. Even those who are somewhat competent tend
not to be truly productive: see the Waltons, who made their money as
distributers–merchants.
The techies have mostly outsourced production; they don't make things, they design them.
That didn't work out for England in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and it hasn't
worked well for the US, though thanks to Covid-19 and US fears surrounding China, the US
may re-shore their production capacity before it is too late.
I think there is also a lot to be said for historical (and current) memories of crisis.
Both South Korea and Taiwan are countries on a near permanent war footage – both have
genuine reasons to fear an external attack (this is particularly visible in South Korea
– bomb shelters and warnings everywhere). They are simply at a higher level of alert
than most countries and take civil defence very seriously. Much the same applies to
Vietnam.
I've noticed here that so far as I can see, the response in Ireland has been significantly
better than the UK, despite the NHS being a far better system than the rickety, unequal, and
notoriously bureaucratic Irish system. I've noticed that a lot of the official response has
revived old protocols for TB and Polio – both diseases that ravaged Ireland into living
memory – most old doctors of my acquaintance here will tell you horror stories and I
grew up knowing people crippled from polio. While in the UK its fair to say I think that such
horrors have slipped out of bureaucratic memory. People talk about the War, but in reality
they have no real memory of the horrors of seeing neighbours die. So I think there is a lot
to be said for simple institutional memory and practice allowing some countries to respond
that big quicker. And with this virus even just 2-3 weeks extra preparation could have made
all the difference to a country or region.
And they don't have to live where they are from anymore. When Tony Blair wants positive
attention, he jets off to the US or Israel. Claire McCaskill lost a statewide race when the
same electorate passed a minimum wage increase and legalized at least medical Marijuana. She
now opines on Comcast PR about elections.
That does make a difference. After the Celtic Tiger crash in Ireland, the PM (Bertie
Ahern) who was largely responsible ended up banned from his regular pub where he was well
known to have a pint every evening after his day job. The owner explained that if he didn't
bar him, he'd lose the rest of his customers.
Mind you, like all the others he still makes a living on the public speaking circuit and
his chiklit writer daughter got a mysteriously large book deal from a Murdoch owned
publisher..
The Irish case is interesting, because the performance of the state in recent times has
been anything but competent. The bank bailout and the cervical cancer cases allowed by the
botched testing program are examples. I remember a Morgan Kelly lecture where he said, "We
don't do competence in Ireland. You start holding people responsible and you might get
some of the 'wrong' people."
The Irish leadership stratum so far looks as if it has done a better job than even the US.
Your point about the living memory TB and Polio -- in the 50s, my aunt and uncle, visiting
from the US, were advised by the priest not to go to mass because of the danger of picking up
TB -- rings true. I wonder if the recent fails by the state, that seem to have left the
public abidingly angry (the bailout) and aghast (authorities letting women die of cervical
cancer ) have shown elites that they have no political room to fail this time, and that they
must show tangible success.
Plutonium Kun: Thanks for re-posting the Ian Welsh essay, which was posted at Naked
Capitalism a couple days ago–and which has been on my mind since I read it then. I
recall that when I was living on the North Shore, the belt of rich suburbs north of Chicago,
on a whimsy for a few years, the prevailing stance in dealing with others was a kind of
genial incompetence. Shortly after, I returned to Chicago for some grit and consequences.
I woke up this morning thinking of this example of the decadence (a term Welsh describes):
The serious person Hillary Clinton opining on something or other. Where is serious person,
and vision of competence, Hillary Clinton these days? Why isn't she advocating for the little
people? Or at least for her slobbering fan club? Or hoping for another soft-ball interview
that doesn't ask what it was like to be Bill's bag-man all those years as they raked in the
moolah?
The incompetence is a symptom of a morally-degenerate managerial class Infected with bad
ideas and having no sense of responsibility to anyone other than themselves. They plan out
quarter by quarter, loot their companies instead of investing in them, and lie habitually.
This is CORRUPTION. Consider that the ex-CEO of GE, with all his hundreds of millions
garnered by cheating GE employees and offshoring their jobs, looting company funds to enrich
himself and his co-conspirators, was also a tax cheat, buying art for his NY city palace but
claiming it was for his abode in NH and evading NY sales tax. Committing fraud to evade his
fair share. A better model for what ails US America cannot be found than this scum.
And note that Boeing moved its headquarters to Chicago "to be more like GE". Well they've
destroyed the company to be more like the looters and liars and cheats. Nice work if you can
get it.
This post is not just about the private sector. State and local governments are primarily
responsible for public health.
Your theory does not explain Jerry Brown killing the Schwarznegger emergency response
apparatus.
Nor is it adequate to respond to the general idea that "never attribute to malice that
which can be explained by incompetence". Even though it is obvious that America has a lot of
corruption, you omit the notion that a lot of stupid will also explain much of what we are
seeing now.
Thank for your article – due to that we humans tend to compare us to each other, we
are prone to error. Why shouldn't we do, what the others do?
And that's were the incompetence gets it's grip on. Here in Germany we just avoided the
closure of smaller hospitals, because they are not efficient enough – now we are the
lucky ones with the higher number of beds and ICU's and ecma and so on.
That's not only luck, but the preachers of the neoliberal agenda have a hardship nowadays
– and 'we, the people' have a minimum of two years to redesign our societies.
But remember, too, that Brown showed in his first term, in the 70s, that he was a textbook
case of being one of Stoller's progressive post-Watergate Democrats that set aside New Deal
programs and regulation. I remember his deregulation of intrastate trucking from that time,
which the highly unionized truckers opposed. Come quietly to The Gap
I think one of the problems is that financialization and securitization of everything has
effectively separated the managerial class in both private and public sector from knowledge
and experience of actual logistics and execution.Transferring securities with the push of a
button is not the same as getting an industrial plant or phone center built, trained, and
running efficiently. Companies and organizations with a history of doing this well can
completely undo that capability in only a couple of years (e.g. CDC, FEMA, numerous companies
taken over by PE). While my examples below are US-based, I think a lot of the same thought
processes have been going on in much of the OECD (e.g. Brexit debacle).
Once everything is measured in dollars with a maximum of a 1 to 5 years window, then it
becomes really easy to just focus on the little ball needed to become really "efficient"
without thinking about the bigger societal picture. I think the generations that grew up in
WW I, 19189-19 Flu, Prohibition, Great Depression, WW II had a much bigger picture of life
and society. In some respects, things like Vietnam, were an over-reaction (like immune system
going haywire) but on the whole, there was a big focus for 50 years on the potential for
really big, bad things to happen. Once the Berlin Wall fell, much of that dissipated and so
the shocks that come are generally responded to with a combination of bewilderment, lack of
general interest unless it personally impacts you, or the immune system going wild (Iraq
invasion, torture).
He wants universal daily testing of all Americans to prove daily they can be out and
about. This is in a country that can't figure out how to have half the country vote without
standing in lines for hours or hasn't been able to figure out how to even get sick people
tested and waiting a week or more more for the test results to come back. Granted, the 15
minute tests mean that it might be possible to set up a lemonade stand at the entrance to
every subdivision or subway station for people to get their daily test. The logistical
undertaking to do this would be mammoth, although there are at least lots of unemployed
people who could get several months of training to learn how to do such a test.
Once everything is measured in dollars with a maximum of a 1 to 5 years window, then it
becomes really easy to just focus on the little ball needed to become really "efficient"
without thinking about the bigger societal picture. I think the generations that grew up in
WW I, 19189-19 Flu, Prohibition, Great Depression, WW II had a much bigger picture of life
and society. In some respects, things like Vietnam, were an over-reaction (like immune system
going haywire) but on the whole, there was a big focus for 50 years on the potential for
really big, bad things to happen. Once the Berlin Wall fell, much of that dissipated and so
the shocks that come are generally responded to with a combination of bewilderment, lack of
general interest unless it personally impacts you, or the immune system going wild (Iraq
invasion, torture).
I am a design engineer and I have found it is really difficult to get people to engage in
real discussions of potential risks and solutions. Generally the only thing that anybody
wants to know is "What will it cost to be prepared?" Almost nobody wants to talk about low
probability, high impact events because that generally would not show up in the 1-5 years
time limit people care about.
low probability – high impact events and human nature. We just went thru a
surprising 5.6 earthquake – I'm pretty sure we were ground zero because it not only
shook the house like a hurricane for 4 seconds, there was also the sound of a very loud
explosion. Sometimes earthquakes make booms like that. If it had lasted another 2 or 3
seconds the roof would have come down; the gas lines would have pulled apart; the plumbing
would have been disabled and etc. But we just went, Well that was interesting. Lucky there
was no damage. Probably not worth taking out earthquake insurance – it's so
expensive.
State and local government ARE responsible for public health. The local people running
those agencies do not control their budgets. With insufficient funds their experience and
qualifications are wasted by scrambling for stop-gap methods. The political leaders
(Governors, mostly.) are most to blame. So the next time folks are choosing at the ballot box
remember that public health needs vigoroous funding.
As for the incompetence of "managers" and the credentialed, it occurs everywhere in
organizations in America, and beyond. A paycheck is essential while "speaking up" is
dangerous. See: Captain Crozier. Most folks are neither secure enough financially or
academically to voice a contrasting observation.
Yves, this was an excellent post. Decidedly pointed. There are few who dare to take this
challenge. That is why NC is so important. Stay safe!
Are you sure you don't mean Dennis Koslowsky (spelled something like that) who was a CPA
from New Jersey and ran Tyco? At least he did some jail time. The smart ones figure out how
to cheat legally by hiring the well connected white shoe Ivy League lawyers. That is not to
say that GE was not mismanaged but it really was done in by the finance crisis because Jack
Welch bet the company on it which worked really well for a long time until it did not which
covered up the fact that manufacturing in the US is essentially impossible secondary to the
legal system and the health care system, or lack thereof.
If only it was as simple as saying that services operated by the state were fine, it's
private capital where the problem lies.
It's not. This is a societal and cultural problem.
There are employer "pushes" towards the deskilling and degrading of levels of operational
competence. One is employers ( both public sector and private sector) do not want to pay for
training and to retain a body of experienced employees because both of these cost money
up-front with a payoff (in the form of competent, knowledgeable staff) that comes only
slowly, later. And a churn of staff is seen as the sign, wrongly, but this is what the MBAs
sell as snake oil, of a dynamic, healthy organisation which is bringing in (through a process
which never seems to be adequately explained) new talent. Plus, of course, most obviously,
younger and newer employees are cheaper so your average headcount cost is lower which is
usually a management metric -- often one which is incentive-ised through reward.
There are also employee "pulls" -- and again, these are not just observed in the private
sector. You see them in medicine, academia and even, most bizarrely, the arts. An example of
these employee-instigated causes of a reduction in capability is that it becomes
in-cultural-ated that if you spend too long in the same place, you're only doing so out of
necessity because you're so useless, no-one else will employ you. So even if don't really
want to move onto a different organisation or a different field of work outside your
skillset, you feel you have to, in order to avoid looking "stale", "resistant to change",
"stuck in your comfort zone" or any other of the myriad of thought-crimes which you don't
want, in today's job market, to be seen to having evidence of committing. And also, as
collective union bargaining has gone the way of the dinosaur, more often than not, if you
want a raise you have to threaten to quit to get one. But again, more often than not, your
current employer will call your bluff and let you leave. So you have to have another job
lined up to to go to, if you're not to fall into a trap of flouncing off in a huff but having
no other work to walk straight into. While your current employer might not, if they were
honest, want to lose you, the dynamics of the workplace being what they are, neither side can
then climb down from the ultimatums they've just served.
Yes, there are some notable poster-children of how private enterprise has committed
suicide through the wanton bloodletting of its skilled employees (Boeing being a recent
case-in-point). But even if you cast your gaze in the direction of public employers, this
same phenomena can be found in universities, colleges and K-12 schools (where faculties are
no longer bolstered by a strong bench of tenured staff, contract and non-tenured
hire-and-fire disposable staff are now the norm, I won't even go there on the effect of
charter schools) healthcare (even in the UK's entirely public sector NHS, there is huge
reliance on contract and agency staff which the COVID-19 crisis has highlighted and the
government is trying, belatedly and without any clear indication it can do so in the short
term
to redress this and avoid being price-gouged). Or federal and state
regulators which now simply do not understand the businesses they are supposed to be
regulating and have to buy-in external "expertise" (and merely exacerbate the revolving
door problem).
In summary, I wish it were so simple to merely say "private sector bad, government good".
But the rot has set in from top to bottom across all aspects of how we manage our shared
organisational maturity (or, should I say, now, fix our shared organisational immaturity) and
whether or not it started in the private sector, it has well and truly spread to infect the
public sector, too. This was the unmistakable point of the post, so it bears re-reading it
again with a particular emphasis on understanding why this is the case.
devolution by automation. the dystopia we didn't see coming. can't help believing that
automation itself – even though it has often been, or seemed to be, beneficial –
hasn't undermined and/or destroyed what should be a collective human intelligence and
contagious creativity that is the real thing that makes us thrive. But it takes a long steady
progression and we're all too impatient.
In my experience working as a lawyer in government service for 34 years, I saw this
obsession with "new blood" and "innovation" flooding the system with lawyers -- and judges --
who were breezily ignorant of the law, yet supremely confident in their own cleverness.
University faculties dominated by TA's and adjuncts; charter schools taught by
6-week-wonder TFA's; warships piloted by teenagers; Presidents with no experience in
government The list goes on and on.
I blame the instant and consequence-free ego gratification of television-watching for this
phenomenon.
100% on the employer pushes. I've seen this plenty in my 25 years of working in
engineering and manufacturing businesses. And no matter how many "systems" and "quality
functions" they put in place, experience matters. In has happened several times that even
with great and detailed documentation, when a particular machinist retires, a product line
starts having quality issues. Several times we've had layoffs for some reason or another and
they have to bring particular individuals back because there was some function they did that
no one else is qualified or able to do. Also, because we run lean, cross training is
difficult no one has the extra time.
It is disappointing to see these early comments ignore the framing of the post and go for
simplistic takes.
I said at the top that this post was about advanced economies that had poor coronavirus
responses, not just the US. That includes Belgium, France, and the Netherlands, all of which
have much higher fatalities per capita than the US. None of those countries have high rates
of infant mortality.
That's a bit optimistic.You could argue Belgium and the
Netherlands have already plateaued in terms of new cases and deaths. For France the
numbers are not as clear thanks to a one-day spike in reported nursing home cases. But
the US
has shown clear exponential growth in both new cases and deaths thru today. I don't think the
data is in.
For the last week the US has reported 20-30k new cases a day which means the deaths won't
hit for another 1-2 weeks. The number of tests is comparable to the other countries you
listed, so it isn't a matter of overdiagnosis. The East Coast is the only region in the US
doing meaningful testing.
It's not farfetched to think the US will experience a uniquely bad result in terms of
health care and economic outcomes because of its uniquely bad health care system and elite
indifference. Never attribute to malice or indifference that which can be adequately
explained by indifference. Malice is too difficult to prove, and when it comes to enriching
themselves, elites are demonstrably competent. What they are, is indifferent. They simply
don't care about long term outcomes or their population. For them, everything is consequence
free. Coronavirus is just another example in the litany.
2 models dominate the informed universal health care coverage debate: 1) a purely public
(state) model, as in the UK and Italy, in which financing for health care costs is located in
the federal budget where it is allocated from a stream of tax revenues and financing sources;
and 2) a highly regulated non-profit (non-state) model, as in most of Scandinavia and central
Europe, in which financing is located in a pool of premiums and when needed, e.g. for the
very young, poor, elderly who cannot afford to pay premiums, state subsidies.
A variation on 2) is a hybrid of non-profits and private, profit-oriented insurers, as in
Germany and the Netherlands, in which the mix is critical and is subject to regulation.
Something like 90% non-profit, 10% private is IMHO OK though in Germany it might be more like
70/30.
The EU has been blamed for the devastation caused by Covid-19 in Italy. The argument goes
something like, the austerity imposed by the Germans forced Italy to reduce health care
capacities. The Frankfurter Allgemeine argues today that ECB imposed austerity is not to
blame. Rather the purely state model of financing for health care coverage is at fault. The
fact is that in the Italian model many stakeholders want a share of the stream of tax
revenues and financing sources from which funds for the provision of health care are also
drawn. The FAZ notes that Italian state retirement benefits have risen substantially in
recent years while funding for health care has been level.
The rise of the FIRE sectors as a percentage of GDP has been obvious. We are
over-financialized. All this has done is over lay a very expensive layer of debt and interest
payments on the real economy. This is the bubble the pandemic pricked.
Again, this post is not about the US. It is about trying to develop theories as to why
some countries responded reasonably well to the coronavirus crisis and others not.
Italy's banking sector, even with its dud loans not written down, is 1.5 trillion euros v.
a GDP of about 1.9 trillion euros, or 79% of GDP. Unlike the US, Italy does not have a
ginormous securities market nor a big asset management business, so its banking industry is
pretty much the only game in town except for government bond issuance. By contrast, in the
US, banks are a way smaller proportion of financial activity (they represent <15% of
non-farm private loans) but even banking assets alone are a higher % of GDP, 94%.
Your explanation does not fit key facts. Italy, one of the very worst hit countries, is
not heavily financialized. It is also dominated by medium and small businesses
Besides the new aristocracy aspects and a general lack of accountability, I do wonder
about rates of foreign elites being "educated" in the US. When my parents go to Boston, all
they do is complain about how nice it is, but they remember when the nice areas were where
regular people lived. Like US tourists think all Europeans take high speed trains to work,
how much of Euro attitudes by seeing the rise of enclaves in the US?
I'll use UVA and Charlottesville Virginia, but if you never go beyond Preston Ave
(gentrification may have shifted it) away from Grounds, why would a student see poor people
or any lower class employees beyond UVA employees who aren't making a living wage?
Charlottesville has the highest rate of wealth inequality in the state.
Thank you. You analyze it. For years I have called it "playing video games". Years ago I
knew a guy who said it did not matter of what but he had to be a manager.It was some sort of
prestige thing for him. Took him out of the common herd in his way of looking at things.
Yesterday, I read Paul Johnson's short biography of Winston Churchill. Churchill did not like
desk work according to Johnson and every new task he undertook, he went out and learned the
ins and outs of it. He was a relentless inspector and questioner. He taught himself how to
lay bricks. He learned by doing and led from knowledge. He made mistakes. He took
responsibility. Certainly he was not a typical person, but neither did he sit in an office
assuming he knew it all because the model said he did.
That is why Boris Johnson is no Churchill. Churchill was in a lots of was a dilletante,
but he was an informed dilletante. He had hunger to learn, maybe too much of it to be good at
anything.
Johnson's hunger is just to be in the news, to make a history. I do wonder whether he
still believes it worth it now, or in a short future as he's being sedated for intubation
(which would not surprise me).
I do not really have much to add to what you write Yves. The "we lost sense of danger" is
something I have thought of for a long time. IMO, every system that loses feedback will
crash, sooner or later. We have worked really hard to remove not just the feedback, but any
traces of the feedback.
Everyone who asks for *real* feedback is looked at as a weirdo. We need to know shit
happens, we need to have bad shit happen to us now and then (speaking as one who had some
really bad shit happen).
One place you can learn about society is how it treats its kids. Most of the kids today
are way more cosied that even I ever was, and it's getting worse. We want to remove any and
all dangers, and we go to anyone who promises us that, even if we really know it's not
possible.
But we have to be very careful there. I believe that claims "we need suffering" are
bulshit, because most of the time they want to say that suffering is good for us. It's not.
It _may_ be necessary to remind us that bad stuff can happen, the same way as pain does. But
it doesn't mean we'd use it to excuse suffering.
: Grand strategy, according to Boyd, is a quest to isolate your enemy's (a nation-state or
a global terrorist network) thinking processes from connections to the external/reference
environment. This process of isolation is essentially the imposition of insanity on a group.
To wit: any organism that operates without reference to external stimuli (the real world),
falls into a destructive cycle of false internal dialogues. These corrupt internal dialogues
eventually cause dissolution and defeat.
For the central attribute is symmetry: the balancing of incentives and disincentives,
people should also penalized if something for which they are responsible goes wrong and hurts
others: he or she who wants a share of the benefits needs to also share some of the
risks.
. . .
And in the absence of the filtering of skin in the game, the mechanisms of evolution fail:
if someone else dies in your stead, the built up of asymmetric risks and misfitness will
cause the system to eventually blow-up.
I read your use of feedback as >reference to external stimuli (the real world).
With Taleb, I'm reading disincentives as penalties, and that lack of penalty/punishment
warps the selection process of evolution. With respect to the post, that has created a lack
of respect for risk by those who make decisions.
It can be taken a step farther, that the selection process has created perverse
incentives. For example, the bailouts from 2008 made the FIRE sector qliphotically
antifragile. In that scenario, risk becomes rewarding.
I want to be careful here about using the word feedback, its ambiguities could be
confusing. Given that, I'm interested in knowing what you mean about ignoring the
disincentives skin-in-the-game creates. Could you please expand on that?
My problem with Taleb's skin in the game is that, as he well knows, it's hard to
distinguish luck (good or bad) and skill. How can we punish for luck though?
Think of a judge, who gets, through his skill, 99 out of 100 cases right. But the 100th
– which, by pure luck, could be really large case – he gets wrong.
Or, even simpler. Technically, if you do one decision a day, and have 99% success rate,
every three months you get somethign wrong (1-0.99^60 = 0.54) more likely than not. Should
you be punished for this? If we yes, then people will start takin decisions where alternate
history is hard to prove, i.e. you create a selection bias towards "do nothing". You can then
be punished for "doing nothing" but most of the time "do nothing" is a safe choice. (it's a
specific case of "go with the crowd")
Also, in decision making, context is extremely important (which is why courts go to super
lenghts to establish it in judical cases). Taleb should know it, and he should also know that
unless context is taken into account _in_full_ then the skin-in-the-game will not be seen as
fair. But the problem is, the context can never be fully established, and rarely w/o the
participation of the major decision maker. Who will have no incentive to participate. Which
will hamper learning from it.
Skin in the game makes sense when you can clearly separate luck and skill, and clearly
establish context. Even one of those is rare occasion, both is extremely so.
That said, you can often establish post fact when someone blew up (this is what the
various enuiries do). And then you'd treat accordingly. But that's not skin-in-the-game,
because again, the enquiry can establish that you acted in good faith, as most people would
act at the time – and so assign no blame. So you may "fail honourably".
Skin in the game does not let you fail honourably – because it's not skin in the
game anymore (because it can let you game the system again, via doing just enough to pass any
future enquiry as "more could have been done, but there's no clear knowing dereliction of
duty).
TLDR; skin-in-the-game is an attempt at simplictic solution to a complex problem. Taleb
should know better.
I'd like to expand on this a bit, as I think it's deeply related Yves' point on risk and
perceptions of risk. Far as I can tell, notions about parenting changed very drastically in
the 80's when
1) mainstream media companies discovered that endlessly replaying (and sometimes plain
inventing) lurid tales of horrible things happening to children was good for ratings and
required no real journalistic effort or talent.
And 2) I'm not exactly sure how to describe what I'm trying to say, but somehow both
responsibility for rare and terrible tragedies along with childrens' and young adults' agency
got transferred to their parents. As if everything that happened to a child or that a child
did resulted directly from the adequacy of parenting received.
So rather than cozied (which I think of has having all one's needs met and being protected
from awfulness – a good thing), I think many children are micromanaged, isolated from
authentic social interactions, and perhaps worst of all, taught that profound questions of
morality and existence are best ignored (lest they cause distress). This, along with
cultivating an intense desire for approval from authority, seems to have become the default
mode of preparing children for membership in the privileged classes.
Somehow though, at the same time, we were also taught that our life situation is also
wholly the result of our qualities as people. Wondering about a person's station in life? We
were taught not to ask "what happened" but "what kind of person are they?" Are they smart or
dumb, cultured or trashy, attractive or loathsome? Unnattractive and trashy but rich, they
must be really really smart.
I think this combination of dramatically limiting children's opportunities for growth in
competence, confidence, friendships, independence, morality, worldview, and all the other
things that go into discovering who you are and where you fit in the world, combined with
relentless meritocratic mythologizing have raised a couple generations now that are both
terrified of risks yet somehow often heedless of the consequences of their decisions. We're
terrified to speak up in a meeting, but if the result of that meeting harms a lot of people,
well, not our fault, just how the world is.
All that said, there aren't many power brokers I can think of under the age of 65, so
maybe all this generational analysis is beside the point. Have the powers that be always been
so old?
The powerbrokers are (often) elected by the people. Who may be looking for a father
figure, rather than anything else. Someone who would take the responsbilities for them,
because they are too hard to bear (you'd argue that some poor don't vote because they don't
feel the need to offload their responsibilities on others, but it could be a bit
overconvoluted – I think most humans want to dump responsiblity elsewhere).
How to truly accept responsibility for ourselves is IMO one of the most important things
we'd teach out kids, and that we're failing to do so (myself included). It's hard, and
paradoxicaly, our society made it harder.
I think all I described has been hard on parents too. IMO, parents are only the primary
teachers of children in the early years before peers and society take over. To the extent
neoliberalism has a pedagogical philosophy, it's that we can't control things we do have
power over, and can control things we don't have power over. Love and accept your kids, treat
them with respect, listen, help them when you can, and make sure to laugh together from time
to time, and you'll be a parent I'd envy the children of.
"notions about parenting changed very drastically in the 80's"
– Brings to mind a long ago article regarding children raised in hunter-gatherer units,
was it Papua New Guinea? who were from toddler stage spared much of the parental policing now
considered appropriate. Allowed to play with the machete and roam free around the open camp
fire they emerged with far less anxiety and perhaps a more practical and functional risk
assessment process than modern kids.
Playgrounds today are foam buffered and accident proofed as much as possible, football and
hockey helmets and padding are designed to absorb the shock of contact. Automobiles are seat
belted, air bagged, AI driver assisted with back up cameras. Airlines and aircraft
manufacturers rely on ever advancing auto pilot systems, a trade off that dispenses with
higher salaried experienced pilots for lower paid, less flight tested, dial tenders. "the too-common belief that it is possible to run an operation, any operation, by numbers,
appears to be a root cause." -YS
I believe quantum physics has largely, by numbers alone, drifted off into string theory and
multiple universes, all fascinating but of a highly extenuated and dubious relation to
anything real.
We have lost touch with consequences through the intermediary remediation of technology and
virtual modeling, great tools but they have unintended consequences on human behavior.
What's struck me most about the UK government's approach to the practical day-to-day
aspects of Brexit is that it is exemplifying a typically British form of managerialism
which bedevilles both public sector and private sector organisations.
The genetic map of England (outside the major cities) is essentially unchanged since the
Anglo-Saxon invasion.
As a decades-long American ex-pat living in London, it's taken me a long-time to realize,
that despite its modern trappings, England remains a feudal society. The way ordinary
individuals feel a lack of agency and still look up to the aristocracy and Oxbridge graduates
for guidance rather than trusting their own skeptical instincts and standing up for those
such beliefs is astonishing.
The fact that "forelock tugging" (an act of deference to a passing lord) remains a phrase
in common usage says it all.
I've felt that the only thing that enforced competence was the elites credible fear of
communism after world War II. They had to do some things for the public lest their wealth be
seized by the public. And propaganda was used right up to the fall of the USSR. I was fairly
shocked that we then looked to China for all our outsourcing needs. The myth was that
capitalism would make China an open democracy. Whoops! We enabled them to become a great
power without any credible plan to make them any kind of ally beyond some mutual threat of
dual self destruction if a trade war erupts. China is credibly working to become independent
of the US with heavy state planning while we bail out and reward failed financiers and
abandon all public planning to rent extractors. What I wonder is if people will start to look
to another way that will credibly threaten the standard elite disaster capitalism approach
that has been the norm for decades now.
A sound banker, alas! is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when
he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional and orthodox way along with his fellows, so that no
one can really blame him. Keynes via Yves
The problem is that the payment system, besides grubby coins and paper Central Bank notes
(e.g. Federal Reserve Notes), must work through private depository institutions or not at
all.
How then can we have a sound economy when it is held hostage by "sound" bankers?
And are not the banks a form of rentier – who rent the Nation its money supply?
Then where are the proposals of the MMT School to euthanize those rentiers?
Right out of college, I got a job at a commodities trading firm on a recommendation from
my "Political Economics" prof. This was just when the PC started getting incorporated into
technical analysis. I learned one of the programs pretty quickly and made a few fortuitous
currency trades for some weird clients. One of my thoughts was, "what if you could just make
this program run and trade automatically?" I think a lot of people had the same thought.
Where has this laziness taken us? (I left after 6 months go to law school but that's another
story).
I see this thought trap how to be more lazy as sort of an alienation that happens when you
don't have to think about what you're doing anymore but how to get around it, and that gets
passed on to others who see that you don't really have to "work" but that it's more about
being clever enough to come up with a solution that pushes the whole process of being
responsible, reflective and hard working on to something – or more likely someone
– else.
I sometimes think we live in a world like Jerry Lewis in the Disorderly Orderly where he's
the only sane one in the asylum, constantly tripped up by insanity from doing the job of an
orderly.
As of incompetence the Brits bought some corona-tests which were just crap.
Seven-And-A-Half million tests just for the bin.
That's were the incompetence has it's home nowadays: 10 Downing St. If everything goes
according to plan, the Brits will be redeemed from the incompetence reigning there in these
days.
I think you hit some critical points about "spreadsheet models" and their disconnection
with reality. Unfortunately, it's not just the business and finance world that's struggling
here. I've seen serious failures along these lines in science and engineering as well.
Unfortunately even experts in those fields (who should know better), routinely interpret
model results very uncritically.
Like with business and finance, I believe the availability of computers for calculation
and plotting has made scientists and engineers a lot more prone to misinterpreting their
results or the results of others. I believe visualization of data via plotting software may
actually facilitate uncritical interpretation of that data. ("Seeing is believing". ) Before
computers, technicians had to construct plots by hand, which often involved close study of
the raw data to determine the best design for conveying that data.
Then there's also the problem of romantization of computation. Particularly recently, a
great many people (technical or otherwise) erroneously assume that a more complicated model
or a model that relies on a broader range of data input will produce more accurate results.
In reality, models involve *abstraction* of real things into data, which often requires
making assumptions and/or discarding information. Proper interpretation of the model results
requires taking the process of abstraction into account, but this is rarely done properly and
is often impractical when complicated models or heterogeneous data sets are involved.
Yet another problem is that scientist and engineer livelihoods often depend more on
abstract deliverables like "peer reviewed" papers (academia), reports, presentations,
demonstrations, etc. The target audience is typically either a non-specialist manager or a
specialist who doesn't have enough time to give proper critical attention to the work anyway.
Hence, there is great incentive to produce "results" for their own sake and typically fewer
negative consequences to the person (in terms of career / money) for "getting it wrong" than
for "failing to deliver".
For me these things are fundamental to the reason that I'm not in a satisfying technical
career. I could have made a whole career out of doing sciency bullshit. I had a very
successful and well-connected Ph.D. advisor and could have been one of a lucky few to score a
"tenure-track" position without doing post-doc work. Unfortunately every time I raised
concerns about the integrity of the methods, he would blow me off with "we can talk
philosophy another time". All he wanted to talk about was how to present the "results" for
maximum "impact". Success in that and many other "scientific" fields depends on marketing
over integrity, and someone such as myself who values integrity will struggle to match
productive output (in terms of prestige and career development) with those who just want to
"win".
I should clarify that I don't believe all scientific fields (or sub-fields, really) are
incompetent as I describe above. I know many aren't. And it's a bit of a mystery to me why
some are very tight and others are full of nonsense. I don't have a good answer.
When the dust settles I do think the scientific establishment will have a lot of hard
questions to answer. The response from official science bodies and advisors has often been
terrible (not just with the face mask debacle). Among other issues, I think a fake form of
'scientism' has taken hold whereby models based on dubious assumptions are treated as a form
of reality.
Nicholas Nassim Taleb has a paper out on the topic of models. His maths is way beyond my
poor skills, but the general point he is making is that there are fundamental problems with
models that extrapolate from past events poorly – in particular the often inbuilt
assumption that the worst case scenario is the worst previous event. There is an entertaining
explainer from a maths teacher in this article .
This is not an easy issue. If one is to review the scientific literature, there was no
lack of risk warnings from specialized scientific sources on the possibilities of new
SARS-like outbreaks. I also believe there were scientists that from the very beginning
worried about this. Once we saw how the outburst in Hubei evolved and watched coming data,
surely many could go and check that we were confronting a new guy with a very different
epidemiological and clinical behaviour compared with SARS. I am not at the forefront in
science but i recall commenting this a couple of months ago here, so I can guess some many
others did exactly the same. I don't think we were short on scientists able to do a good job
on risk assessment. Particularly scientists working in public institutions. What's the
problem then? I believe part of it is that we collectively turn a deaf ear to them. I noticed
from the very beginning a focus on the clinical aspects of the disease but almost full
blindness regarding the analysis of the epidemics. I think it possible that authorities in
Western countries took HC experts for advice to their tables but these experts had no idea on
epidemiology so they could barely give counseling on the dynamics of the outbreak and
couldn't predict the speed of the spread. If someone tried to notice this would have been
received with disbelief as all here were in negationist mood. Still many are. Also, I believe
tha many thought this was a Chinese thing and felt comfort on the fact that Chinese
authorities seemed to control it. Control, hah!
There is a parallel in union organizing. Old school organizers do their workplace charts,
listing every employee, their relationships to one another, and tracking their support for
the union, by hand. Doing so helps makes the organizer retain this "map" in their head.
Younger organizers (myself included) tend to substitute databases and spreadsheets for the
old hand-drawn version. Not saying these are entirely ineffective–I can speak from
experience that they are not. Rather that the pervasiveness of the technological change is
across many boundaries. Woe to the revolutionaries who use a google sheet!
A lot of useful things have already been said, not least by Yves, and I won't repeat them.
But if you think about it there are a whole series of different issues here, and it's
important not to mix them up. For example: how the virus got started, why it spread so
quickly, whether it should have been anticipated, whether it was prepared for, what was
assumed about it, what was done, how quickly it was done, whether the consequences
(especially economic) were foreseen etc. etc. If you're going to argue incompetence (which I
think there has been) you also have to have some idea of what would have constituted a
competent reaction. Simply comparing countries doesn't really help, because there are too
many variables, especially political and administrative ones: the US and China would not and
could not have reacted in the same way, for example. So Italy, for example, has always had a
weak state (to the point where many Italians have seen the EU as their salvation) and this is
probably a more important factor than many more technical ones.
If there's a common thread that links all of these elements, it's dissociation from reality,
which is also the cause of the incompetence on display. Globalization, for example,
responsible for the speed of the spread and much of the economic dislocation, could only have
been forced on the world by people who did not know about, or were indifferent to, the likely
consequences. Some of this dissociation comes just from wealth and power of course (how to
travel the world and see nothing) but some of it comes from ideology. For globalists, and
neoliberals generally, the idea that the market will adjust to meet any short-term
requirements (like masks) is not a simplification in a textbook but a statement of belief.
So, even if globalists were aware that masks, testing kits and ventilators were no longer
made domestically, they would have replied that it didn't matter because the market
would provide.
A corollary of the above is that, if the market will always provide, then there's no real
reason to plan or provision anything, provided you can buy it fast enough when you have to.
Thus, all organizations should concentrate on being as small and "flexible" as possible,
doing only those things that are essential, and thus in turn the stifling obsession with
process and organizational change to the exclusion of actually, you know, doing things, which
is the characteristic of our MBA-ised culture.
And finally, popular and political culture is no longer about anything. Children's books and
TV are purged of anything that might seem threatening, and even adults demand a life free
from even the possibility that something might happen that upsets them. We no longer have the
vocabulary and cultural references to handle collective grief and trauma. Our elites, for the
first time in history, have no personal experience of genuine crisis or deprivation, and,
since the 90s politics and PR have become effectively indistinguishable. Politics has
degenerated into a classically Liberal struggle for power between groups, and political
society is divided into smaller and smaller warring tribes, defined by skin color or genital
arrangement, competing for the spoils.
There's a lot more that could be said but I won't presume any more on the patience of others.
Essentially, though we have been living in Dreamland, and, for all that our elites may think
they've been cleverly manipulating us, they have been faster asleep than anyone. Our elite
and popular cultures, in other words, have long been full of shit. And that mess you see is
what happens when it hits the fan.
Thats a hell of a meaty post, lots to chew on there and I'd agree with all of it. This
virus really has identified the weak spot of so many institutional systems. Its a genuine
game changer in so many ways. It will be fascinating (and not a little terrifying) to be able
to observe this in real time.
And finally, popular and political culture is no longer about anything. Children's books
and TV are purged of anything that might seem threatening, and even adults demand a life
free from even the possibility that something might happen that upsets them. We no longer
have the vocabulary and cultural references to handle collective grief and trauma. Our
elites, for the first time in history, have no personal experience of genuine crisis or
deprivation, and, since the 90s politics and PR have become effectively
indistinguishable.
I belong to some playwrights groups (one is a kind of old-fashioned list-serv). Many of
the writers are waiting for this to blow over, so that they can go back to submitting the
same old, same old. Then they may get a production in which the playwright's background is
made much of. The work of art matters much less than the world of P.R. that now surrounds the
typical rising U.S. writer, playwright, or painter.
What so many of these people don't get is that the New Rococo is over. As you say, "Our
elite and popular cultures, have long been full of shit." It has been fifty or more years of
Rococo paintings of doilies and flourishes and word-salad on stage.
I have these days been writing on a theory that is flying around like an evasive butterfly
on the conditions that may have been at the root of this and other recent outbreaks. I am
replying to your comment because this is the first question in your well organized set of
questions. I think this post touches many points that merit an in depth view and I like yours
as well as many other comments here that add more insights. It seems to me very few are
dedicating a single neurone to these arguments or at least I can only find them at NC.
As for the origin of Covid-19 I have read a solid narrative that says the origin could be
the vulnerabilities of industrial farming practices in China. The world's largest producer of
pork meat suffered in 2019 a devastating African swine fever outbreak that decimated hogs and
very much reduced the most important source for meat production in China. Whether this
resulted in a significant increase in wild animal farming and traffic is not clear because
China doesn't provide data on this. Anyway it could be the case that such hidden practices,
that I think were encouraged by Chinese leadership, could have increased by a lot during 2019
becoming an important business by itself and a relevant source for food in Chinese markets.
This could have increased by much the possibility of a zoonotic outbreak like this.
thanks david ("our elite and popular cultures have long been full of shit"). I'm thinking
we are far too aggressive as a species to stop to examine our equally aggressive fantasies.
What we do best when we are not daydreaming is fight, usually without thinking it through.
(So what happened to that instinct when it comes to fighting a virus? We couldn't switch back
from the daydream in time?) We are either in some bloody confrontation or we are indulging
ourselves in escape. We are totally bipolar. Economically as well. I recommend mandatory
therapy, starting with members of Congress. And it wouldn't hurt to use our instincts as
capitalists right now to do a government sponsored program to produce testing equipment that
is reliable and can be distributed to every household. (Why is Capitalism so AWOL? It doesn't
look like the fault of capitalism, it looks more like the absence of capitalism.) Likewise
for first treatment – if it's hydroxychloroquine every household should have a current
supply. We really shouldn't rely on our schmoozer-in-chief to jet off to India at the very
last moment and cut a deal for drugs – which promptly get confiscated by the Indian
Government. I mean duh.
I deal with a lot of computer modeling, but am also old enough to know how it used to be
done with design charts etc. before computeres were available. The design charts were
developed using human computers like shown in "Hidden Figures". So I spend time with the
junior engineers and scientists teaching them about how the entire infrastructure that they
use daily was designed before computers were even available.
The first thing I look at when somebody gives me calculations is how many significant
digits they are reporting the answer to. If there are more than 1 or 2 after the decimal
place, I go through the entire thing with a fine tooth comb, because that means they don't
understand significant digits and the inherent limitations of modeling and are just
regurgitating whatever the computer spits out at them. There are often significant
errors.
If somebody gives me something to look at that has a detailed computer analysis reported
to one or two decimal places and checked with a simple design chart to ensure order of
magnitude correctness, it is much easier to check and is invariably more than likely to be
usable.
Italy has an historical weakness with the national state structures, and if we look at
national stereotypes we are supposed to be naturally messy and disordered.This is reflected
in our own expression "fare le cose all'italiana" ( to do things the italian way ) , which is
used when somebody acts in a range of ways going from messy , to corrupt ,to shallow ,to
disorganised, to tricky.
As for our political and practical management of the Covid crisis, I see now rolling on the
usual controversies among the factions of decision-makers, such as the ping-pong of blame
between the Lombardy governor and the central government. The issue below ,in my view, is
that NHS was regionalized , hence making it difficult a real joint effort and a joint
national policy, and any decision on the ground was the result of a political wrestling
between them .If there is some link with the article issue is that I tend to think that all
the fundamental policies that have been implemented and publicized in the last decades in
Italy were based on the idea and ideology of the external constraint . If you go on saying
that whatever you are actually doing as a ruling class is because of some external
constraint, you are saying that in the end you are not really responsible of you do in front
of your citizens.This has little to do with the economical structure, or if it has something
to do I don't see it at first sight.
I stopped a long time ago to try to understand whether or not the death count criteria were
worldwide standardised, so I apologize if I'm saying nonsense with the following : when in my
country death toll was approx ten times less than now, I remember that Italian HPA came out
with the official digits that , with 1266 deaths of people with Covid, 2 deaths were with
Covid alone.
A simple and probably useless idea is the effect the jet airplane and it's compression of
time has had an effect on top dog thinking, creating an illusion of being able to simply
avoid risk by running from it. We might also have hit a fulcrum point with financioneers
running out of countries to easily exploit and razzle dazzle although traditional legacy
media may have hit a ditch in the road the googoylemonstyr is simply still just a glorified
electronic yellow pages and bookfaze is the excuse used to explain bad and failed
systemization in media operations There are many outlets for information gathering and most
people outside the oecd have been imf-ed in recent enough history to not be so easily
mesmerized by promises of some mythical sparkle pony happy ending
Finally perhaps also the eloquent ignorance of your correct observation of the notion one
can simply PR problems past the newshole and blurb past the facts. There are more lobbyists
and PR flax then have ever existed in most parts of the world.
Lastly, and perhaps it is just new to moi, but it would appear, despite the facts most
countries outside the big three have multi party parliamentary systems, most have adjusted to
a simple two party system with the hand offs then followed with a loud and proud but "loyal
approved" opposition
"In the remote era of my youth, even in the prestigious firms, new hires were subjected to
at least a couple of years of grunt work."
I think this is hugely important. I'm a big fan of Lave and Wenger's theory of legitimate
peripheral participation: basically that becoming an expert at something requires
apprenticing to a community of practice possessing large amounts expertise, and doing
increasingly consequential tasks until one gains expertise.
I think one major – perhaps the major – casualty of the symbolic economy was
that there isn't any simple way to quantify the years (and in some cases decades) of
apprenticeship it takes to become highly competent at a highly complex, highly consequential
set of responsibilities. Expertise is obviously highly valuable, but let some other suckers
or universities do the training, or substitute a credential, amiright ;)
I'm curious to hear from those of a certain age who are experts at something or other. My
guess is that you can all name a handful of people without whom you never would have attained
your current level of expertise, and that you cannot name a comparable number of young people
that you have similar opportunities to mentor.
In many ways I think this virus has been adept at exposing the weaknesses in nearly every
countries system. In China, the policy of governing by way of top down directives,
interpreted in varying ways by local governments ensured that the initial response was to
suppress news of the outbreak rather than deal with it aggressively. In South Korea the
problem was stubborn religious extremists. In japan, a sclerotic and over-rigid bureaucracy.
In the US, all three.
There are six fundamental questions to which there are two fundamental answers; or there
are 479,001,600 permutations that might describe a given circumstance. Taken one at a time,
each permutation is partially correct, 1/479,001,600. Your thoughts here avoid the error of
examining the errors made in dealing with the pandemic by examining one error at a time and
focus on the factor set that drove the errors. There is no simple single factor to be
altered. There is a factor set that consists of several risks ignored. There is no benefit,
at this moment, in fault finding. Here and now, we need massive testing, we need at least one
reliable treatment regime, and most importantly we need a vaccine. Once we have those things
we can then examine who decided what and hopefully we can examine what we need to do to
preserve protect and defend the grand American experiment in political economy. Our
Constitution calls for a Federal Republic that employs democratic means to achieve a
representative government of, by and for, the people. As my high school civic teacher taught,
you have to read all the words and a multifaceted thing cannot be described by citing only
one of the facets. Consider the recent event, Hillary won the vote and lost the election.
Your thoughts here address much of what we should be contemplating as individuals and as a
society. One might differ with you with respect to one or more of the components; but, taken
all together, you point to a cancer that needs to be eradicated. Thank you.
Ultimately, it's a case of power corrupts. Thinking through all of the above, it was all
enabled by people in power thinking they could get away with something, trying it and then
knowing they can do whatever they want. The power they held let them put greed first, and the
lack of real potential deprivation or threats led them to make money (as opposed to
self-sufficiency or equality or sustainability) the new god. After all, since when has money
not delivered? This is the first time in a long time that money can't buy safety. As Stoller
has said on Twitter, the Fed can't print a vaccine.
The corrective is accountability, or as vlade said, feedback. Elites can't just sit in their
offices, mansions and private jets all day and fail upward, or sideways at worst. We had a
little crisis not 12 years ago, but there was no accountability. So here we are.
Their preparedness did not come from SARS, but from MERS in 2015. That one ended up
killing 30 people, not much these days but enough for a large scare. It included hundreds of
school closures and the like – it looked much larger at the time. There was also a huge
scandal, when it turned out that medical institutions had been hiding infections, and this
added to the scare.
The current Korean epidemic response system was set up after that – it's just a few
years old. It is not deeply rooted in their history or culture or something
Yes, I'd agree with this – in fact, this is precisely what the Koreans authorities
themselves are saying. There is a lot of nonsense being talked about 'confucian values' and
so on – the reality is that South Korea was on much higher alert because of its recent
history (similarly with Taiwan, Singapore and Vietnam). This isn't to dismiss the excellent
quality of the response which reflects very well on their government institutions and people,
but a lot of outsiders are reading far too much into it.
Perhaps another Minksy-like pro-cyclical flaw in our current system is underestimating the
marginal cost of incompetence. We can socialize the cost of the occasional minor disaster
made worse by incompetence. Ditto for socializing the occasional cost of a parasitical
rentier class. As with all short term thinking, it works until it doesn't.
As you point out, things like offshoring further undermine our ability to assess costs
(ex. to the local workers, environment). Out of sight, out of mind.
I want to say that a portion of the electorate bear some responsibility here. In addition
to the moneyed influencers, enough of the electorate agreed to put these officials in office.
In the calculus of what the voters thought they stood to lose or gain, they believed they
came out ahead.
Great post. My dad used to say "nothing beats experience" and when I was a younger know it
all–lover of books and libraries–I scoffed. But now I know he was absolutely
right. "No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy." The people making the
decisions are divorced from the results and the real world that most citizens live
in–from experience. And so we've gone from a country with a genius for the
practical–"heroic materialism" Kenneth Clark called it–to one where the elites
are going through the motions until it all falls in. It may be falling now.
I'd like to throw a perspective that could be seen as CT onto the barbie, grill away.
This is a use of Howard Becker's Machine Trick: Design the machine that will produce that
result your analysis indicates occurs routinely in the situation you have studied.
This assumes that results are (at least in part) due to the machines functioning exactly
as intended. National differences of responses are a result of different de-facto
policies.
I. The Big Picture.
Rule #2: Go die!
There is a actuarial perspective that letting people die has a net benefit.
The Greeks and Malthus were aware of overpopulation problems. 1972's Limits to Growth
showed that famine was not the trigger for population crash, pollution was. They modelled a
crash date of 2055. The climate crisis is quickening.
The elite case for lowering life expectancy has been established:
: Tobacco Giant's Analysis Says Premature Deaths Cut Costs in Pensions and Health Care :
Critics Assail Philip Morris Report on Smoking
[nytimes.com/2001/07/18/news/tobacco-giants-analysis-says-premature-deaths-cut-costs-in-pensions-and.html]
Note that COVID-19 targets the same demographic that the Philip Morris report does.
Targeting high-energy_usage high-capital_liability individuals give good ROI both in climate
and financial terms. This brings in
II. The Middle Shark
Actions speak louder than words. Those with access to elite information behaved
differently within the US. Feb 28 the President used the word Hoax, four days later the Fed
put the crisis on the same level as 9/11 and the Lehmann fall.
Rule #1: Because markets.
Suppressing the response, both in public perception and in ER's, gave time for the
decisionmakers behind the politicians to array their responses. The selfless perspective is
this is a geostrategic eruption that must be tended. The venal symptom is elites had time to
dump their stocks.
III. The Immediate Threat
A nanoscopic enemy, less than half the size an N95 shield targets. Asymptomatic
invisibility, the false negative/positive problems of tests (if you can get them), the
horrors of the ventilated. A real threat.
I had previously said that, with the obfuscation and miscategorization systematically
skewing downward the perceived incidence of an already blurred enemy, we would have to look
at all-cause deaths to really understand the proximate and ultimate mortality. I did not see
falling death rates coming. In a complex world there are paradoxical effects. So any evil
geniuses are gonna get really frustrated when their plans go awry.
We can already see the opportunistic authoritarians hard at work. I'll close with a couple
paragraphs of Boyd, but first a reminder. This comment is a perspective on why some countries
had a less-lethal response to this virus than others. In a complex world, simple explanations
are incomplete. Boyd:
Remember what I said, without a crisis, they don't have an operation. They've got to have
that crisis. Remember what I said last night? Without anomalies, no mismatch. No mismatch,
no
crisis. Without a crisis, no change.
Remember I said that crisis is important to them because then they can insert, work the
propaganda, tear apart, generate these many non-cooperative centers of gravity.
Yves, you say leaders are showing their incompetence managing two jobs, their medical
response to Coronavirus and their management of countries' economies. I suggest that
perspective can be gained by stepping back further and looking at a bigger job than those two
tasks. How well are humans managing the planet's response to the threat of potential human
extinction caused by extreme planetary warming (too quickly returning to PET-M).
Where I'm headed: collectivism vs. individualism.
It appears to me that an adequate planetary response (If it isn't already too late. That's a
separate discussion.) to the threat of potential human extinction would require a giant
collectivist response. Almost all countries would need to be collectively acting together.
E.g., efforts would fail if a major economy like China or the U.S. continued its polluting
ways.
However, it appears most of our leaders are not collectivists. They appear, instead, to be
individualists who have fought their way to the top by competing against other highly
competitive individualists. Is it in the nature of individualist leaders to seek and join
collectivist activities? Are our leaders actively seeking to join an adequate (rather than
symbolic) collectivist planetary effort to reverse climate change?
Instead, it appears our leaders aim to be among the "winners" who will win by being among
the survivors in their bunkers in the Hamptons or New Zealand.
I'm wondering about how much the culture of collectivist action, collectivist values, in
various countries' medical systems has played in managing their response to Coronavirus. How
much has (predatory) individualism contributed to the incompetent management of
economies?
We humans have it in our nature to seek narratives, stories, that "explain" what we are
witnessing. Stories simplify explanations. Stories give comfort to our minds. We crave that
comfort. The two heroes in your two stories are 1.) losing sight of risk and 2.) using
symbols to separate leaders/actors from reality. IMHO those are excellent heroes.
Is it reasonable to expect successive generations of individualist humans/leaders to
maintain a focus on risk after previous generations appear to have insulated them from
previously known risks? I suggest that a collectivist culture would be much more vigilant
about identifying risk and preparing for it. For example, the collectivist U.S. military has
done considerable work recognizing and preparing for the risks of climate change.
Is it reasonable to expect individualist (predatory) leaders to competently manage the
economy of a country when they're so busy preying on their respective parts of the economy?
Individualists have found a giant tool, symbols substituted for reality, to exploit/prey on
the economies they live in. Is it reasonable to expect those individualists to give up their
competitive predatory tools to embrace collectivist ways to manage economies for the benefit
of all people in their respective economies?
Thanks for this great post, Yves. Managers, CEOS, and politicians losing any sense of risk
or real dangers sounds right. Promoting people incompetent or unfit for task isn't a problem
if there is no risk or danger. They've become the managerial/political equivalent of the
anti-vaxers: they believe no danger can touch them because no danger ever has (so far).
As a young person starting out in the work world, I was as said above, given the
opportunity to do "grunt" work. Put another way, like the old world apprentice system, I was
given the opportunity to understand the mechanics of work before moving on to such things as
planning and strategizing.
Early in my education I had troubles with math. Someone told me to think of numbers as
things, or put another way, every number stood for something in the "real world". Once I
understood this, every math problem could be visualized as a real world thing/concept. After
learning this I learned to love math, and to apply it well. Word problems referred to real
things. Logic and problem solving, thru math, was real. Moving forward to the work world, and
with the move from mainframe computers (which I worked with), to PC's, I became proficient in
very complex spreadsheets, creating them, maintining them, and undertaking complex analysis
with them. But, and someone above hit on this well, unlike today where the numbers are the
thing, or end product, I always envisoned them and understood them, each and every one of
them, as just being a representation of a real thing in the real world. This I think sets my
work generation apart from how things are done today. The loss of connection between numbers
and real things is I think what Yves is referring to as how people have become distanced from
risk and by default, it almost becomes "not risk".
Lastly, when I was younger I always had a need to understand the real world aspects of
anything I did. I had a job in analytics/logistics at an Oil & Gas company, one aspect
was gasoline blending. It wasn't good enough to get reports from the field for me, I had to
go out to the field and see, touch and discuss the actual work. I loved going to
manufacturing plants (refineries), and to the oil rigs. I had to understand everything
because how else can you do the "administrative/planning" side of things if you don't have an
intimate relationship with the actual thing?
Anyway, great post. It isn't the USA, it isn't capitalism, it is a deeper change in society
that knows no boundary or ideology.
kinda like there should only be one number, lets call it 3, and the size of it tells us
everything about the world we live in – so a big 3 is extremely important and requires
mobilization in some way, whereas a little 3 can be dealt with on a smaller scale ;-)
An old (both ways) friend took up CNC work at a local maker space a while back. After a
year or so he is good enough at it to be able to take orders for custom parts, but is now
getting to the 'real world' of numbers. He is, to his indignation, awe, and utter delight,
grappling with calculating the rate of taper he needs for some part, "Cotan, sine, tan --
it's trigonometry !"
There is simply no risk in the game for elites. Trump was slow to act because his risk was
that the stock market would be hurt by his action. He was free to wait because the stock
market would get a bailout in the end. The lives of the public were less important and still
are. The opinion polls of the voting class are all that matter.
The elites have very successfully bought off the voting class by making them small and
insignificant players in the game via the 401(k). They readily take the risk off of elites
because they are taking it off of themselves. They identify with elites and see them as their
protectors.
I think that the dereliction of duty by state actors is a something to be examined in
depth. Unfortunately, I am not today in the mood for doing the thinking effort this post
merits. I would have wanted to think on one of the symptoms of failure (widespread denialism)
and contrast it with the many good observations made in the post. The quarantine and some
personal stress has lately been a shock for me. Unfortunately some of my worst worries have
come true. I was writing something that could be interesting on the conditions that favoured
this outbreak but now I am not sure I can finish it.
Please take care. I am pretty sure I will still need this site to check for some common
sense, good, sensible and critical thinking plus relief from the too abundant disingenuous
widespread disinformation. So I insist, you gals and guys take a lot of care for
yourselves.
Widespread denialism is not hard to figure. Contemporary ruling classes and attached
elites have no regard for honesty and truth, so they lie to the people as default practice.
The people for whom they have so much contempt are smart enough to figure out that they are
being lied to. Given that the authorities cannot be trusted, one might as well believe
anything one wants.
Why the Czech Republic isn't bottom of the barrel, I certainly wouldn't hold us up as
exemplary case either. There are problems with protective equipment as everywhere else, the
testing regime is grossly lagging, contract tracing is nonexistent and just today the leading
epidemiologist and sort of top state science guy for this whole thing floated the idea we
should let 70 % population who are low-risk contract the virus without explaining how he
thinks this could be done without everyone else catching it too.
I would not depict you as exaggerating about the change in posture toward risks. This was
a very good essay. The change in posture about risks was enabled because typically big
political donars (smallish minority) get bailed out of their troubles while those with lessor
political influence (the working poor and middle class) get crushed.
BTW, seduction is the one thing Pres. Trump is really good at. Every news conference of
his I happen to catch (not my objective), it is marvelous, fascinating to watch how he
operates to seduce. It is what he does, even more fundamental than lying.
The lack of investment in public health has been so long standing that it is not the least
surprising to me that the USA has done poorly in pandemic preparation. I knew we had deeply
compromised capacity to respond. I am rather surprised by all the valient fighting for lives
now going on by many health care workers and a few politicians. To me, I feel there is a
mustard seed of humanism and hope in this world because we've purposely crashed our economies
to try and slow transmission, save lives and health care from imploding totally. It is not a
uniform sentiment, but it exists. It surprises me and am glad for it. Still, the
disadvantaged are going to fare worse, suffer worse on account of the risks that others
neglected.
we've had a Minsky-like process operating on a society-wide basis: as daily risks have
declined, most people have blinded themselves to what risk amounts to and where it might
surface in particularly nasty forms. And the more affluent and educated classes, who
disproportionately constitute our decision-makers, have generally been the most
removed.
I see something very similar happening in academia. We align our identities with our
institutions and think in very a short-term, metric-based fashion, seeing "success" (for
instance) in terms of student recruitment (tuition fees paid in). Moreover, we're encouraged
above all to be global in outlook: we look forward to our perennially "busy" international
conference seasons and we emphasise the global and the transnational over the merely local or
national (denigrated as narrow, provincial, and ideologically suspect). We like to see
ourselves as mobile subjects, bodies in constant motion, our minds Romantically untethered
from the confines of any one nation state.
So our identities as academics are unavoidably embedded in a form of neoliberal hyperglobalisation. We rely on unrestricted flows of (wealthy) bodies across borders. Our
institutions (or many of them) have become dependent on international students and their
superior fee-paying ability compared with merely "domestic students." We might agree in
principle with ideas of a GND, say, or take an ecocritical approach to a novel or a play, but
we're certainly not going to cut back on the number of international conferences we attend.
Indeed, many of us go further. We see this form of globalisation, and the benefits that
accrue to us and our institutions from it, as a form of moral necessity : something it
isn't possible even to argue against in good faith. Hence our loud assent to principles like
open borders and always-on mass migration. We have to keep those lucrative international
students flooding in, after all. (Not that we'd ever put it in terms as crassly material as
that; after all, we don't work in university administration .)
Our commitment to the global as a form of moral mission has left us completely unprepared
for what's currently unfolding. We are utterly unused to considering the material constraints
of the economy our livelihoods depend on; that globalisation might come back to bite us; that
the very aircraft that carry us across the world to conference destinations and field work
sites would one day turn off the spigot of endlessly mobile bodies our careers and identities
depend on. Hence the reason why a lot of my colleagues are so lost right now. They're so used
to living on a purely symbolic (or moral-symbolic) level that the materiality of this virus
and its consequences seems like a crude insult. Many stubbornly hold on to their old
commitments, unwilling to admit that the world might have changed. In this respect, I think
of this post over
at Crooked Timber, where John Quiggin (an economist I have a great deal of respect for)
simply cannot bring himself to confront the possibility that the open borders dream might be
dead.
Where we go from here, I have no idea. But the fact that international and Erasmus
students might be gone for the foreseeable future, and the major implications this will have
for the financial viability or our universities, seems to be slowly sinking in. But the fact
that the "export education" model was a disastrous wrong turn will take much longer to be
accepted, I think, because of the widespread commitment I've been talking about here to the
principle of the global as a form of moral necessity.
Intriguing question and hypothesis regarding the reasons behind the variability in
coronavirus infection and mortality rates among nations.
Variable coronavirus outcomes by nation could suggest a combination of elite incompetence,
poor individual judgment, a lack of appreciation of risk in all its Rumsfeldian forms,
corruption, a desire by oligarchs for autocratic control and being insulated and divorced
from actual operations; or underlying cultural and economic factors.
It could also suggest
that other factors either singularly or in combination played a role, including
intentionality based on misjudgment of the agnostic nature of the virus regardless of
demographics, economics and social class; or simply denial of an emerging public health
threat by political leadership that reflected their own psychological characteristics and
cognitive biases that led to a two month delay in implementing containment and control policy
measures.
While they played a role, don't know that blaming the variability among nations entirely
on a narrow set of insular public and private sector leaders who relied on computer
spreadsheets to assess ROI, NPV of alternatives, payback periods, cost vs. benefit analysis,
JIT inventory management of PPE; and the guidance of financial markets is an all-encompassing
answer. Why exactly did they rely on those spreadsheets?
My own view is that we can trace the root cause of policy failure back to the dominant
values of leadership and the values of the society/culture which spawned them regarding the
relative importance of money in determining policy choices regarding public health and
safety.
Unfortunately I expect the social and economic effects of this pandemic and the policy
choices that increased its severity are going to be with us for some time.
The U.S. was not adequately prepared for the current coronavirus pandemic and needs to
address the lack of planning to better prepare for future crises, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said Monday.
In his annual letter to shareholders, Dimon said he hoped America will "roll up its
sleeves" and start to attack its problems, including a costly health-care system, unequal
access to education, a litigation and regulatory system that burdens small business, failed
immigration policies, and ineffective infrastructure, among shortcomings. The share of wages
for the bottom 30% of Americans has been falling, he said, a problem that needs to be
acknowledged if it is to be fixed
"There should have been a pandemic playbook," he wrote.
Likewise, he added, every problem he noted "should have detailed and nonpartisan solutions."
" 'While conditions may sometimes be unusual and difficult, we are functioning smoothly. In
fact, over the last month in certain parts of our company, we've had the highest volume and
transaction totals we have ever seen.'
The media were just as much in denial as the White House was: Who's
Right: Donald Trump or the Media? - Amren I've seen this posted everywhere; article after article in the mainstream media telling
us to stop worrying about the coronavirus.
The epidemic revealed that there is a lot of incompetence on all levels: The
Death of American Competence - Stephan Walt - Foreign Policy Washington's reputation for expertise has been one of the greatest sources of its
power. The coronavirus pandemic may end it for good.
The long delay in the U.S. reaction has led to a urgent need for personal protection
equipment. The result is a new 'wild west' where stealing and cheating to get PPE is the new
norm:
The neoliberal transformation of the state is also on display with regards to the
distribution of medical supplies. The USG is distributing much needed supplies to private
commercial entities, which then play off various states, municipalities and hospitals against
each other in bidding wars. This is what "public-private partnerships" and "new public
management" have led to: a thorough abdication of institutional responsibility and
capacity-building by the state, which itself has been devoured internally by market
principles.
Without an analysis of capitalism as the central issue in the American crisis we can't
understand how things are playing out.
Stephen Walt gets many things right but he has no sense of the political economy of the
American crisis.
Why? Because his realist theory is bereft of any sociology and political economy.
The thing with the billionaires is that they have demanded and benefitted from the
hollowing out of the state in the neoliberal period, and then they exploit moments of state
crisis to reassert their "importance" (and our dependence on them).
So he sounded the alarm, sending a letter to 19 senior military officials. The gist of that
letter was a recommendation to disembark and isolate the Roosevelt's crew, treating those
infected and subjecting the entire ship to a thorough cleaning to eliminate the virus. "We are
not at war," Crozier wrote. "Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing
to properly take care of our most trusted asset -- our Sailors." While the ship's operational
readiness would momentarily suffer, Crozier was intent on ensuring that none of the men and
women under his command would "perish as a result of this pandemic unnecessarily."
Today, of course, many Americans are dying unnecessarily through the negligence of leaders
at all levels. In the weeks to come, negligence will claim the lives of many more. Crozier
stands out as one leader who was quick to assess the danger at hand and to recommend prompt and
decisive action.
For this he was fired. Needless to say, his letter leaked. Navy officials were thereby
embarrassed. While eventually taking the actions not unlike those that Crozier had recommended,
they gave him the axe. According to acting Navy secretary Thomas B. Modly, himself a Naval
Academy graduate, Crozier lost his job because the Coronavirus outbreak "overwhelmed his
ability to act professionally."
That's one opinion. Mine differs. Faced with a perplexing leadership challenge, Crozier made
a very tough call: This was one instance, he concluded, where Men should come before Mission,
while he unhesitatingly placed his own career interests last. His superiors, up to and
including Acting Secretary Modly, ought to have applauded his actions. That they did not calls
into question their own good judgment.
... ... ...
Of course, my own opinion matters not at all. On the other hand, my guess is that for
Crozier the opinion of his sailors matters quite a lot. As he left his ship for the last time,
in a moving display of support for their former skipper, they gathered spontaneously to give
him a rousing sendoff. Crozier left with their cheers ringing in their ears. The men and women
assigned to the USS Theodore Roosevelt know professionalism when they see it.
Another point of discussion here is The Mission. Me thinks the mission of TR was to show
force, intimidate and cower the Chinese. A very worthwhile job in the time of pandemic.
While the good captain said that the US is not at war, maybe the higher ups know better and
the US is indeed at war with a handful of countries in that area... and in that case The
Mission must take precedence, eh?!
BUT if he had killed civilians, taken pictures with their dead bodies, had every member of
his unit testify against him and been found guilty of war crimes, Trump would have his
back!
He didn't even inform his immediate superior, who lived feet away. He communicated outside
his chain-of-command classified information (yes, mission-readiness is classified.) He
absolutely should have been fired, and also brought up on charges. I expect this guy got
his foot in the door to command via his fealty to Obama, instead of his actual suitability
for command.
Crozier graduated from the Naval Academy in 1992. In his 28 years of military service he's
been a rotary wing pilot (SH-60s), a fixed wing pilot (F-18s), been the exec (second in
command) of a Nimitz-class carrier USS Ronald Reagan), and the the captain of a major ship
(USS Blue Ridge) (Command of a CVN requires both aviation and ship command; his career path
is typical of those groomed for command of a CVN). He's a graduate of the Naval War
College.
I'll go out on a limb here, but considering his background I'm comfortable thinking that
CAPT Crozier understands the chain of command, OPSEC, formal vs informal means of
communication, who to address a message or email to, what items should be and shouldn't be
in an unclassified email, realized the Carrier Battle Group's commander was embarked along
with him and he could walk down the hall to discuss concerns with him, and all the other
items people are raising.
The question should be why did someone with his background and experience consider it
necessary in a peacetime deployment to act as he did to protect his crew, taking actions he
had to have known would result in his being relieved of command and sacrificing his career.
If those above him considered the sickness and death of a number of his crew, along with
reducing the ship and its embarked air wing to an ineffective token, to be an unavoidable
but necessary price to pay for the boat to continue on its deployment without alteration
they need to come forward and say so. I have yet to read any rationale from the navy's
civilian leadership (or military, for that matter; the CNO's office has been silent) where
they have done anything other than note how bad he made them look.
I believe that Colonel Bacevich is right on point with one small error. That is that
Captain Crozier's action wasn't necessarily placing mission behind the men. The Navy will
keep it secret, of course, but a carrier underway with a large fraction of its crew sick,
to some degree, is just as non-mission capable as one sitting in port.
Captain Crozier was in an untenable catch-22 situation. Would the USS Roosevelt have suffered a similar casualty if it's skipper
stayed within his chain of command in attempting to address the burgeoning virus aboard that very well may have impacted it's crews
ability to operate safely? Capt Crozier's naval career was damned if he did and damned if he didn't (ie catch-22). Capt
Crozier made the right decision in putting the health/lives of sailors aboard the Roosevelt ahead of 7th Fleets need to check boxes.
Notable quotes:
"... I am circling around to the view that Crozier's actions were correct, honorable, and laudable, and that they also created a situation that made it impossible for the Navy, notwithstanding the current occupant of the White House, to keep him in his position. ..."
"... The difference between a competent administration and the one we have is that Crozier would not have felt compelled to go outside the chain of command, the SecNav would not be "acting," and the Acting SecNav would not have been so terrified of his own President that he would have acted precipitously against the captain. ..."
"... There is a disheartening present trend on who is promoted (and what comprises their value set) within organizations in America at present. ..."
Robert Farley at LGM has an interesting post on Crozier,
I am circling around to the view that Crozier's actions were correct, honorable, and laudable, and that they also created a
situation that made it impossible for the Navy, notwithstanding the current occupant of the White House, to keep him in his
position.
The difference between a competent administration and the one we have is that Crozier would not have felt compelled
to go outside the chain of command, the SecNav would not be "acting," and the Acting SecNav would not have been so terrified
of his own President that he would have acted precipitously against the captain.
But decisions with strategic consequences
should lie firmly with the very senior leadership of the armed forces, and the civilians that the leadership serves.
Thank you for that link. I agree with that assessment, and I would extend that circumstance to other departments within our government,
and into other sectors like business, education, and non-profits. There is a disheartening present trend on who is promoted (and
what comprises their value set) within organizations in America at present.
Trump Weighs Legal Action Against China Over PPE Hoarding As International 'Mask Wars'
Heat Up by Tyler
Durden Mon, 04/06/2020 - 12:55 The Trump administration is considering legal action against
China after leading US manufacturers of medical safety gear say Beijing has prohibited them
from exporting goods in what the
New York Post says was a bid to "corner the world market" in personal protective equipment
(PPE).
"In criminal law, compare this to the levels that we have for murder," said Trump
re-election campaign senior legal adviser, Jenna Ellis, who says that legal options include
filing a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights or working 'through the United
Nations."
"People are dying. When you have intentional, cold-blooded, premeditated action like you
have with China, this would be considered first-degree murder, " she added.
Executives from 3M and Honeywell told US officials that the Chinese government in January
began blocking exports of N95 respirators, booties, gloves and other supplies produced by
their factories in China , according to a senior White House official.
China paid the manufacturers their standard wholesale rates, but prohibited the vital
items from being sold to anyone else , the official said.
Around the same time that China cracked down on PPE exports , official data posted online
shows that it imported 2.46 billion pieces of "epidemic prevention and control materials"
between Jan. 24 and Feb. 29, the White House official said. -
New York Post
In total, nearly $1.2 billion in gear - which included over 2 billion masks and 25 million
"protective clothing" items which came from EU countries, along with Australia, Brazil and
Cambodia according to the White House official.
"Data from China's own customs agency points to an attempt to corner the world market in PPE
like gloves, goggles, and masks through massive increased purchases -- even as China, the
world's largest PPE manufacturer, was restricting exports," they added.
'Mask wars'
The shortage of vital protective equipment has pitted neighboring countries - and even US
states - against each other, resulting in accusations of theft and modern piracy, according to
the CBC . The United States, in particular, has been accused of stymying efforts by allies to
procure said equipment - by allegedly attempting to scuttle European deals for purchases from
China, as well as attempting to halt exports of US-made N95 masks to Canada and Latin America
last week.
That said, a Berlin senator who accused the US of "piracy" by diverting a shipment of
protective masks slated for delivery in the German capital has reversed his position - saying
that no US firms were involved in the case of the still-missing masks.
The CBC suggests that 'the apparent desperation of some of the wealthiest countries on
earth' comes as a surprise which has 'justifiably raised eyebrows in less fortunate parts of
the world' which are now preparing for coronavirus to hit, yet with a fraction of the
resources.
Striking selfishness
"It's normal for countries to take care of their own citizens first," said University of
Ottawa professor of international affairs and former Trudeau adviser, Roland Paris - who added
that the selfishness and lack of coordination among leading countries "is striking."
"We're unfortunately seeing a mad scramble to grab whatever's available, to hell with the
other guy," added Paris, who's apparently unfamiliar with game theory.
Even more stark, the mask wars have seen American and other buyers scuttling European and
Brazilian deals, some even snatching shipments already promised to other jurisdictions by
outbidding them -- even "on the tarmac" as planes prepared to take off. Some shipments
reportedly just disappear. - CBC
Not just masks...
While global PPE supplies have run critically short, nearly half the supply of
hydroxychloroquine - the Trump-touted treatment for COVID-19,
comes from India - which has banned exports of all form of the 'game-changing' drug .
Consequently - while China is without a doubt the biggest antagonist to the US, India is
beginning to grate on Trump's nerves despite his nominally cordial relationship with Modi.
According to data compiled by Bloomberg Intelligence, 47% of the U.S. supply of the drug last
year came from India makers. Only a handful of suppliers in the top 10 are non-Indian, such as
Actavis, now a subsidiary of Israeli generics giant Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Still,
it's likely that some of their production facilities are nevertheless located in India.
India's export ban on the drug is aimed at ensuring it has enough supply for domestic use
after the American president's endorsement sparked global stockpiling of the medication. Now,
Trump's decision to tout the drug will cause major shortages in the US.
Imagine if the United States hadn't exported the manufacture of just about everything?
White House economic adviser got into a massive argument with the
coronavirus task force's Anthony Fauci over the doctor's ongoing resistance to the use of
hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, despite reports of the drug's widespread efficacy.
Numerous government officials were at the table, including Fauci, coronavirus response
coordinator Deborah Birx, Jared Kushner, acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf, and
Commissioner of Food and Drugs Stephen Hahn.
Behind them sat staff, including Peter Navarro, tapped by Trump to compel private
companies to meet the government's coronavirus needs under the Defense Production Act.
According to the report, towards the end of the meeting Hahn began a discussion of the
commonly used malaria drug hydroxychloroquine - which was recently rated the '
most effective therapy ' for coronavirus according to a global survey of more than 6,000
doctors .
After Hahn gave an update on various trials and real-world use of the drug, Navarro got up
and dropped a stack of folders on the table to pass around .
According to Axios 's source, " the first words out of his [Navarro's] mouth are
that the studies that he's seen, I believe they're mostly overseas, show 'clear therapeutic
efficacy,' " adding "Those are the exact words out of his mouth.
Fauci - who's not got his own Twitter hashtag, #FireFauci - began pushing back against
Navarro, repeating his oft-repeated contention that 'there's only anecdotal evidence' that the
drug works against COVID-19.
Navarro exploded - after Fauci's mention of anecdotal evidence "just set Peter off." The
economic adviser shot back "That's the science, not anecdote," while pointing to the stack of
folders on the desk, which included the results of studies from around the world showing its
efficacy.
Here's what unfolded next, via Axios :
Navarro started raising his voice, and at one point accused Fauci of objecting to Trump's
travel restrictions, saying, "You were the one who early on objected to the travel
restrictions with China," saying that travel restrictions don't work. (Navarro was one of the
earliest to push the China travel ban.)
Fauci looked confused, according to a source in the room. After Trump imposed the
travel restrictions, Fauci has publicly praised the president's restriction on travel from
China.
Pence was trying to moderate the heated discussion. "It was pretty clear that everyone
was just trying to get Peter to sit down and stop being so confrontational," said one of
the sources.
Eventually, Kushner turned to Navarro and said, "Peter, take yes for an answer,"
because most everyone agreed, by that time, it was important to surge the supply of the
drug to hot zones.
The principals agreed that the administration's public stance should be that the
decision to use the drug is between doctors and patients.
Trump ended up announcing at his press conference that he had 29 million doses of
hydroxychloroquine in the Strategic National Stockpile.
According to a source familiar with the coronavirus task force, "There has never been a
confrontation in the task force meetings like the one yesterday," adding "People speak up and
there's robust debate, but there's never been a confrontation. Yesterday was the first
confrontation."
Meanwhile, 37% of 6,227 doctors across 30 countries felt the drug was the "most effective
therapy" out of 15 options in treating coronavirus,
according to a poll reported by the Washington Times .
The drug has been prescribed in 72% of cases in Spain, 49% in Italy, 41% in Brazil, 39% in
Mexico, 28% in France, and 23% in the USA . Overall, 19% of physicians have prescribed the drug
for high-risk patients, and 8% for low-risk patients.
More from the Sermo poll (via the Washington Times )
***
Sermo CEO Peter Kirk called the polling results a "treasure trove of global insights for
policy makers."
"Physicians should have more of a voice in how we deal with this pandemic and be able to
quickly share information with one another and the world," he said. "With censorship of the
media and the medical community in some countries, along with biased and poorly designed
studies, solutions to the pandemic are being delayed."
The survey also found that 63% of U.S. physicians believe restrictions should be lifted in
six weeks or more, and that the epidemic's peak is at least 3-4 weeks away.
The survey also found that 83% of global physicians anticipate a second global outbreak,
including 90% of U.S. doctors but only 50% of physicians in China.
On average, U.S. coronavirus testing takes 4-5 days, while 10% of cases take longer than
seven days. In China, 73% of doctors reported getting rest results back in 24 hours.
In cases of ventilator shortages, all countries but China said the top criteria should be
patients with the best chance of recovery (47%), followed by patients with the highest risk of
death (21%), and then first responders (15%) .
"... will know exactly which professor, non-profit boss, esteemed expert, talks sense outta a brain that absorbs information & devises answers, and which ones are little more than industry shills who got lucky once early in their career, who are the notorious plagiarists, who are better at politicking than doctoring etc. ..."
Out in the land of 'distinguished epidemiologists' the types who are charged with doing
the hands on work of developing counters to this virus, will know exactly which professor,
non-profit boss, esteemed expert, talks sense outta a brain that absorbs information &
devises answers, and which ones are little more than industry shills who got lucky once early
in their career, who are the notorious plagiarists, who are better at politicking than
doctoring etc.
"...the intelligence agencies were warning about information derived from medical sources
in China that suggested viruses were developing that might become a pandemic, but the
politicians, most particularly those in the White House, chose to take no action. He writes
that " the Trump administration has cumulatively failed, both in taking seriously the
specific, repeated intelligence community warnings about a coronavirus outbreak and in
vigorously pursuing the nationwide response initiatives commensurate with the predicted
threat. The federal government alone has the resources and authorities to lead the relevant
public and private stakeholders to confront the foreseeable harms posed by the virus.
Unfortunately, Trump officials made a series of judgments (minimizing the hazards of
COVID-19) and decisions (refusing to act with the urgency required) that have needlessly made
Americans far less safe."
"The article cites evidence that the intelligence community was collecting disturbing
information on possibly developing pathogens in China and was, as early as January, preparing
analytical reports that detailed just what was happening while also providing insights into
how devastating the global proliferation of a highly contagious and potential lethal virus
might be. One might say that the intel guys called it right, but were ignored by the White
House, which, per Zenko, acted with "unprecedented indifference, even willful
negligence...."
@bevin #8
In January? Really? Seems like the highly paid and budgeted intelligence agencies should be
able to do a better job of predicting the nCOV threat before China instituted a shutdown on
January 23 due to its view that nCOV was a problem.
Frankly, seems more like intel agency ass covering than anything else.
Additional comments regarding Chinese KN95 and why it's banned in 'murica
Getting type approval means paying for certification so a lot of domestic chinese brands
won't bother going for EN or NIOSH as those markets are stitched up by big names like 3M.
Some lesser brands or importers OEM them from China but will pay for certification for US
NIOSH for example, they would have their branding on it and probably contractual limitation
on market exclusivity, even though they're probably pumped off the same production line.
and because they're made by suppliers serving the domestic market in China, they're about
30% - 40% cheaper than N95
so it begs the question, in times like these why wouldn't you allow a temporary standards
equivalency recognition?
The only motivation I can see beyond red tape is the KN95 masks generally will have
Chinese printing on them (brand, model, certification etc) and how would the US narrative go
when everyone is wearing Chinese masks on the streets?
That was one of the worst decisions Trump administration made. Now they change their stance. Better later then never...
Notable quotes:
"... Part of the reason was to preserve medical-grade masks for health care workers who desperately need them at a time when they are in continuously short supply. ..."
Until now, the C.D.C., like the W.H.O., has advised that ordinary people don't need to wear
masks unless they are sick and coughing.
Part of the reason was to preserve medical-grade masks
for health care workers who desperately need them at a time when they are in continuously short
supply.
Masks don't replace hand washing and social distancing.
On March 23
we wrote this: " For want of a mask the largest economy in the world has been gutted, with
Goldman Sachs now projecting that U.S. GDP could contract by as much as 24 percent in the
second quarter." Now, in the past two weeks, 10 million Americans have filed claims for
unemployment. Let that sink in, 10 million of our fellow citizens have lost their jobs in just
a two-week period.
In the same article linked above, we showed a photo dated March 4 from the Associated Press
of people packed together on a subway in New York City with almost no one wearing a mask. And
then we explained why:
"On February 29, the Surgeon General Tweeted that the public should stop buying masks
– despite scientific agreement that the virus is spread by sneezing, coughing and
talking. The Surgeon General's advice may have made sense for people living on a 10 acre farm
in New Hampshire but it was dangerous advice for people who can't afford taxis and are forced
to ride a packed subway to work each day in Manhattan."
Because there were simply not enough masks to go around, the Surgeon General effectively
lied to the American people.
Now, New York City is the global epicenter of the coronavirus with more deaths than anywhere
else in the country. As of this morning, the New York Times is reporting a total of 51,810
cases and 1,562 deaths in New York City – which is 25 percent of the deaths in the entire
United States, despite New York City representing just 2.6 percent of the U.S. population.
This past Monday, March 30, MSNBC news host, Chris Hayes, told his viewers this:
"At the beginning of this crisis, the World Health Organization and the CDC came out and
basically said that if you're healthy, you just don't need to wear a mask around public to
protect yourself or others from Coronavirus.
"Now, over the weekend, there was a rumbling the CDC was about to change its guidance to
suggest Americans should wear protective masks, and while the CDC is now denying that
reporting, and saying it is not updating its guidance, it is very hard to ignore the fact
that the countries where masks are most prevalent, particularly in East Asia, are the ones
doing the best job of battling the virus . [Italics added.]
"A prominent Chinese doctor was recently asked by Science magazine what mistakes are other
countries making, quote, 'the big mistake in the U.S. and Europe in my opinion is that people
aren't wearing masks.' "
Yesterday, April 2, the Washington Post published an OpEd by Joseph G. Allen, director of
the Healthy Buildings Program at Harvard University's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The
title of the OpEd was this: "
You Need to Wear a Mask. Here's How ." Allen wrote this:
"The debate is over. You should be wearing a mask when you go out
"First, masks of any type help prevent the user from infecting others by acting as a
physical barrier that will block large droplets from coughs and sneezes. These droplets can
travel up to 20 feet with a powerful sneeze, so six feet of social distancing is not always
enough. And wearing masks is not just a good thing for those who are actively sick: Any one of
us might be harboring this virus asymptomatically and could transmit it to others, cascading
into a thousand new infections."
Allen also correctly pointed out that "Wearing a mask does not replace other important
public health control measures such as hand-washing, social distancing, covering your cough and
cleaning surfaces."
Allen critically noted that while N95 masks must be reserved for front-line health care
workers, people can and should be making their own masks. Unfortunately, Allen suggested using
a 100 percent cotton t-shirt, which this
tutorial on the proper way to make a mask recommends against . A T-shirt is knit,
thus making it subject to stretching. The tutorial recommends using a double layer of
high-thread-count 100 percent cotton from sheets or pillow cases made out of Percale or a list
of other fabrics.
According to the CDC, the 1918 flu pandemic, known as the "Spanish Flu," resulted in the
death of 50 million people globally and an estimated 675,000 people in the United States. The
photograph above likely explains one of the numerous reasons that the Spanish Flu was not
contained in the U.S. Red Cross volunteers were using highly porous gauze to make masks.
Yesterday, New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio said this: "We're advising New Yorkers to wear
a face covering when you go outside and will be near other people. Let's be clear, this is a
face covering. It could be a scarf, it could be a bandana, something you create yourself."
NBC News is reporting this morning that "The White House is expected to urge Americans who
live in areas of high coronavirus transmission to wear cloth face coverings to prevent the
spread of the virus, a senior administration official told NBC News on Thursday night."
Clearly, the whole country should be wearing properly-made, home-made masks so that their town
doesn't become the next heavily impacted area.
It didn't need to take this long and the loss of this many lives and the U.S. economy to
figure out the obvious. The Surgeon General's negligent Tweet on February 29 should have told
Americans to stop buying N95 masks needed desperately by health care professionals and advised
them on how to properly make their own masks. The Surgeon General should be held accountable
and lose his own job along with the other 10 million Americans who didn't give out dangerously
bad advice.
Apparently a low cost ventilator was constructed years ago by direction of the Federal
government. The company was bought out by another company that produced higher costs
ventilators and the project died.
Looks to me like Dr Francis Collins, director of the US National Institute of Health
He is no longer AWOL? You have seen or read a recent interview? For at least a month or
two, it has been Fauci, Fauci, Fauci, and not a hint of his boss Collins. Perhaps Collins has
been too busy handing out guitar picks.
NIH
Record
At the outset of his... presentation..., NIH director Dr. Francis Collins described new
guitar pick-shaped lapel pins ... popping up around NIH and even on Capitol Hill that tout
"Hope at NIH." These arose not only out of Collins' reputation as a musician, but also as
"insignia that we believe in what we are doing," said Collins. "You want to pick NIH and
you want to pick hope," he said, inviting the group to wear the symbols with pride.
Who needs research or effective planning when we've got "Hope at NIH"?
In 2017 he was been busy promoting
Mind/Music/Magic pseudo-science. Maybe he got lost backstage.
"Music and the Mind," on the intersection of music and science. There will be performances,
presentations, and discussions by Dr. Collins, Ms. Fleming, the National Symphony
Orchestra, neuroscientists, music therapists, and others. Some events are free, open to the
public, and will be streamed online
Too bad he is too busy to run his $35 billion agency. Good thing he has Fauci to do it for
him.
The shortage could also be a matter of the medical bureaucracy at play. A primary driver in
physicians actions is whether or not they will be sued. If they prescribe malaria medication
for covid-19, a use that has not gone through clinical trials and FDA approval, could they be
sued if someone dies? They may expect it to work, which is why they are hoarding for
themselves and their family. But, if someone dies while being treated by ventilator, they
have no exposure because it is currently within medical guidelines.
In contrast, Chinese doctors can and are solving the problem through trial and error. One
doctor tries a medication on a patient and if the patient recovers he can communicate to
other doctors to try the medication. They dont have a system in which an attorney looking for
cash shows up if an already dying patient dies anyway.
This is a big problem for the US that is going to lead to many unnecessary deaths.
"... Put together, they reveal how big a share of the American markets for drugs, medical devices, and protective gear is controlled by goods made overseas. The big takeaway is that the nation could be in big enough trouble if supply disruptions were to occur in normal times (say, due to natural disasters in manufacturing centers abroad). During a high-mortality pandemic like the CCP Virus, these levels of foreign dependency are high enough to guarantee significant numbers of needless deaths. ..."
"... And in fact, the import penetration trends for these products exemplify the nation's health care security weaknesses. In 2002 -- a good baseline, since that's the first year China was a member of the World Trade Organization -- imports overall accounted for 16.7 percent of all surgical appliances and supplies used in the United States (measured by value, not numbers of masks or pairs of gloves). During the first full year of the Great Recession, 2008, this share totaled 28.08 percent. ..."
"... Keeping this qualification in mind, overall, 32.41 percent of surgical appliances and supplies were imported from other countries by 2011, according to these figures. In 2016, that number reached 41.81 percent of a $33.71 billion U.S. market. It may well be higher these days, as between then and last year, U.S. overseas purchases jumped by more than 29 percent. (Interestingly, in light of domestic shortages, U.S. exports in appliances and supplies actually rose by more than 13 percent during this period!) ..."
"... Ventilators, sadly, have been in the news, too; they and related products like oxygen tents and bronchoscopes and inhalators and suction equipment are found in a big goods category called surgical and medical instruments. In 2002, imports from all corners of the world represented 22.04 percent of American consumption. By 2016, this figure stood at 35.91 percent of a $37.5 billion national market, and over the next three years, imports grew nearly 31 percent. (Exports expanded at a relatively slow 11.84 percent.) ..."
"... exclusive U.S. reliance on China for the chemical ingredients of numerous medicines has now become a major federal government concern. ..."
"... The main foreign suppliers to the American pharmaceuticals market as of last year look encouragingly diversified and encouragingly friendly. For example, Ireland was number one, with 22.15 percent of such shipments, followed by Switzerland with 14.05 percent. But third and fourth, with 8.87 percent and 8.39 percent of imports, were Germany and India, respectively, both of which have limited or embargoed their medical exports this year. And number five, at 7.38 percent, was Italy -- whose current CCP Virus devastation could easily bring about export restrictions. ..."
"... Last year, America's leading foreign supplier of surgical and medical instruments (the ventilators category) was Mexico, which sold U.S. customers 28.58 percent of the $17.62 billion of total imports. But export-curber Germany was number three, at 9.43 percent, and China was sixth, at 6.93 percent. ..."
"... Purely domestic policy steps, like mandating more stockpiling or new recycling and re-use strategies, undoubtedly can add to national medical products supplies. But even these general import penetration figures, along with the shortage reports that keep pouring in, make clear that enduring national health care security can't be restored without a major ramping up of domestic output. And since export-heavy economies like China's and Germany's will undoubtedly work overtime to keep their American health care customers -- including with all manner of predatory economic practices -- it's similarly clear that big, lasting U.S. departures from standard free trade policies will be unavoidable. ..."
Not Just China: U.S. Reliance on Foreign Medical Supplies is Staggering
The government's own numbers tell a frightening tale of how this happened, and when.
Virus pandemic having exposed scary domestic shortages of critical medical
goods ranging from safety masks to ventilators, along with potential shortages of
pharmaceuticals, political leaders across the spectrum are finally regretting having allowed so
much output of these products to migrate offshore.
China's role in global supply chains has understandably sparked much of the alarm, since its
government has all but threatened to withhold supplies of medicines whenever it wishes. But all
told, at least 38 countries (including the 27-member European Union) have curbed exports of
anti-pandemic products at some point since the CCP Virus began dominating headlines.
So
potential foreign chokeholds in the nation's health care-related supply chains appear global in
scope. The federal government's best data make clear just how widespread the problem has
become, and how steadily it's been growing.
The figures come from the government's statistics on industry-by-industry manufacturing
output and on exports and imports. (The output data can be accessed through databases created
by the Census Bureau for its Annual Survey of Manufactures that are located at this link . The
trade numbers can be retrieved at an interactive database maintained by the U.S. International
Trade Commission that's located at this link .)
Put together, they reveal how big a share of the American markets for drugs, medical
devices, and protective gear is controlled by goods made overseas. The big takeaway is that the
nation could be in big enough trouble if supply disruptions were to occur in normal times (say,
due to natural disasters in manufacturing centers abroad). During a high-mortality pandemic
like the CCP Virus, these levels of foreign dependency are high enough to guarantee significant
numbers of needless deaths.
These statistics aren't problem-free. Principally, because the manufacturing output figures
are so granular, and therefore take so long to compile, import penetration rates for these (and
other manufactures) can be calculated only through 2016. Yet the more timely import numbers can
provide a reasonable indication of whether vulnerabilities are worsening or shrinking. At the
same time, the government's main trade data aren't nearly as detailed as the production
numbers. As a result, it's not possible to know the percentage of, say, safety masks used in
the United States that are produced abroad. But it's easy to come up with this number for the
category in which masks (and other protective gear) are grouped -- surgical appliances and
supplies.
And in fact, the import penetration trends for these products exemplify the nation's health
care security weaknesses. In 2002 -- a good baseline, since that's the first year China was a
member of the World Trade Organization -- imports overall accounted for 16.7 percent of all
surgical appliances and supplies used in the United States (measured by value, not numbers of
masks or pairs of gloves). During the first full year of the Great Recession, 2008, this share
totaled 28.08 percent.
Notably, these imports from China were a tiny 1.5 percent in 2002, and had actually dropped
to 0.49 percent by 2008. By 2016, they accounted for a seemingly modest 6.54 percent of
American consumption. But here's where another weakness in the data emerges: they say nothing
about the origin of the materials, parts, and components of the final goods.
Keeping this qualification in mind, overall, 32.41 percent of surgical appliances and
supplies were imported from other countries by 2011, according to these figures. In 2016, that
number reached 41.81 percent of a $33.71 billion U.S. market. It may well be higher these days,
as between then and last year, U.S. overseas purchases jumped by more than 29 percent.
(Interestingly, in light of domestic shortages, U.S. exports in appliances and supplies
actually rose by more than 13 percent during this period!)
Ventilators, sadly, have been in the news, too; they and related products like oxygen tents
and bronchoscopes and inhalators and suction equipment are found in a big goods category called
surgical and medical instruments. In 2002, imports from all corners of the world represented
22.04 percent of American consumption. By 2016, this figure stood at 35.91 percent of a $37.5
billion national market, and over the next three years, imports grew nearly 31 percent.
(Exports expanded at a relatively slow 11.84 percent.)
Again, the China figures are small beans -- the import penetration rate for 2016 was a mere
2.35 percent. But these products often contain lots of electronics parts, and half the world's
printed circuit boards, for example, are made in the People's Republic. In other words, lots of
existing global surge capacity throughout the sector is ultimately controlled by Beijing.
Thanks to the work of researchers like the Hastings Center's Rosemary Gibson and independent
journalist Katherine Eban, heavy and sometimes exclusive U.S. reliance on China for the
chemical ingredients of numerous medicines has now become a major federal government concern.
Indeed, the Food and Drug Administration is keeping an especially close eye on the availability
of no fewer than 20 pharmaceutical products that use Chinese raw materials. (Unfortunately, the
FDA won't say what they are, which calls for some Freedom of Information Act requests,
pronto.)
But the import penetration figures make clear that supply disruptions could also originate
elsewhere. Between 2002 and 2016, drugs produced overseas more than doubled their share of
America's consumption (which stood at nearly $200 billion three years ago), from 17.23 percent
to 38.51 percent. As of 2019, moreover, U.S. drugs imports were 20.34 percent higher than in
2016.
The main foreign suppliers to the American pharmaceuticals market as of last year look
encouragingly diversified and encouragingly friendly. For example, Ireland was number one, with
22.15 percent of such shipments, followed by Switzerland with 14.05 percent. But third and
fourth, with 8.87 percent and 8.39 percent of imports, were Germany and India, respectively,
both of which have limited or embargoed their medical exports this year. And number five, at
7.38 percent, was Italy -- whose current CCP Virus devastation could easily bring about export
restrictions.
Nor is this pattern restricted to pharmaceuticals. Last year, America's leading foreign
supplier of surgical and medical instruments (the ventilators category) was Mexico, which sold
U.S. customers 28.58 percent of the $17.62 billion of total imports. But export-curber Germany
was number three, at 9.43 percent, and China was sixth, at 6.93 percent.
For surgical appliances and supplies (the masks and protective gear category), Ireland
topped the 2019 foreign supplier list, selling the United States 24.09 percent of its $18.21
billion of total imports. But China was second, at 15.29 percent, and in third place, at 9.68
percent, stood Malaysia, which banned mask exports on March 20.
Purely domestic policy steps, like mandating more stockpiling or new recycling and re-use
strategies, undoubtedly can add to national medical products supplies. But even these general
import penetration figures, along with the shortage reports that keep pouring in, make clear
that enduring national health care security can't be restored without a major ramping up of
domestic output. And since export-heavy economies like China's and Germany's will undoubtedly
work overtime to keep their American health care customers -- including with all manner of
predatory economic practices -- it's similarly clear that big, lasting U.S. departures from
standard free trade policies will be unavoidable.
Alan Tonelson is the founder of RealityChek, a public policy blog focusing on economics
and national security, and the author of The Race to the Bottom .
"The number of idiots everywhere on the Internet proclaiming the following:
1) The virus won't prove to be any more dangerous than ordinary flu..."
Yeah sure, we should have just shut up and believed...
Russia interfered in the election
Russia invaded Crimea
Russia invaded Georgia
Iran is making nuclear bombs
The Skripals were poisoned by Russian agents
Assad is using chemical weapons
Saddam has weapons of mass destruction
"etc, etc., ad nauseum.
I could go on and on. The number of people who just *have to have an opinion* is staggering.
And they'll argue that they're right until the cows come home."
@99 Michael Weddington
"The virus deniers here remind me of the global warming deniers."
Why not holocaust deniers? In fact, since you didn't say holocaust deniers you must be an
antisemite holocaust denier nazi, right? It's not like you two are at CNN's website, you're
in the alternative media, where we actually questions things instead of just having blind
faith.
jackrabbit @33 -- "Coronavirus Drives the U.S. and China Deeper Into Global Power Struggle"
I would rephrase that to "US uses coronavirus to deepen global power struggle against
China"
NYT -- "These officials warn that a fast-growing China, under Mr. Xi's increasingly
authoritarian rule, seeks military, economic and technological domination over the United
States and its allies."
What weasel-speak! Repeating a big enough lie often enough, and you get distracted
citizens to fall in line behind you for when you launch a sneak attack on China. This is
nothing but a case of projection by parties who are themselves seeking to dominate the world,
the better to eat other people's lunches.
| The truth is always less glamorous than the
perception. And the truth about 9/11 is that it was first and foremost a failure of
bureaucracy.
As early as spring 2000, the CIA had learned that two of the future
hijackers had traveled to Malaysia for an al-Qaeda summit. Both men had U.S. visas yet the
information was never acted on. In California, the pair roomed with an undercover FBI agent. In
Oklahoma, one of them was pulled
over for speeding . Mere days before the attacks, they were hunkered down in Laurel,
Maryland, not far from the National Security Agency's headquarters.
They were never stopped, nor were several of the other soon-to-be hijackers who were cited
for traffic violations and raised eyebrows at flight schools, more Rocky and Mugsy than
SPECTRE. After 9/11, a congressional
investigation found that the attacks could have been prevented were it not for FBI and CIA
ineptitude. According to that and subsequent reports, the agencies had failed to share
information with each other, gotten bogged down in turf wars, and lacked outside-the-box
thinking.
They did this because this is how bureaucracies work. The state isn't some enchanted
repository of our national priorities; it's a sprawling network of individuals, who, like the
rest of us, tend to place their own interests before the common good, show reluctance in the
face of innovation, cling to rote procedure even under extraordinary circumstances, abuse their
power. And just as the predictable failures of the security bureaucracy allowed 9/11 to happen,
so too are the predictable failures of the medical bureaucracy enabling the coronavirus to
spread.
Start with the feds' delayed reaction to the virus's outbreak in Washington State. There,
the first case of COVID-19 in America was confirmed all the way back in January, and an
infectious disease expert in Seattle, Dr. Helen Chu, had an idea. According to the New
York Times , her lab had been using nasal swabs to research the flu; were they to
repurpose the tests, they could check for the coronavirus. The team quickly sought the approval
of the CDC, which kicked them over to the FDA. The FDA then denied their request, citing both
privacy concerns over the swab results and the fact that the labs were not certified for
clinical purposes. After weeks of the agency refusing to budge, the team decided to do that
most American of things: ignore the government. They tested for coronavirus and found a
positive. The bureaucrats promptly told the team to stop; they later relented but only in
part.
Those FDA rules may be in place for good reason -- patient privacy must be protected, labs
must be classified correctly -- but such rationales should quickly fall to the floor when an
epidemic is raging. Because they didn't, Chu's team was forced to waste valuable time. And even
those laboratories approved for clinical work were having a tough go of it. They still had to
apply with the feds for emergency approval to develop their own tests, and were being stymied.
"This virus is faster than the FDA," grumbled one researcher to the Times . So are
turtles with polio. It's worth pointing out that all this transpired well after the government
had declared the coronavirus a public health emergency.
The root of the problem seems to be that the bureaucracy underestimated just how widely the
coronavirus would spread. Initial tests were limited to those who had just returned from China.
Warnings from local officials that the virus was proliferating were ignored. The CDC,
meanwhile, developed its own test, but the kits were quickly determined to be faulty and
retracted. Precious weeks slipped by. Had measures been implemented, had people started social
distancing earlier and the infected been identified and quarantined faster, the coronavirus
could have been better contained. Instead the FDA tried to control the process, only to find
that it couldn't. Private labs were brought in too late and struggled to meet demand, forcing
them to ration tests. It wasn't until last week that the FDA started
permitting companies to market tests without federal blessing, though they still must get
the agency's approval within two weeks.
The process remains hamstrung by that most bureaucratic of problems: lack of coordination.
Only whereas prior to 9/11 it was agencies failing to coordinate with each other, now it's the
government failing to coordinate the supply chain. The labs, the medical providers, the supply
manufacturers -- all need to be in harmony in order to develop tests and distribute badly
needed equipment. Instead hospitals warn of
ventilator shortages . Masks are running dangerously low, with Vice President Mike Pence
announcing only last
weekend that the government had at last placed an order for hundreds of millions more. A
run on supplies following the FDA's belated easing of restrictions on private labs caused
shortages,
according to the Wall Street Journal . Tom Rogan at the Washington Examiner
reports that pallets of medical equipment are sitting unused in warehouses because the FDA
hasn't loosened its inspection protocols .
Contrast all this with South Korea, which
streamlined its medical bureaucracy following the MERS outbreak in 2015. There, officials
sounded the alarm in January and
one week later a private lab had developed a test. Today, about
10,000 South Koreans are tested daily , many of them at drive-through diagnosis centers,
compared to just a small fraction of that number in the United States.
Yes, the fish rots from the head down. Donald Trump's complacent reaction to the virus set a
terrible example. His pronouncement that the outbreak was "like a miracle, it will disappear"
now sounds insane. Yet the president can also only reach so far down into the bureaucracy; some
of those gears need to align on their own. And they clearly failed to do so. This also can't be
blamed on a lack of funding, given that Trump's supposed cuts to the medical bureaucracy
never
actually happened . Amid a massive federal budget and trillion-dollar deficits, we're
paying more than enough to expect the government to do better than this.
I know we've convinced ourselves that the country would run better if only the damned
libertarians would get out of the way, but it may be that the real problems are less trite than
that. And one of them is clearly that the government has mummified itself in its own red tape.
This happened despite the bright minds running its departments, human genome pioneer Francis
Collins at the NIH and the oncologist Stephen Hahn at the FDA. So now the bureaucracy is taking
a more deregulatory approach, lifting roadblocks to private labs,
easing restrictions on trucking,
lifting barriers to telehealth. They're about two months too late. Those early weeks were
critical and the feds spent them methodically tripping over their own banana peels.
After 9/11, the nation consoled itself by establishing a new government agency with a fancy
name, the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone who's ever talked to a DHS employee knows the
confusion and bureaucratic jostling that reigned there for years. Instead of doing the same,
once the coronavirus has passed, Congress should take a cue from another post-September 11
authority: the 9/11 Commission. Establish a body to investigate the government's blunders.
Mimic South Korea and clear away the clutter. Because this time the costs of bureaucracy aren't
just abstract notions of productivity and GDP; they're human lives. about the author
Matt Purple is the managing editor of The American Conservative . emailleave a comment
"... This is specifically about coronavirus testing. In fact, CDC very much screwed up -- its test had a contaminated assay, the negative control, which made it unusable. ..."
By CNN's count, at least 13 states and 13 municipalities in the US have ordered 144,522,931
people to stay home as a result of the pandemic, according to data compiled by CNN using US
Census population estimates.
Update (1324ET): President Trump on Tuesday once again tried to
deny that his administration dropped the ball on the coronavirus response, while saying he
would like to see the country re-open by Easter.
Of course, the CDC's botched handling of the tests has been well-documented, and the fact
that nobody in the administration acting to overule the CDC and start stockpiling tests from
elsewhere might be remembered as one of the administration's biggest screwups in handling the
crisis.
Trump: "We did not screw up."
This is specifically about coronavirus testing. In fact, CDC very much screwed up --
its test had a contaminated assay, the negative control, which made it unusable.
World Health Organization offered us test it had been using in China.
On the morning of March 11, US author Kurt Eichenwald tweeted
As I said, @ GOPLeader – and other GOPrs – were told in a political
consultants memo to start using name "Chinese Virus" as part of some stupid political
strategy.
Everyone: Go to McCarthy's twitter feed and ask "How can we trust GOP when you dont even
know the disease's name?
And just as expected, over the next few days government officials and politicians, including
the respected President of the United States, started using the term "Chinese Virus".
This usage is against the new naming convention released by the WHO in 2015.
Dr Keiji Fukuda, Assistant Director-General for Health Security at WHO said in 2015
regarding the new naming convention, "We've seen certain disease names provoke a backlash
against members of particular religious or ethnic communities, create unjustified barriers to
travel, commerce and trade, and trigger needless slaughtering of food animals. This can have
serious consequences for peoples' lives and livelihoods."
Unfortunately, the political strategy has succeeded. Instead of talking about how absolutely
incompetent the US response has been, the talking point has been shifted to Americans fighting
over whether its right to call it Chinese Virus, with one side saying it stigmatises innocent
Asians and instigates hate crime, and the other claiming its a liberal PC agenda.
This, coupled with the spread of fake news regarding how China "covered it up for weeks",
(which I wrote about here )
has successfully diverted anger away from the US government and shifted the blame to China.
For good measure, a short recap of the US's incompetence:
Censorship and misinformation (which Americans claim China is doing)
"... By mid-February, it was clear that certain drugs and anti-virals were effective. It was important to have widespread tests so that these drugs could be administered early, especially to vulnerable populations. Yet weeks later, the West (especially USA) was still unprepared to test. ..."
The real danger was always in the possibility that the healthcare system is overwhelmed.
Then you get large numbers of unnecessary deaths.
So a country needs to flatten the curve. The best way to do that is to close the
schools as soon as community spread is detected. In the West, this should've been done in
early February - it wasn't.
By mid-February, it was clear that certain drugs and anti-virals were effective. It
was important to have widespread tests so that these drugs could be administered early,
especially to vulnerable populations. Yet weeks later, the West (especially USA) was still
unprepared to test.
There didn't need to be a crisis or a panic. But a CRISIS! is something that is
politically useful: to direct hate against China; to provide extraordinary support to
favored interests like Banks and Wall Street and Boeing.
In addition, it seems that USA/Trump was hoping that remdesivir, developed by Gilead
Sciences, would be the (expensive) drug of choice to treat Covid-19.
There is a saying the you fight the war with the army you have, not with the army you want.
Notable quotes:
"... Ok. Let me start by stating that I am not a "staunch" Trump supporter. However, I just really despise the constant visceral negative, hatred towards our Country's President. ..."
"... As I am sure you are aware, it is a tremendously difficult job, especially in today's crisis. I would think it would be better serve of your time and efforts to be constructive and optimistic, and hopeful. Rather than pinpointed every single steps and missteps he makes. He is certainly no perfect - but his goal is the same as all of ours: to defeat this virus in the best manner possible with the resources available. ..."
"... For the entire Trump Presidency it was all about the stock market. So, here we are. ..."
20 hours ago Here is a 1 minute 22 second video timeline of Trump's amazing handling of the coronavirus.
Please play this.
It will take less than two minutes of your time.
One missing key quote is a statement Trump made bragging about having natural talent coupled with a proclamation that he could
have been a scientist instead of president.
More Questions:
And where are the tests? The ventilators?
Who at the CDC or in the administration insisted the US needs to develop its own test instead of using an accurate test the rest
of the world was already using?
What about Trump increasing sanction pressure on Iran in the midst of the biggest global humanitarian crisis since world war II?
And what about Trump's rating his administration's handling of this as "excellent".
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
njbr 20 hrs
The dumb-asses in DC still don't get it. "Top" leaders crowding around a single microphone in a stage no larger than a public
restroom. Working toward a 1 time $1200 check that probably wont be issued/delivered for another couple weeks. What about the weeks
after that--are they going to spend the next couple weeks going around about the next check?? Has the production of ventilators actually
been accelerated-who could tell from what has been said? Why are nurses and doctors in my area asking the public for donations of
PPE at the very beginning of the serious phase? What happens when the doctors and nurses start tipping over? Two partially ready
hospital ships may help in one spot each on the coast, but what about everywhere else? Has anyone even checked on the production
capacity for the maybe helpful malaria medicine--has anyone been directed to begin proactive super-production of this product? On
and on.
DeeDee3
20 hrs
hard to prove deliberate neglect when you eliminate all of the evidence. No testing means "no virus" and sadly supported the hoax
theory.
Another doc died in the city today. ER's are unprotected. what conclusion can we draw from all of this?
Zardoz
20 hrs
Thousands will die because of his incompetence... and his followers will blame the Chinese
egilkinc
20 hrs
There should be a tracker of the number of cases [among medical personnle] in the US along with this
Sechel
20 hrs
Oh my g-d. This is excellent! I think Trump has learned some bad lessons from Goebbels. Repeat the lie and repeat it often and
people will take your version of events. This really serves to correct the record! Good work!
PecuniaNonOlet
20 hrs
And yet there will be an avalanche of Trump supporters defending the idiot. It is truly beyond me.
michiganmoon
20 hrs
Actually, Trump should resign and give the GOP a chance this November.
Had Trump not downplayed this and had tests ready, he could have played on a loop Biden on January 31st saying travel restrictions
from Wuhan were racist and xenophobic.
thesaint0013
20 hrs
Ok. Let me start by stating that I am not a "staunch" Trump supporter. However, I just really despise the constant visceral negative,
hatred towards our Country's President.
As I am sure you are aware, it is a tremendously difficult job, especially in today's crisis.
I would think it would be better serve of your time and efforts to be constructive and optimistic, and hopeful. Rather than pinpointed
every single steps and missteps he makes. He is certainly no perfect - but his goal is the same as all of ours: to defeat this virus
in the best manner possible with the resources available.
To criticize previous tweets, interviews, and depict his flaws and errors
does not help the common goal. The nature of some of the questions posed to him during the press conferences should be a bit more
respectful and again, it doesn't serve any positive outcome to try and "catch" him in a lie, and how he may have said something that
was not factual or false.
Again, he's not perfect and neither are anyone of us. However he is our President and we should support
his and all of our common goal to defeat this virus.
Russell
J 20 hrs
Not making excuses for Trump at all but he/we have people who are specialists and are responsible for being ready at all times
for something like this and are responsible for being on the look out for this. Somebody should have came forward, even as a whistleblower.
I've been aware for about 2 months now.
Thank you WWW.PEAKPROSPERITY.COM, MISH and WWW.ZEROHEDGE.COM
This was an epic failure of Trump, his administration and America in general.
ghoffa
20 hrs
Hi, @MishTalk @Mish
I wanted to sincerely thank you MISH from my whole extended family. I have been reading you since 2007 when Ron Paul removed the
scales from my eyes on the Fed and govt., Jekyll Island book, the "financial markets" (all modern day money changers). Every picture
I see of Fed chairpersons, their eyes look dead black sharks eyes (to quote a famous book which I subscribe, the eyes are the windows
to the soul).
In addition our mob style duolopoly govt and for the most part complicit MSM (all with significant influencing billionaire ownership
to control the news - easily searched). I've learned so much from this blog and the many commentors in this space ( a personal fav
is @Stuki ) . Nothing short of brilliant and reminds me of my fav news source Zerohedge and it's articles and commentors.
A special thanks for pointing us to Chris Martenson (peakprosperity.com) as my wife and I have watched every day his free daily
videos since JAN @24th and our extended family is as prepared as we can be. God help us all with what's coming.
For those who haven't watched it, Dr. Martenson has a great 3 min video on exponential growth on YTube. Search his name and exponential.
It will help you prepare for what our govt knows is coming in enourmous exponential growth in fatalities. Even knowing, it will be
an emotional thing to prepare for. Prepping home supplies is one thing, prepping emotionally is also important per Dr. Martenson.
HCWs be damned.
As this impacts people personally, I expect insider leaks to come from many fronts. We're working with neighbors to get prepared
as we're all on our own now as the money changers (evil) bail out the money changers (evil) amidst a system that is so debt leveraged
it can't likely be bailed out. "everything's a nail and the Fed has a hammer".
Lastly this brings a famous quote to mind as the people rise up against corrupt govt, corp bailouts after stock buy backs, etc.
Let alone the monsters upon monsters creating lab viruses (regardless of the source of this virus), and unregulated GMOs changing
the fabric of life.....
"All it takes for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing". Margaret Mead
G
QE2Infinity
20 hrs
Come on! First off, anyone can be made to look bad by taking snippets out of context and stringing them together. That said, Trump
does tend towards braggadocio. If that is off putting to you, he can be annoying. I much prefer a transparent fool to the more sly
variety that plays the part well while sticking a knife in your back.
But let's be honest here. The president can do very little. The bureaucracy of the government is a jobs program for the less ambitious
and politically inclined. It's staffed with incompetent bureaucrats that show up, surf the web and may get around to an hour or two
of honest work. Public unions guarantee they can't be fired.
Obama converted the CDC into a PC jobs program for lefties, just like he converted NASA into a Muslim outreach program.
May one ask: why is a self proclaimed libertarian screaming for more government action? Wouldn't it be great if one of the outcomes
of this crisis is that local communities became more self reliant and more self sufficient!
Sechel
20 hrs
that's from a website called therecount.com looks interesting.
Greggg
20 hrs
For the entire Trump Presidency it was all about the stock market. So, here we are.
The graphic at the end of the video already looks out of date and shows how rapid the spread has been. For March 2020 it shows
5,002 cases in the US (and counting) but right now I'm seeing 24,137 cases.
So much for "in a couple of days the 15 is going to be down close to zero".
njbr
20 hrs
What can the President do?
Force and organize the production of necessary goods.
Act as impartial hub for the distribution of new and stocked items.
Force/fund the emergency super-production of even possibly helpful items such as the malarial drug.
Turn every possible research dollar onto the research into the disease, it's treatments and vaccines.
Fund and distribute tests. Make a way to track the progress of the disease, as opposed to waiting for regional medical systems
collapse under load.
Activate whatever resources are possible to pre-position and set-up field hospitals now.
Develop uniform best-practices for quarantine and treatment.
Prepare the population for the realistic probability of multiple months of the crisis.
Mish Editor
19 hrs
May one ask: why is a self proclaimed libertarian screaming for more government action? Wouldn't it be great if one of the outcomes
of this crisis is that local communities became more self reliant and more self sufficient!
I said what I would do
I would remove tariffs. I would not have had them in the first place.
I would expect our president to act to increase supplies not insist on Made in America.
I would expect our president to behave like an emphatic human being, not a total moron
Mish
Editor
19 hrs
Trump did not Drain the Swamp. He IS the swamp
Mish Editor
19 hrs
Anyone who still supports this President's actions is a TDS-inflicted fool.
Jim
Bob 19 hrs
I've followed Mish for ~ 12 years online and on the radio for brilliant economic analysis. Lately his work has been undermined
by irrational political opinion. Mish has turned into Krugman. I won't be back.
abend237-04
19 hrs
The Donald is obviously afflicted with the same narcissistic megalomania prerequisite for a successful run at any elective office
above County Coroner, anywhere in this country.
That said, he can apparently read a graph, and he's right: The two drug combination of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin are working
to treat this damn thing, BUT:
It is, indeed, not a Covid-19 preventative.
If you get it, and you dink around at home too long waiting for improvement, arriving at ICU needing ventilation leaves you with
roughly the odds of Russian roulette of surviving, especially if you're older.
Lacking testing, the only remaining means available to knock the transmission rate down quickly is social distancing/lockdown. But,
enough of that prevention can leave us wishing we were dead anyway.
Unfortunately, all the college kids jamming the bars and beaches is setting the stage for continued exponential growth by hordes
of asymptomatic spreaders.
The march of folly continues.
I like what I'm seeing of Cuomo. He'd be a good guy to have in the room in a serious fight; This qualifies.
DBG8489
19 hrs
As someone who hates all politicians, there is zero love lost between Trump and myself. I had hopes when he was elected that he
would make a difference but it was clear based on how he looked after his private meeting with Obama on inauguration day that he
was in over his head.
Having said that, I will say this:
From at least the "major" state level up, it would appear that not one single elected official or the top advisors and bureaucrats
who work for them have shown anything but complete and utter failure in their handling of this emergency.
You have senators selling off piles of stock while either saying nothing or telling the rest of us that it was bullshit. And trust
me - they were not the only ones. If anyone cares to investigate, they will likely find this problem rampant. Elected officials should
not even be allowed to trade stocks when they control the entire economy - not even through alleged "blind trusts" - it's bullshit.
But that's a conversation for another time.
You have congressional reps and senators blaming each other and/or the other party and passing laws and bailouts without even
reading the bills they are passing.
You have the Treasury and the Fed printing money and throwing it at every hole that opens up without the slightest regard for
what the unintended consequences of those actions may entail.
You have governments of the "major" states (CA, NY, NJ...etc) who know they can't simply print money being exposed using any extra
money they had (along with taxes based on tourism that have now disappeared) to fund God knows what now demanding that everyone else
pony up to pay for their failure to plan...
The lack of leadership in the major states and at the Federal level is abysmal ACROSS THE BOARD.
And that includes members of BOTH parties and nearly every single bureaucratic agency involved.
You can single Trump out if you want, but he's not alone. He's just an easy target because 49% of the population hated him before
this started.
njbr
18 hrs
....Top health officials first learned of the virus's spread in China on January 3, US Health and Human Services Secretary Alex
Azar said Friday. Throughout January and February, intelligence officials' warnings became more and more urgent, according to the
Post -- and by early February, much of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA's intelligence reports were
dedicated to warnings about Covid-19.
All the while, Trump downplayed the virus publicly, telling the public the coronavirus "is very well under control in our country,"
and suggesting warm weather would neutralize the threat the virus poses....
...The administration did begin taking some limited action about a month after Azar says the administration first began receiving
warnings, blocking non-citizens who had been to China in the last two weeks from entering the country on February 3 -- a move public
experts have argued at best bought the US time to ramp up its testing capabilities, which it did not use, and at worst had no beneficial
effects at all.
Trump finally assembled a task force to address the virus, putting Vice President Mike Pence in charge of the effort on February
26, and declared a national emergency on March 13. And, just this week -- nearly three months after first receiving warnings from
his intelligence officials -- the president's public tone about the crisis shifted: "I've always known this is a real -- this is
a pandemic," he said Tuesday as he admitted, "[the virus is] not under control for any place in the world."....
Realist
18 hrs
I have been watching political leaders in my own country get on television daily. They have all done a great job of informing
the public about the dangers of this virus. They have all relied on the experts to relay information to the public about what the
government is doing, and what individuals should be doing. This is true at the national, regional, and local levels.
In addition businesses have been sending out emails, radio announcements and tv messages explaining what they are doing in regard
to this pandemic.
In fact, I am amazed at what a good job everyone is doing.
I am also watching what is happening in the US. Every US state governor and city mayor I have seen on tv has done a wonderful
job of presenting the facts to the public and provided instructions as to what they are doing and what the public should be doing.
Then there is the gong show that is Trump. I could not imagine that anyone could be as bad as he is; months of lies, denials,
suppression of the truth, and a complete and utter lack of preparation for something he was warned about many times. Denying one
day that the virus was a pandemic; only to claim the very next day that he had known it was a pandemic for months; and then the very
next day say that no one could have seen this coming; and finally saying that his response to the virus rates a 10 out of 10.
Worst President ever. Sadly, many, many Americans are going to suffer and die because America had this moron in charge.
Mish keeps referring to worldometer to get stats from. Their numbers seem to match up with numbers I see in my own country and
in the US.
Disturbingly, today, the mortality rate for closed cases ticked up 1% to 12%. 12978 deaths and 94674 recovered. That is not the
direction I expected it to go.
daveyp
17 hrs
You get what you vote for. To have such a malignant narcissist of such profoundly limited intellectual honesty and capacity "leading"
your nation through this is truly tragic for your country. Even the hideously vile ultimate Washington insider Hilary would have
done a better job.
truthseeker
17 hrs
Mish I agree with much of the criticism of Trump, yet had he done everything you and others suggest, there is this implied assumption
that everything would have worked out perfectly. You know I am impressed the way the country seems to be uniting to such a great
degree, that I think there is at least some hope for our country's future though there are huge challenges that lay ahead absolutely!
abend237-04
17 hrs
I will now proceed, once again, to bitch about the root cause of our current pandemic, which is causing many to experience cosmic
scale frustration with The Donald, which I share:
Civilization has now been hit squarely in the head with three killer coronavirus outbreaks in 18 years, yet still has no unified
global new viral antigen detection system. We could have if our world "leaders" would make it happen.
Local supercomputers, however massive, will never crack this nut, but the billions of powerful, web-accessible smartphones could
if linked and used by a parallelized, intelligent scheduler to raise the alarm when a new antibody/pathogen is discovered in human
blood anywhere.
Such a system could have lifted the burden from a lonely doctor struggling to raise the alarm in Wuhan, before Covid-19 killed
him, and placed it squarely in front of disease control experts, worldwide. It can be done; We must do it.
Sars cov-3/4/5/6/7/8/9/n could kill us all if we don't.
But she sees this China-bashing as mostly a political reaction:
In reality these people are rallying behind the campaign to blame China for the health
crisis they're now facing because they understand that otherwise the blame will land
squarely on the shoulders of their president, who's running for re-election this year.
instead of a deliberate Deep-State strategy (which is my view).
We can argue who created the virus (I'm still looking for any rebuttal to the Chinese
claim that USA must be the source because it has all five strains of the virus), but the
Empire's gaming of the virus outbreak seems very clear to me.
A looming shortage in lab materials is threatening to delay coronavirus test results
and cause officials to undercount the number of Americans with the virus.
CDC Director Robert Redfield told POLITICO on Tuesday that he is not confident that U.S.
labs have an adequate stock of the supplies used to extract genetic material from any virus
in a patient's sample -- a critical step in coronavirus testing.
"The availability of those reagents is obviously being looked at," he said, referring to
the chemicals used for preparing samples. "I'm confident of the actual test that we have,
but as people begin to operationalize the test, they realize there's other things they need
to do the test."
The growing scarcity of these "RNA extraction" kits is the latest trouble for U.S. labs,
which have struggled to implement widespread coronavirus testing in the seven weeks since
the country diagnosed its first case.
"the US is particularly poorly set up to cope, thanks to our fragmented public health
system and overpriced, privatized and less than comprehensive health care. That bad situation
is made worse by the CDC being short on resources and hamstrung further by the Trump
Administration's PR imperatives."
Basically, it is expected that Europe manages the crisis less badly.
It has been interesting watching Dr. John Campbell's growing realisation & some shock
that everything is not well with the US healthcare system & he has received some abuse
but also support from Americans for his growing criticism.
His listing as requested of his 2 degrees & Phd, never mind his long front line
experience & his books I think shut some up for perhaps thinking that he was only a
nurse, but perhaps he shouda gone to NakedCapitalism.
"... people who appear healthy can be asymptomatic so are therefore spreading the disease, which I believe that masks would help prevent. ..."
"... The problem is that there are no masks for everybody so these should be available for those who need them the most . This is a F*c*n*gly problematic issue and that is why there must be a campaign against massive mask usage. ..."
"... A healthy mucosal epithelium contains non-specific barriers to virus and other pathogens including our normal microbiota, enzymes and various types of fibers acting as a physico-chemical barrier for virus entry. In winter, these barriers are less efficient. ..."
"... The tide has now gone out, and has revealed that the US is swimming naked. ..."
By
Jerri-Lynn Scofield, who has worked as a securities lawyer and a derivatives trader. She is
currently writing a book about textile artisans.
I was chatting on Facebook the other day about the topic de jour – protecting friends,
family, and myself from coronavirus – with Dr. Sarah Borwein, an old friend and travel
buddy from my Oxford days. Sarah's a Canadian- trained doctor who has practiced family medicine
for more than 15 years in Hong Kong. She co-founded the Central Health Group.
I recently attended Sarah's wedding in that city in early January – and got out just
in time to avoid some of the more draconian travel restrictions that have since been imposed as
a result of the outbreak of the #COVID-19 coronavirus.. At least for now. And just before Hong
Kong imposed drastic restrictions that have allowed it to weather the coronavirus crisis while
recording only three deaths, so far.
She has an extensive professional history of dealing with infectious diseases in Asia. Prior
to commencing her practice in Hong Kong, she successfully ran the Infection Control program for
the only expatriate hospital in Beijing during the SARS period, also serving as liaison with
the World Health Organization. For a fuller account of her career and her thoughts on the
current crisis, see this interview in AD MediLink, Exclusive
Interview on COVID-19 with SARS Veteran Dr. Sarah Borwein .
I thought readers might be interested in some of the things Hong Kong is doing to combat the
virus.
Partial Lockdown
The city has been in partial lockdown from the middle of January, with schools and
universities, shut, employees encouraged to work from home, sports facilities and museums
closed down, and people told to avoid crowds according to the Financial Times, Hong Kong's
coronavirus response leads to sharp drop in flu cases . Hong Kong residents have accepted
these restrictions, since:
Hongkongers are particularly compliant with public health measures because the 2002-2003
Sars outbreak, which claimed almost 300 lives in the territory, is still fresh in many
people's minds.
The partial lockdown is neither easy nor cost-free, but it largely seems to have controlled
incidence of the disease, without paralysing Hong Kong. The city is close to mainland China and
has extensive economic and other ties. But so far, it has recorded only three deaths, according
to the South China Morning Post,
Coronavirus: Hong Kong records third death as five more cases confirmed, bringing total to
114 . And this for a city with population of roughly 7.5 million people.
Testing
There has been extensive texting for the coronavirus in Hong Kong – which is free.
This allows public health austhories to track the spread of the disease, and see that victims
get treated properly and promptly.
This record stands in contrast to the US, which has not yet managed to distribute tests
widely – let alone, as far as I can see, determine who will pay for testing.
The disease seems to have taken hold in In U.S., with cases exceeding 500 and deaths so far
recorded of 22, with 19 in Washington state, according to the New York Times, Cases of
Coronavirus Cross 500, and Deaths Rise to 22 .
The inability to test means that it's not possible to track the progress of the disease
properly, is as to determine from where a patient may have caught it. Nationwide in the US, a
fraction of people who are symptomatic or who may have been exposed to the virus have been
tested. Even India, which has so far managed to limit exposure of its population to foreign
sources of infection, has tested many more people – and is doing comprehensive screening
at its airports.
Which makes a lot of sense, as foreigners – tourists – are principal source of
the infection, Others are Indians returning from foreign climes, carrying with them the
disease. So far, India has reported 39 cases, a large cluster of which is an Italian tour group
that visited Rajasthan. Five other recent cases are non-resident Indians (NRIs), who returned
to India from Venice. We can only help as the temperature slowly rises as we approach the
Indian summer, that increase in temperature slows spread of the virus (see
Coronavirus cases rise to 39 as 5 found infected in Kerala ). Whether this will prove to be
the case is as yet unknown, but as Sarah discussed in her MediLink interview:
It is true that some viruses that are spread by respiratory droplets, as COVID-19 is
believed to, spread more easily when the air is cold and dry. In warm, humid conditions, they
fall to the ground more easily and that makes transmission harder.
But there is still a lot we don't know about exactly how COVID-19 is spread and the
effects climate may have on it. We do see it spreading in Singapore, which is warm and humid,
so who knows?
I should mention that there have been dark musing about the NRIs returning to the state of
Kerala from Venice – as they concealed their travel history and exposure. Kerala Health
Minister K.K. Shailaja has said these victims will be treated, but that this type of behavior
-- the deception – should be considered to be a crime.
Hong Kong has made it a criminal offence to lie to a health care provider about one's travel
or exposure history, according to Sarah; I wonder whether the US will attempt to do the
same?
Most of us have heard the advice for avoiding infection. I'm going to repeat this advice.
Those who know it all already, feel free to skip ahead. Those who've not seen such advice, pay
attention.
Wash your hands, with soap, properly and frequently. I posted this video last week, but some
readers may not have seen it:
WHO handwashing technique. Notice the attention to between the fingers, back of fingers,
and nails:
Hand sanitiser can be used as a stopgap until you can wash your hands, but the World Health
Organization says that only those that are 60% alcohol killl the virus. And hand washing is an
absolute must for hands that are visibly dirty.
Maintain social distance. Avoid crowds.
Cough or sneeze into a tissue, and dispose of it promptly and properly (I'm tossing mine
into my toilet, and flushing them away.).
Pay attention to your overall health. Eat well. Including plenty of fruits and vegetables.
Stay properly hydrated.
Get a 'flu shot if you haven't already. Although this won't protect you from coronavirus,
'flu can be a nasty disease in its own right, and catching it can land you in hospital or
quarantine. Not to mention getting sick with the 'flu overburdens health systems when resources
are needed elsewhere.
The procedures Hong Kong has put in place to control coronavirus have also led to a drastic
decline in 'flu cases,. In fact, its winter influenza season has ended more than a month
earlier than usual. 'Flu cases also dropped during the ARS crisis, according to the FT:
Data provided by the government's Centre for Health Protection show the incidence of
infection with influenza had fallen to less than 1 per cent by the end of February, marking
an end to the winter flu season, which normally extends to the end of March or into
April.
"A similar pattern happened in 2003 during Sars. All respiratory infection diseases were
down between March to September compared to 2002," said David Hui, a respiratory disease
expert from the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
"Influenza spread is one of the markers [of the coronavirus containment] as the same
principles of avoiding droplets and social contacts apply."
Ho Pak-leung, a leading microbiologist at the University of Hong Kong, said data showed
the flu season had shortened from an average of 98.7 days to 34 days this year.
Use of Masks?
Masks are not very useful, and many places are out of stock anyway, but Sarah says these can
prevent you from passing along any infection you might have to others. She says the advice to
avoid masks outright is wrong. There is a place for them, they're just not a panacea, and in
any case, if used improperly, they may actually increase your risk.
From her Medilink interview:
The shortage of masks has many people feeling quite anxious and unprotected. But masks are
NOT very effective at preventing transmission of viral infections, particularly when worn by
healthy people. They are by no means the most important measure you can take to protect your
health. In fact, if you wear a mask incorrectly, touch or adjust it frequently, re-use it, or
fail to wash your hands before putting it on and after taking it off, you may actually
increase your risk.
Who should wear a mask:
– People who are sick, to prevent them spreading their viral droplets when they
cough or sneeze.
– People caring for sick people at close quarters.
– In a health-care setting.
– People whose occupation requires them to have close contact with clients.
As it has become socially unacceptable in Hong Kong to NOT wear a mask, there may be
situations in which you might choose to wear a mask simply to make other people feel
comfortable. But in general, healthy people do not need to wear masks, except when they need
to be in crowded places, or with possibly sick people.
Infection Control Protocol?
This to me was the most striking thing I learned from our conversation. I don't think
anything like this infection control protocol is yet in place – certainly not throughout
the US, nor even in high-risk areas. And it it should be.
From a text from Sarah:
We have triage at the door. People with high-risk travel history can't be seen, have to go
directly to government hospital if symptomatic; or if just for routine care, wait 14 days
after return (all of which must be healthy). Low risk people with symptoms we isolate
immediately; they never enter the main clinic. And we wear PPE [i.e., personal protective
equipment] to see them.
In Hong Kong, people are being told to get tested if you think you have been exposed, and/or
are symptomatic. Anyone with a fever or respiratory symptoms is tested as a matter of course,
upon recommendation of a doctor.
To be fair, I should mention that Hong Kong did not initially test so extensively. Sarah
texted me:
Testing has been ramped up gradually. Initially they just added testing of all pneumonia
patients, regarless of epidemiological link. The testing of all mildly symptomatic patients
with no epidemiologic link is relatively new. A few weeks ago they started offering it in the
public hospital A&E's and public outpatient clinics. Then last week they extended that to
private sentinel clinics (of which we are one) and this week have extended it to all private
clinics
But in the US, even if your doctor wants to test you, no testing kit may be available to
conduct the test. This is simply insane, so many weeks, after the disease has taken root in so
many places, and after the World Health Organization made accurate tests available months
ago.
Hong Kong has also made it easier for patients to test themselves, without involving a
health care provider. From a message from Sarah:
They also pioneered a test that patients could do themselves – ie they self-collect
a "deep throat saliva" sample at home. That reduces risk of exposure to healthcare workers,
as taking nasopharyngeal swabs is "aerosol generating"
So there is considerable scope for United States to learn from Hong Kong's experience and
ramp up its testing – without appreciably increasing risk to its health care
providers.
One thing talking to Sarah has driven home to me is how poor the comparative US
infrastructure for dealing with such a disease is – although she didn't say so in so many
words. These are my words, but I don't think she would dispute the conclusion.
Contrast that to Hong Kong. From her MediLink interview:
The situation is much less serious in Hong Kong than in mainland China, especially Wuhan
and Hubei. We are quite exposed here, because of our close ties with the mainland, but we
have a very strong public health system, good resources, and deep experience in managing
epidemics. After SARS, Hong Kong set up the Centre for Health Protection (CHP) , which is our
version of the CDC in the United States .
When COVID-19 emerged, there was already an epidemic management plan in place that just had
to be activated. The four best prepared places in Asia are probably Hong Kong, Singapore,
Thailand and South Korea.
Her MediLink interview is upbeat in some ways. Perhaps a better description would be
measured. She points out that COVID-19 is less lethal than SARS. But because of that fact, it's
much easier to spread:
COVID-19 and SARS do
share some common features: they belong to the same family of viruses, they both seem to have
jumped from animals to humans, they both originated in China and both can cause severe
pneumonia.
But there are some important differences. SARS was more lethal than COVID-19, but less easily
transmitted. It went straight for the lungs, and caused severe pneumonia which became
transmissible only when patients were quite severely ill and usually by then in hospital.
About 10%
died .
COVID-19, on the other hand, seems to be more likely to replicate in the upper respiratory
tract and it seems like individuals might produce a lot of virus when they are only mildly
symptomatic. It's not known how many people with COVID-19 develop pneumonia, but of the ones
who do, about 20% get severely ill and fewer than 2% die. Overall death rates are still not
known for sure, but are probably less than 1%.
So COVID-19 is a lot less lethal than SARS, but harder to control because it spreads more
easily and by people with milder symptoms. That's why, despite being considerably less likely
to kill you than SARS was, COVID-19 has still in total killed
more people in 6 weeks than SARS did in eight months.
We should recognise considerable advances in infection control have been made since that
time. Alas, many countries seem not to have absorbed these lessons – including the United
States. Or if they did, that knowledge has failed to translate into effective responses. From
MediLink:
Another important difference is that medical science has advanced considerably in the 17
years since SARS. In 2003, it took months to identify the virus and develop a test. For
COVID-19 that happened within a couple of weeks. That has made identifying patients a great
deal easier. In addition, there are newer treatments and some vaccine prospects already in
the works.
Epidemic control is something that has confounded the US political system. The relevant
public health officials may know what needs to be done, they're not doing it. That may simply
be, at least in part, because resources are simply not available. It's also due to the way we
divide authority for such problems, with responsibility largelylodged at the state and local
level. And the reflexive reliance on neoliberal, market-based solutions is also at fault. There
are some things government is uniquely positioned to provide, but many are no longer capable of
recognising that simple fact.
Over to Sarah's MediLink interview again:
The most important thing we learned from SARS was that infectious diseases do not respect
borders or government edicts, and cannot be hidden. It requires international cooperation,
transparency and sharing of information to control an epidemic.
We also learned the importance of providing good, balanced, reliable information to the
public. In any epidemic, there is the outbreak of disease and then there is the epidemic of
panic. And nowadays, there is also what the WHO has termed the Infodemic , the explosion
of information about the epidemic. Some of it is good information, but some of it is rumour,
myth, speculation and conspiracy theory, and those things feed the anxiety. It can be hard to
sort out which information to believe, so it is important to choose trustworthy sources.
Panic and misinformation make controlling the outbreak more difficult.
On a day when markets are melting down, and people are succumbing to panic,I can only say,
keep calm. And to remind everyone: wash your hands!
The only query I would have with that is in reference to masks, is that people who appear
healthy can be asymptomatic so are therefore spreading the disease, which I believe that
masks would help prevent.
The problem is that there are no masks for everybody so these should be available for
those who need them the most . This is a F*c*n*gly problematic issue and that is why there
must be a campaign against massive mask usage.
It has to be repeated 100 1000 1000000s times
but we f*c**gl* avoid to understand this necessity.
Today has been a day of overreaction indeed. I would point as an addition to Sarah remarks
on disease spreading that regarding weather, temperature and humidity as important or even
more important than virus air transmission or fomites-led transmission is our susceptibility
to infection.
A healthy mucosal epithelium contains non-specific barriers to virus and other
pathogens including our normal microbiota, enzymes and various types of fibers acting as a
physico-chemical barrier for virus entry. In winter, these barriers are less efficient.
The
same virus load will not have the same effect in winter or in summer in the nasopharyngeal
tract. In this sense HK and NY are not comparable. Regarding the lessons of SARS epidemics,
if one of them is to keep calm that is a goos lesson. If another lessons is to identify the
sites that need stronger protection, that is another good lesson. A third good lesson would
be awareness on precautions to be taken personally. Anyway given differences between SARS1
and 2 in virulence and epidemiology there are not many more lessons to learn. Again comparing
Singapore or HK with NY in terms of potential fatalities is not spot on for weather
reasons.
The main failure in Italy first, or in Spain now, has IMO been on lack of awareness. No
overreaction is needed but good reaction would have made things better if the objective is to
reduce fatalities and avoid HC services being overwhelmed. Focus on safety in hospitals is a
must. Focusing on safety in residences for the elder is a second must (this has been noticed
too late for many).
This evening I will have a discussion with my son that wants to go to a concert next
saturday in a closed ambient. I think that the government will come to my rescue and forbid
this class of events.
Right the major fiasco was with CDC testing kits. I do not see any other. Exaggerating the
threat would only make hoarding panic that engult the USA worse. Of source Trump desire to
protect stock market at any human or other cost was cruel and silly, but Trump is cruel and silly
in many other areas as well.
Quarantine for retired persons might really help in areas with high number of
infections.
Notable quotes:
"... For the last several weeks, we have seen the president and top administration officials presenting the public with misleading and outright false information in an effort to conceal the magnitude of the problem and the extent of their initial failures. The president has been unwilling to tell the public the truth about the situation because he evidently cares more about the short-term political implications than he does about protecting the public: ..."
The AP
reports on more of the Trump White House's bungling of the coronavirus response:
The White House overruled health officials who wanted to recommend that elderly and
physically fragile Americans be advised not to fly on commercial airlines because of the new
coronavirus, a federal official told The Associated Press.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention submitted the plan this week as a way of
trying to control the virus, but White House officials ordered the air travel recommendation
be removed, said the official who had direct knowledge of the plan. Trump administration
officials have since suggested certain people should consider not traveling, but they have
stopped short of the stronger guidance sought by the CDC.
There is no good reason for the White House to prevent this recommendation from being made
public. This is another example of how the president and his top officials are trying to keep
up the pretense that the outbreak is much less dangerous than it actually is, and in doing so
they are helping to make the outbreak worse than it has to be.
For the last several weeks, we have seen the president and top administration officials
presenting the public with
misleading and outright false information in an effort to
conceal the magnitude of the problem and the extent of their initial failures. The
president has been
unwilling to tell the public the truth about the situation because he evidently cares more
about the short-term political implications than he does about protecting the public:
Even as the government's scientists and leading health experts raised the alarm early and
pushed for aggressive action, they faced resistance and doubt at the White House --
especially from the president -- about spooking financial markets and inciting panic.
"It's going to all work out," Mr. Trump said as recently as Thursday night. "Everybody has
to be calm. It's going to work out."
Justin Fox
comments on the president's terrible messaging:
The biggest problem, though, is simply the way that the president talks about the disease.
His instinct at every turn is to downplay its danger and significance.
Minimizing the danger and significance of the outbreak ensured that the government's
response was less urgent and focused than it could have been. It encouraged people to take it
less seriously and thus made it more likely that the virus would spread. Then when the severity
of the problem became undeniable, the earlier discredited happy talk makes it easier for people
to disbelieve what the government tells them in the future.
The administration had time to prepare a more effective response, but as I
said last week the administration frittered away the time they had. They were still
preoccupied with keeping the
virus out rather than trying to manage its spread once it arrived here, as it was inevitably
going to do:
"We have contained this. I won't say airtight but pretty close to airtight," White House
economic adviser Larry Kudlow said in a television interview on Feb. 25, echoing Trump's
tweeted declaration that the virus was "very much under control" in the United States.
But it wasn't, and the administration's rosy messaging was fundamentally at odds with a
growing cacophony of alarm bells inside and outside the U.S. government. Since January,
epidemiologists, former U.S. public health officials and experts have been warning, publicly
and privately, that the administration's insistence that containment was -- and should remain
-- the primary way to confront an emerging infectious disease was a grave mistake.
The initial response and the stubborn refusal to adapt to new developments have meant that
the U.S. is in a much worse position in handling this outbreak than many other countries. Max
Nisen
comments on the lack of testing in the U.S.:
Don't cheer just yet. The lower case count doesn't mean Americans are doing a better job
of containing the virus; rather, it reflects the fact that the U.S. is badly behind in its
ability to test people. The Centers for Disease Control stopped disclosing how many people it
has tested as of Monday, but an analysis by The Atlantic could only confirm 1,895 tests.
Switzerland, a country with fewer residents than New Jersey, has tested nearly twice as many
people. The U.K., which has far fewer cases, has tested over 20,000. This gap is particularly
worrisome given evidence of community spread in a number of different states and a high death
count, both of which suggest the number of cases will jump as more tests are conducted.
Capacity is finally ramping up, but only after weeks of delays prompted by unforced errors
and botched early test kits from the CDC. The continuing inability to test broadly is leading
to missed cases, more infections, and an outbreak that will be bigger than it needed to
be.
The administration not only bungled their initial response, but they have also been
extremely resistant to admitting error. Trump's appointees are reluctant to contradict the
president when he spouts nonsense about the outbreak, and that in turn makes it more difficult
for them to communicate clearly and consistently with the public. All of this serves to
undermine public trust in the government's response, and it prevents health officials from
being able to do their jobs without political interference. The federal government's response
has been
hampered by a president who wants to make people think that the problem isn't that bad and
is already being dealt with successfully:
At the White House, Trump and many of his aides were initially skeptical of just how
serious the coronavirus threat was, while the president often seemed uninterested as long as
the virus was abroad. At first, when he began to engage, he downplayed the threat -- "The
Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA," he tweeted in late February -- and became
a font of misinformation and confusion, further muddling his administration's response.
On Friday, visiting the CDC in Atlanta, the president spewed more falsehoods when he
claimed, incorrectly: "Anybody that needs a test, gets a test. They're there. They have the
tests. And the tests are beautiful."
When the president lies about such a serious matter, he is causing unnecessary confusion and
he is sending exactly the wrong message that remedying earlier failures is not an urgent
priority. Because Trump's primary concern is making himself look good in the short term, he is
willing to risk a worse outbreak. During his visit to the CDC, the president went on in an even
more bizarre vein to praise the tests by
comparing them to his "perfect call" with the Ukrainian president last summer that led to
his impeachment:
In an attempt to express confidence in the CDC's coronavirus test (the agency's second
attempt after the first one it developed failed), Trump offered an unorthodox comparison from
the last enormous crisis to swamp his presidency. The tests are just like his
impeachment-causing attempt to pressure a foreign government to help him get reelected. "The
tests are all perfect like the letter was perfect. The transcription was perfect. Right? This
was not as perfect as that but pretty good," Trump told reporters after falsely stating,
again, that anyone who needed a test right now could get one.
This morning the president was back at it this morning with more self-serving
misinformation:
We have a perfectly coordinated and fine tuned plan at the White House for our attack on
CoronaVirus. We moved VERY early to close borders to certain areas, which was a Godsend. V.P.
is doing a great job. The Fake News Media is doing everything possible to make us look bad.
Sad!
The president needs people to think that everything he does is perfect, so he is incapable
of acknowledging his failures and prefers to vilify accurate reporting about those failures. He
cannot help but mismanage
the government response because he cannot put the national interest ahead of his own
selfishness. An untold number of Americans will be paying a steep price for the president's
unfitness for office in the weeks and months to come.
I wish you had thought a bit into the future before you voted him. Did you really think
things wouldn't turn out EXACTLY the way they have? Honestly, it's to rime tell the truth
here.
It's the Democrats who should have thought a bit into the future. It was the identity and
known character and policies of Trump's opponent that tipped my vote to Trump. And no,
obviously I didn't think things would turn out "exactly" this way. I thought if I put up with
his repulsive manner I'd get maybe a third of his main campaign promises and that the GOP
establishment would get the hiding it deserves. Boy, was I wrong.
I take you believe Hillary Clinton was worse than Trump. Fair enough, but do you still think
our country would be in the state it is now? In what way could she possibly be worse than
what we have now with Trump?
It's better for Trumpism to have burst like a zit onto the mirror, no matter how disgusting,
because it was all there anyway under Bush and Cheney, it was there alongside "Barack the
magic... birth certificate!" You can fairly easily wash off the stain of Bush and Rumsfeld,
you can sort of start to forget their sublime horror, the exact same level of lies and utter
mismanagement, but you can't wash off a man like Trump, ever. His portrait will be in the
White House so future Americans can see what we're capable of, and hopefully be more vigilant
about the subtle and polished lies and civilized outrages. We needed this barbaric display to
get some clarity.
"The president has been about the situation because he evidently cares more about the
short-term political implications than he does about protecting the public"
It's no different from the first two years of his presidency. He already betrayed those of
us who voted for the America First promises on immigration and ending the wars. He spent most
of his doing favors for Wall Street, Israel, and Saudi Arabia instead. Now he's going to
betray the many vulnerable elders who voted for him, risking their illness and even death by
his selfish evasions and lies. He's a con artist. A fake.
Testing around the U.S. was hampered when local officials reported flaws in the kits the CDC
sent. Replacements didn't come until weeks later, which left most hospitals and clinics short
of tests. Shifting guidelines for who should get the few tests available also confused
hospitals, Diaz said.
At the time, there had still been just the single case reported in Seattle. Trevor Bedford,
a Harvard-trained researcher and viral genome expert at the city's Fred Hutchinson Cancer
Research Center, wondered why. He had spent weeks analyzing genomes of patients from around the
world, tracing minor mutations to deduce how Covid-19 emerged and spread.
The early work found that infections were doubling roughly every six days, and that for
every three to four rounds of transmission -- or once every 20 to 30 days -- one minor mutation
was occurring, Bedford said in a Feb. 13 interview. "We are watching very carefully for more
local transmission," he said at the time.
They soon found it: a teenager with mild symptoms who attended a high school about 15 miles
from where the first case was identified -- someone who wouldn't have been tested because he or
she didn't meet the criteria. But the results showed up in the Seattle Flu Study, a project on
which Bedford is a lead scientist.
The new case, announced Feb. 28, was genetically identical to the original except for three
minor mutations in the virus. And it contained a key genetic variant that was present only in
two of 59 viral samples from China. This type of circumstantial evidence stops just short of
proving a chain of transmission. It's possible the Washington cluster didn't derive from the
known Patient Zero, but another case that came into Washington the same time and went
undetected. Still, Bedford calculated a 97 percent probability the new case was a direct
descendant -- one that hadn't been spotted because of the narrow testing at that time,
Bedford wrote
in a March 2 post.
"This lack of testing was a critical error and allowed an outbreak in Snohomish County and
surroundings to grow to a sizable problem before it was even detected," he wrote.
... ... ...
All told, 31 Kirkland firefighters -- almost a third of the department -- in
addition to 10 from other communities as well as some relatives have been quarantined, adding
to the stress on emergency teams.
Bedford, the genome expert, is working with University of Washington researchers to
understand the extent of the spread. Last week, the university started using its own virus
test, a modified version of one created by the World Health Organization. When a positive
result is found in a sample, the researchers perform a second round of tests to sequence the
viral genome.
Pavitra Roychoudhury, a university researcher in charge of sequencing, said technicians have
been working late into the night to complete as many samples and sequences as possible. She
puts her toddler to bed and then logs back into her computer.
On a call with reporters on Monday, Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC's National Center
for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, called Bedford's theory "an interesting hypothesis"
but said other possibilities have not been ruled out. "There are alternate explanations of the
same findings," she said. There may have been a "secondary seeding" in the community, she said,
as more recent cases in Washington match viral sequences posted in China.
So far, Bedford has reported, sequencing still suggests the transmission is related to the
original patient -- and the number of active infections could reach 1,100 by March 10 and 2,000
by March 15.
What's more, the state's early cases may have seeded infections now exploding on the
cruise ship Grand Princess off California's coast, he tweeted this week. Researchers from
the University of California at San Francisco have said the viral strain from a patient
infected on the ship is similar to the cluster circulating in Washington state. -- With
assistance by Emma Court and Michelle Fay Cortez
As COVID-19 begins its inevitable "community transmission" phase around the United States,
the purveyors of the conventional wisdom are largely focused on President Trump's (and by
extension,
prayerful Vice President Pence's) incompetence and his self-serving, empathy-free approach
to the coronavirus. And it is true that, as with all things Trump, it seems that all he really
cares about is the stock market and its effect on his reelection bid. But Trump's narcissism
obscures something both far more pernicious and far more permanent than his oft-televised
obsession with himself and that's the fact that he's been busily making Milton Friedman's
"Supply Side/The Bottom Line Is The Only Line" dream an intractable reality.
It was a dream that first took flight when Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980. The dream was
often made manifest by the neoliberal lurch and deregulatory impulses of President Bill
Clinton. But it is Trump who's come closest to fully realizing the dream of ending responsive
government. It should come as no surprise, though. Trump lifted, among other things ,
his " Make America
Great Again " slogan from the Gipper. He's also taken Reagan's anti-FDR pitch about the
dangers of government (see "The Deep State") and, with the help of a motley crew of Tea
Partiers, Evangelicals and corporate Republicans, transformed it into, as Steve Bannon calls
it, a "
War on the Administrative State ."
Since taking office and taking complete control of the news-cycle, Trump has been
systematically starving Federal agencies of resources, personnel and attention. He has, through
the sycophants
and
lobbyists he's installed around the Executive Branch, been pushing out career professionals
and barely replacing them with also-rans. And he is dismantling every aspect of government
he cannot
use to reward his corporate clients or punish political apostates.
The idea is to cripple the Federal government from within instead of doing the hard
legislative work of changing the laws that legally compel government action. As a result, many
of the regulations on the books are becoming
functionally irrelevant . Some laws are being rewritten by the lobbyists who used to lobby
against 'em, but mostly the Executive Branch is being systematically emaciated by the political
equivalent of chronic wasting disease.
It's an approach first pioneered by Reagan devotee Grover Norquist, who advocated "
starving the beast
" of government down to a manageable size before "drowning it" in a bathtub. It's an idea
currently being implemented with wide-ranging effect by Trump, who, like Reagan before
him , is
accelerating the bankrupting of the already debt-laden treasury with a combo of tax cuts
and massive spending on a world-dwarfing defense industry. Eventually, the theory goes, the
"safety net," a.k.a. "entitlements," and other "common good" spending will collapse under the
weight of the financial limitations generated by profuse borrowing to fund market-distorting
tax cuts and to dole out subsidies and tax gifts to cronies and key corporations. All the
while, the ever-less regulated chemical, oil, defense, agricultural and (most importantly of
all) financial industries will continue to hoard assets through the rinsing and repeating of
the supply side boom-and-bust scheme, a.k.a. the business cycle.
Frankly, this all looks like the endgame of a long plan to undo the demand side economy
created by the New Deal. Along with the seemingly (but not) contradictory spike in Unitary
Executive power (which is about protecting rackets, shielding enforcers from prosecution
and about enforcing political compliance), this is a transformation decades in the making and
Trump is the perfect salesman for this final episode even better than Reagan or Clinton because
his "flood the zone" narcissism is the ultimate, 24/7 distraction for a people addicted to
binge watching, inured to scripted reality shows and motivated by belligerent infotainment.
Reagan was the first actor to hit his marks on a stage set for him by the interlocking
forces of Big Oil, Big Defense and Wall Street. Not coincidentally, this same Venn Diagram of
power has profited mightily from Trump's Presidency. Rather than an actor, though, Trump is the
barking emcee of the final season of the American Dream Gameshow a program that was initially
cancelled in 1980, but somehow kept running in syndication on one of the two crappy channels a
"free" people have been given to chose from. But now, the final credits are closer to rolling
that ever before.
As such, Trump is the omega to Reagan's alpha. And any coronavirus-related "incompetence"
you see being reported is a feature, not a bug, of this Re-Great'd America. And that's because
Trump is not an outlier. He is a culmination.
JP Sottile is a freelance journalist, published historian, radio co-host and
documentary filmmaker (The Warning, 2008). His credits include a stint on the Newshour news
desk, C-SPAN, and as newsmagazine producer for ABC affiliate WJLA in Washington. His weekly
show, Inside the Headlines w/ The Newsvandal, co-hosted by James Moore, airs every Friday on
KRUU-FM in Fairfield, Iowa. He blogs under the pseudonym " the Newsvandal ".
"... During the 2019-2020 influenza season, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that 15 million people came down with flu, of whom 140,000 required hospitalisation. 8,200 deaths were recorded. Over a 4-month period, that averages to 2,050 deaths per month. This is in a country with 1/4 of the population of China's. ..."
"... If the White House failed to recognise a major health crisis already simmering on its own doorstep, what hope can be held for when the coronavirus epidemic starts sweeping through the inland US, taking out the elderly, the poor and the homeless? ..."
The White House should not have needed to look very far to China to prepare for a
coronavirus epidemic within the US.
During the 2019-2020 influenza season, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
estimate that 15 million people came down with flu, of whom 140,000 required hospitalisation.
8,200 deaths were recorded. Over a 4-month period, that averages to 2,050 deaths per month.
This is in a country with 1/4 of the population of China's.
If the White House failed to recognise a major health crisis already simmering on its own
doorstep, what hope can be held for when the coronavirus epidemic starts sweeping through
the inland US, taking out the elderly, the poor and the homeless?
"Zis damned military service vill haff to end sometime. I've grown tired of hafing to say
'Yes, sir' to anyone with a higher ranken. I kan barely vait to return to being an anonymous civilian
and being able to zay 'Yes, sir' to any of my superiors..."
Bonvi had a small part as a German officer. The quality of the two movies was uneven, albeit
some ideas and situations (such as the Captain abusing a life-size plush toy with
Karl Marx features -- only
to be assaulted and bitten by it -- or the Pope offering a poisoned wafer to the angelic soldier
who came from heaven to usher in a new age of Peace) are very biting and sarcastic, on par with
the best strips.
On August 16, 2006, Miramax moved forward with plans to create a live-action movie based on Sturmtruppen.
It is not known if a script has been written, or who is slated to direct the movie.
Many writers have addressed the Absurd, each with his or her own interpretation of what the Absurd
is and what comprises its importance. For example,
Sartre recognizes the absurdity
of individual experience, while
Kierkegaard explains
that the absurdity of certain religious truths prevent us from reaching God rationally. Camus regretted
the continued reference to himself as a "philosopher of the absurd". He showed less interest in
the Absurd shortly after publishing Le Mythe de Sisyphe (The Myth of Sisyphus). To
distinguish his ideas, scholars sometimes refer to the Paradox of the Absurd, when referring
to "Camus' Absurd".
His early thoughts appeared in his first collection of essays,
L'Envers
et l'endroit (The Two Sides Of The Coin) in 1937. Absurd themes were expressed with more
sophistication in his second collection of essays, Noces (Nuptials), in 1938. In these
essays Camus reflects on the experience of the Absurd. In 1942 he published the story of a man living
an absurd life as
L'Étranger
(The Stranger). In the same year he released
Le Mythe
de Sisyphe (The Myth of Sisyphus), a literary essay on the Absurd. He also wrote
a play about Caligula, a Roman
Emperor, pursuing an absurd logic. The play was not performed until 1945.
The turning point in Camus' attitude to the Absurd occurs in a collection of four letters to
an anonymous German friend, written between July 1943 and July 1944. The first was published in
the Revue Libre in 1943, the second in the Cahiers de Libération in 1944, and the
third in the newspaper Libertés, in 1945. The four letters were published as Lettres à
un ami allemand (Letters to a German Friend) in 1945, and were included in the collection
Resistance, Rebellion, and Death.
Ideas on the Absurd
In his essays Camus presented the reader with dualisms: happiness and sadness, dark and light,
life and death, etc. His aim was to emphasize the fact that happiness is fleeting and that the human
condition is one of mortality. He did this not to be morbid, but to reflect a greater appreciation
for life and happiness. In Le Mythe, this dualism becomes a paradox: We value our lives and
existence so greatly, but at the same time we know we will eventually die, and ultimately our endeavours
are meaningless.
While we can live with a dualism (I can accept periods of unhappiness, because I know I will
also experience happiness to come), we cannot live with the paradox (I think my life is of
great importance, but I also think it is meaningless).
In Le Mythe, Camus was interested in how we experience the Absurd and how we live with
it. Our life must have meaning for us to value it. If we accept that life has no meaning and therefore
no value, should we kill ourselves?
In Le Mythe, Camus suggests that 'creation of meaning', would entail a logical
leap or a kind of philosophical suicide in order to find psychological comfort. But Camus wants
to know if he can live with what logic and lucidity has uncovered – if one can build a foundation
on what one knows and nothing more. Creation of meaning is not a viable alternative but a logical
leap and an evasion of the problem. He gives examples of how others would seem to make this kind
of leap. The alternative option, namely suicide, would entail another kind of leap, where one attempts
to kill absurdity by destroying one of its terms (the human being). Camus points out, however, that
there is no more meaning in death than there is in life, and that it simply evades the problem yet
again. Camus concludes, that we must instead 'entertain' both death and the absurd, while never
agreeing to its terms.
Meursault, the absurdist hero of L'Étranger, has killed a man and is scheduled to be executed.
Caligula ends up admitting his absurd logic was wrong and is killed by an assassination he has deliberately
brought about. However, while Camus possibly suggests that Caligula's absurd reasoning is wrong,
the play's anti-hero does get the last word, as the author similarly exalts Meursault's final moments.
Camus made a significant contribution to a viewpoint of the Absurd, and always rejected nihilism
as a valid response.
"If nothing had any meaning, you would be right. But there is something that still has a
meaning." Second Letter to a German Friend, December 1943.
Camus' understanding of the Absurd promotes public debate; his various offerings entice us to
think about the Absurd and offer our own contribution. Concepts such as cooperation, joint effort
and solidarity are of key importance to Camus, though they are most likely sources of 'relative'
versus 'absolute' meaning.
Religious beliefs and Absurdism
While writing his thesis on Plotinus and Saint
Augustine of
Hippo, Camus became very strongly influenced by their works, especially that of St. Augustine.
In his work, Confessions (consisting of 13 books), Augustine promotes the idea of a connection
between God and the rest of the world. Camus identified with the idea that
a personal experience could become a reference point for his philosophical and literary writings.
Although he considered himself an
atheist, Camus later came to
tout the idea that the absence of religious belief can simultaneously be accompanied by a longing
for "salvation and meaning". This line of thinking presented an ostensible paradox and became a
major thread in defining the idea of absurdism in Camus' writings.[12]
Opposition to totalitarianism
Throughout his life, Camus spoke out against and actively opposed
totalitarianism
in its many forms.[13] Early on, Camus was active within
the French Resistance to the German occupation of France during World War II, even directing the
famous Resistance journal, Combat. On the French collaboration with
Nazi occupiers he wrote:
Now the only moral value is courage, which is useful here for judging the puppets and chatterboxes
who pretend to speak in the name of the people.[14]
Camus' well-known falling out with Sartre is linked to this opposition to totalitarianism.
Camus detected a reflexive totalitarianism in the
mass politics espoused
by Sartre in the name of radical Marxism. This was apparent in his work
L'Homme Révolté (The Rebel) which not only
was an assault on the Soviet police state, but also questioned the very nature of mass revolutionary
politics.
Camus continued to speak out against the atrocities of the
Soviet Union, a sentiment
captured in his 1957 speech, The Blood of the Hungarians, commemorating the anniversary of the
1956 Hungarian Revolution, an uprising crushed in a bloody assault by the Red Army.
Publisher: Basic Books; First Edition edition (1976)
Magnificent., June 3, 2007 By M. Harris (New Zealand) - See all my reviews
`On the psychology of military incompetence' is officially on the list of books that Army personnel
aren't allowed to read, but since I was given this was a retired general, reading it seemed
like the thing to do. I'm pleased I did.
To be frank, non-military personnel might not admire its sheer brilliant powers of deductive
observation. As soon as I had read it I started to panic as I saw the caricatures played out
around me. I then started to spot them in myself, and began to panic harder. I suspect this
book is designed to give oneself (if you happen to be in the military) a bit of a fright, and
to encourage introspection.
Anyway, it's a brilliant book that's simply chock-full of theories, explanations and uncomfortable
questions. I think the uncomfortable questions are the most valuable, but you have to read for
yourself to discover if you think the same. And you should read it - it should be required reading
for Officer Cadets right up to Generals, and civilians should read it as well - after all, you're
the ones ultimately in charge of us gun-slinging types, yes?
A serious look at a deadly problem, March 19, 2007 By In the Middle of the Road (Connecticut)
For most people, including most of today's amateur theorists on the events of the day, war
is something akin to moving toy soldiers around. What they know of military matters is all too
akin to cheering for a sports team. They want someone with a can do spirit and the willingness
to charge into stiff resistance. Take that hill no matter what the cost. Fight to the death.
A lot of horse manure.
War is a deadly business and there is probably no war in which incompetence was not afoot,
whether in losing or in winning. Mix incompetence and a failure to understand the technology
of war and you have WWI. The reality is that incompetence is as pervasive in the military as
it is in the corporate world. And if we must fight wars, we should have a reasonable expectation
tht the people who direct that effort have some idea of waht they are about. Dixon is concerned
primarily with generalship.
I first read this when it was first published in the UK at least a couple of decades ago.
It filled an important gap in the range of serious reading on both the military and organization
behavior. As another reader notes, this is just organization behavior mil101.Most corporations
are still organizing along military lines and that cuts through titles like team leader and
associate. It is hard business to make it work right and too many
times in the military, there is a failure of competence.
The fields o fhte world are littled with the remains of those who died through bad generals.
Dixon reflects some of his own military experience in the British Army, including WWII, before
he entered the Psychology field. There is a British emphasis, but the approach is generally
and applies broadly to any military. And the examples he cites are among those that are studied
deeply for implications. He covers the field from the intellectual capability of generals to
a chapter that for the sake of review rules must be labeled as Bull droppings.
How do we deal with incompetent leadership? That is one of the questions Dixon
addresses. It probably should be extended to political leaders given their power over warmaking.
In our day, we are assaulted with people who accuse their opponents of micromanaging war
in Iraq. A decade or two from now, it may be somewhere else. But what we began doing in Vietnam
was executive branch micromanaging and that was greatly expanded during the Iraq fiasco to the
point that many left senior ranks. We look closely at our generals, but
can we afford to go to war without understanding the competence
gap that we might have in political leadership..
Irreverent, superbly written, interdisciplinary, enlightenin, September 29, 1998 By A Customer
Dixon is a former artillery officer, Sandhurst graduate, and self-described authoritarian
personality, who left the Army and became a clinical psychologist. He uses both sets of experiences
to analyze why officers in armies throughout history--mostly British, but the principles are
generally applicable--have fallen into a stereotypical pattern of incompetence specific to senior
military leaders. Much of the reason, he believes, derives from personality development, but
the book is refreshingly devoid of psychobabble and is written in an astonishingly clear style.
A real eye-opener, after which military history will not be quite the same to the reader again.
"The direct causes of the nuclear accident were the unpreparedness
of Tokyo
Electric Power…and the government's lack of a sense of responsibility."-Koichi Kitazawa,
lead investigator
A Japanese government sanctioned independent investigation has
revealed gross incompetence in the wake of the March, 2011, nuclear disaster at Fukushima Daiichi.
It also says that Tokyo Electric made the situation worse!
Six investigators interviewed more than 300 people, including Japanese and U.S. government
officials. However, officials at Tokyo Electric refused to co-operate with the investigators!
They have just published their findings, February 28, 2012.
The report calls government response "off the cuff", and "too late" (as I was posting last
year)! The nuclear power plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCo), was ill prepared
for a nuclear disaster, despite decades of telling locals they were prepared (as I posted last
year). The Japanese government, especially the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, failed
to ensure the proper training for nuclear disaster response (as I posted last year). The report
also blames Japan's complicated system of delegating authority and responsibility. No one knew
who was supposed to do what regarding the disaster; from top national government officials down
to sub-contractors working for TEPCo (again, as I posted last year).Things were so bad that
local governments have been taking the initiative to try and deal with things like relocating
residents, and decontamination efforts, with little help from the national government (again,
I posted).
Also, many of the discoveries of radiation contamination came as a result of individuals and
private groups, who took it upon themselves to pay for testing things like dirt, water, and
even food, like beef, sold in grocery stores (again, I). It was local governments who discovered
farm crops to be contaminated (posted last year). The report also says that information coming
from the private sector to government officials was insufficient to make proper decisions. TEPCo
officials simply dragged their feet when it came to dealing with specific issues, like cooling
systems being shut down, and vents not being opened. Not only did TEPCo drag their feet, but
the investigators found that there was a back up cooling system that was functional, but TEPCo
never used it!!! Although Japan's government has a crisis management policy, the investigators
said it is totally useless!
The single payment scheme is not a large grant scheme compared to some government programmes,
but the complexity of the EU Regulations, the complex way in which the Department planned
to implement them in England, combined with the deadlines required to implement the scheme
for 2005, made it a high risk project. By choosing to integrate the scheme into a wider
business change programme, the Agency added to its already considerable challenges.
Many of the Agency's difficulties arose, however, from:
underestimating the scale of the work needed to implement the scheme;
over optimistic progress reporting; and
governance structures which, in practice, proved overly complex, and the absence
of clear metrics, arising from the lack of appropriate management information that would
have allowed the oversight boards to measure progress objectively.
By the end of March 2006 implementation of the single payment scheme had cost
£46.5 million more than the Agency had anticipated in its November 2003 business case. The
implementation of the single payment scheme and the wider business change programme had
cost £258.3 million, will not achieve the level of savings forecast, and there is risk of
substantial costs for disallowance by the European Commission. The farming industry has
also incurred additional costs, 20 per cent of farmers have experienced stress and anxiety
as a result, and five per cent of respondents to our survey said they have considered leaving
farming.
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY
The level of RPA mismanagement can hardly be over-estimated. As a small example, representing
a broader pattern, see this
House of Commons testimony (section EV8), by
Johnston McNeill, former RPA boss,
during an inquiry into the SPS debacle (emphasis added below):
Had we known that there was going to be that [level of claimant and land registration]
volume, we could have looked at the volumes that the system could handle; whereas we could
only look at the normal requirements. When we specified this system in 20034, when we were
talking to Accenture, we had had a lengthy contract procurement and specification.
We were specifying without any understanding of SPS requirements. We were
specifying on our normal business requirements.
Accenture witnesses appeared to have been well schooled in not venturing comment on matters
which they deemed were beyond their contractual observations. This attitude denied the Committee
an important perspective on the way the SPS project was being run from the standpoint of
a company at the heart of the venture. We regard this as an unacceptable attitude
from a company of international repute and which may still aspire to work with
UK government in other areas.
As has been widely acknowledged by numerous commentators and experts, significant IT
enabled business change programmes can be difficult to manage. There have
been many examples of problem projects in the public and private sectors in recent years
with difficulties attributed to poorly defined requirements, changing business needs and
lack of business involvement and preparedness that can lead to delivery difficulties.
recovers high value overpayments to farmers (such as those over £25,000) as soon
as practicable;
brings its key offline databases into the single payment scheme IT system to make
its forecasts more accurate and reliable;
in the event that the European Union makes policy changes to the scheme, explores
whether its existing IT systems would be able to accommodate such changes without the
need for major redesign of the application. If the system is unlikely to be able to
accommodate such changes, the Agency should notify its Management Board and the Department
of the risks accordingly and update farmers once a revised timetable can be defined;
draws on the good practices we identified from the IT systems supporting the German
model of the single payment scheme on how to keep claimants informed about the progress
of their claims, and the online processes already available to German farmers to transfer
entitlements; and
learns lessons from implementation of this IT system, to take account of best practice.
In particular, the Agency should:
use appropriate off the shelf rather than bespoke software whenever practicable,
after considering business needs and scheme complexity, because bespoke software
is costly to develop, needs to be thoroughly tested, and takes more time to implement;
avoid offline systems, on which the main IT system depends;
align the system to business needs, rather than the business to the system needs,
applying caution to any significant movement away from tried and trusted business
methods to accommodate the IT system; and
ensure the system specifications retain a realistic level of flexibility to
cope with future changes.
MY ANALYSIS
The National Audit Office recommendations listed above illustrate the extent to which basic
IT best practices were not followed. Consider this as well:
RPA developed custom software, rather than use off-the-shelf products. What was Accenture's
role in this decision? It's precisely the kind of issue I addressed in a blog post called
Consulting's dirty
little secret, which explained how consulting companies can gain financial benefit when
a project becomes larger and more complex than expected.
RPA created databases in which data was stored in computers disconnected from the main
system, despite the fact the main system depended on that data to function properly. Such
issues force questions around who designed this system, from both technical and business
perspectives, and how experienced these folks actually were.
In general, the entire situation represents poor planning and project management
taken to new heights of incompetence. Despite complexities in aligning UK practices with
EU policies, both RPA and Accenture designed and executed a system based on poor practices,
lack of experience, and world-class levels of bad planning.
IMPACT ON VICTIMS
This situation is different from many government IT failures, where money is wasted but innocent
victims don't suffer personal injury. In this case, delayed and incorrect payments have directly
affected farmers depending on subsidies to maintain their operations. In the
words of Roger Williams, Liberal Democrat from Wales:
Farmers have found it difficult to accommodate problems with cash flow. Mention has been
made of paying bills, but at the end of this week interest payments will be due on most
accounts. That money will be taken out of the farmers' accounts. They will not have to make
a conscious decision about it; the money will be removed from their accounts. That may take
them above the level that they have agreed with their banks, and they will suffer the financial
consequences-not just additional interest, but the other costs involved.
"I deeply regret that we in the RPA and I as chief executive were not able to make
payments to farmers in the targeted timetable". He said he was "saddened by the consequences".
Unfortunately, apologies coming from a man who earned
£250,000 per
year (about US$500,000), while inflicting such damage on his constituency, leave only a
bereft and hollow sound.
DILBERT MEANS BUSINESS. The (anti-)hero of one of the most successful comic strips of
our time is an icon for office workers everywhere - the only character property that speaks
to business through multiple media outlets including the daily comic-strip, an award-winning
web site and a best-selling publishing program.
Anybody who works in an office or deals with bureaucracy relates to Dilbert's plight. Created
by Scott Adams, Dilbert addresses issues ranging from office-envy/challenges to new technology
- and the mayhem they produce. Dilbert features a rich cast of characters, including
his sidekick Dogbert, his inept Boss, and his co-workers Wally and Alice. Primary target group
for the property is adults 18-49 years old - affluent, educated and technology savvy.
The
Dilbert daily comic strip appears in 2.000 newspapers in 65 countries worldwide in
25 different languages. More than 20 million Dilbert books and calendars have been sold
in North America alone; several titles cumulatively spending over one year on The New York
Times Best Seller List. The Dilbert Principle is categorically the best selling business
book of all time.
Dilbert was also the first syndicated comic strip character to officially
go online, and the strip was the first to contain its creator's e-mail address. The award-winning
web site The Dilbert Zone attracts millions of visitors each month. A Dilbert television
series premiered in 1999, with Scott Adams and Larry Charles (Mad About You, Seinfeld)
as executive producers.
Working as a computer engineer, Scott Adams started drawing Dilbert doodles to "enliven
boring staff meetings". The character soon became so popular that other people at the company
started using the character in their presentations. A "name-the-nerd" contest soon followed,
and Dilbert was the obvious winner. After a few years, a contract was made with United
Media, and Dilbert - "a composite of my co-workers during the years", Adams says - went
from doodles to dailies.
Since then, Scott Adams has been awarded several prestigious prizes, including the National
Cartoonist Society's Reuben Award for Outstanding Cartoonist of the Year and Best Newspaper
Comic Strip (1997); Prix d'Excellence for Dogbert's Top Secret Management Handbook from
the Maxim Business Club, Paris (1998), and the prize for Best International Comic Strip at the
International Comic-Salon, Erlangen, Germany (1998).
Says Emmy Award winning Larry Charles, writer/producer of the Dilbert TV series: "Dilbert
is a big Kafkaesque story of a little, logical man in a big, illogical world". In an environment
where all bosses and many co-workers are heartless and stupid parasites, Dilbert stands
out as the engineer with an active imagination and a His true love? Technology. Dilbert loves
technology for the sake of technology; In fact, he loves technology more than people – he'd
rather surf the Internet than Waikiki.
Dilbert's dog Dogbert is no man's best friend. His not-so secret ambition is to conquer the
world and enslave all humans - whom he feels have been placed on this earth to amuse him. Dig
deep enough below his fur, and you'll find a cynical, arrogant conniving
little mutt with his paw on the pulse of the absurdity of corporate culture.
Gilbert on Dilbert How Not To Succeed In Business & Life
Years ago in Cleveland I saw the musical "How To Succeed in Business Without Really Trying,"
mail clerk J. Pierpont Finch's hilarious romp up the corporate ladder. I remember using that
experience as a take-off point for a sermon on business ethics - with the president and vice-president
of the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce in the congregation. I was young and foolhardy then. Now
I am old and foolhardy -- as once again I attempt to enter a world
in which I have had little experience, but about which I have many opinions.
Cartoonist Scott Adams in his strip Dilbert has updated "how to succeed" and created
a primer on how not to succeed in business and in life. The Dilbert Principle is that "the most
ineffective people are moved to the place where they can do the least amount of damage: management."
In Gilbert on Dilbert I suggest instead the Gilbert Principle
- that our most important real life task is management - the management of meaning in our lives.
I am convinced that good cartoonists, as few others, have their pulse on the Zeitgeist -
the spirit of the times.
Scott Adams' cartoon critique of management has become the talk of the town. Dilbert's boss
comes in for most abuse. For example, Adams parodies a management
buzz word, reengineering, about which the boss says, "Everybody's doing it. We'd better jump
under the bandwagon before the train leaves the station." Mixed metaphors are always dangerous.
Have you ever written a mission statement? Been there, done that. In another strip he satirizes
the omnipresent mission statement, which he defines as "a long awkward
sentence that demonstrates management's inability to think clearly."
The Boss says, "I took a crack at writing a 'mission statement' for our group.
'We enhance stockholder value through strategic business initiatives by empowered
employees working new team paradigms.'"
Dilbert: "Do you ever just marvel at the fact we get paid to do this?"
The Boss: "Did anybody bring donuts?"
One of Adams' E-mail correspondents demonstrated the observation that Dilbert is more
documentary than satire. "My boss actually said to me 'Let's bubble back up to the surface and
smell the numbers.' I had no idea what it meant." As Adams says, "No matter how absurd I try
to make the comic strip, I can't stay ahead of what people are experiencing in the workplace."
Though he was fired from his job in corporate America, Adams personally thinks that
corporate downsizing often does make the workplace more efficient
- fewer workers means less time to waste on idiotic pursuits like vision statements, meetings
and reorganizations - he nonetheless makes that phenomenon the target of many of his barbs.
One strip begins with a boss announcing he will be using humor to ease tensions caused by
trimming the work force.
'I've decided to use humor in the workplace. Experts say humor eases tension which is important
in times when the workforce is being trimmed. "Knock, knock," says the boss.
"Who's there?" asks a hapless worker.
"Not you anymore," responds the grinning boss.
But Adams' cynicism about human nature does not stop with the boss. Co-workers also seem
to be caught up in this absurd work culture. A group of workers gather around another's desk.
One says,
"We're sorry to hear you're getting laid off, Bruce. We calculated that if ten of your
friends here took ten percent pay cuts, then the company can keep you."
Bruce: "Gosh! You'd do that for me?"
"No, we're here to look at your office furniture."
What is the gospel according to Dilbert? There are times when Scott Adams becomes
a prophet, skewering perceived injustice, mocking dehumanizing practices that are too close
to reality for comfort. He writes about a familiar corporate mantra:
"'Employees are our most valuable asset.' On the surface this statement seems to be at
odds with the fact that companies are treating their "most valuable assets" the same way a leaf
blower treats leaves. How can this apparent contradiction be explained?"
He treats this issue in a cartoon in which the boss admits he was mistaken that "employees
are our most valuable asset." Actually, he explains, "they're ninth." "Eighth place?" someone
asks. "Carbon paper," says the boss.
After a particular "downsizing" there were unused work cubicles which the company decided
to hire Dogbert Construction to retrofit them and rent them out to the state as a prison.
Dilbert: "I don't think it's fair to put convicts in our spare cubicles."
Dogbert: "Don't be such a bigot. These people have made one little mistake. Otherwise,
they're just like employees."
Dilbert: "I think there are a few differences."
Dogbert: "Yeah, their health care is better."
How are we to assess Adams? Is he prophet or embittered employee getting back at his former
bosses? I think Adams is no prophet but a social critic. He has a totally cynical view of human
nature. His characters are not suffering from paranoia, people are out to get them --
from the boss to the stockholders to their fellow-workers. These characters are totally self-interested,
with no discernible trace of altruism.
One reporter asked him, "Are you as cynical as you seem?" "Yes. I don't think what I'm doing
is based on rage, but I'm terribly amused by the absurd.
The absurdity stands out more in a business setting because there's an expectation that people
will act rationally. But people aren't rational."
Whether or not Dilbert is true to life, it is close enough that millions of people
read it daily. In one survey of workers indicate that 87% say their workplace is a "pleasant
environment," but Adams responds, "If you're in an absurd situation and you're not changing
it, then you define it as being OK."
And it is true that more than 70% of workers report stress on the job, suggesting that there
may well be a kind of suppressed rage in America's workplaces. Dilbert's problem is that he
is totally dehumanized by his work environment. Certainly my conversations with many of you
indicate that working isn't what it used to be - that work has become an ordeal - that it is
robbing people not only of their time, but also of their human dignity.
For such people Dilbert is a pleasant catharsis. But Adams has been roundly criticized by
more radical cartoonists as being "on the side of the ruling class," betraying "millions of
insecure and beleaguered office workers" who consider him their champion. It is "not very radical
commentary to say 'Boy, aren't bosses dumb.' There's no analysis, even in a goofy way, of why
bosses act the way they do.
It's 'Boy is my boss dumb,' but not 'Boy, is this huge company stupid for doing this merger
and laying off half its employees and devastating the local economy and shipping the jobs to
Mexico or Indonesia.' Criticizing stupid bosses without putting them in context is like complaining
because it gets dark at night without understanding that the earth revolves around the sun.
It's a really limited view. It doesn't go anywhere. It's just a safety valve."
I confess I am somewhat suspicious of Adams' credentials as the prophet of the workplace.
I withhold that status from anyone who in critiquing the corporation has become one, anyone
who proudly admits he has always wanted "to make as much money as I could....If you can write
on it, if it will hold a label, it's a prime target for licensing. You can't get to overexposure
without getting to filthy rich first."
What is disturbing in Dilbert is the relative equanimity with which the office workers
accept their plight. Passivity is their chief character trait. They seem to be automatons who
do not so much live in, as simply respond to, their environment.
One wonders if painting this humorous picture of their ineptitude, their shallowness of life,
their willingness to go along with absurdity, is a step on the way to ending the insanity. Or
does it simply help them deal with it by laughing at it?
After all, CEO's and management consultants post the cartoons on their office bulletin boards
- how penetrating can this critique be if the targets simply divert the satirical arrows with
a laugh? Adams says they always think he's pointing the finger at somebody else. Does Dilbert
merely co-opt workers who ought to be struggling to humanize their work environment instead
of making the best of their dehumanization?
Adams seems to be ambivalent on his role. On the one hand he defends himself by saying "anything
which can be mocked will not last...." but who is to say it won't last? And, on the other, he
says, "My goal is not to change the world. My goal is to make a few bucks and hope you laugh
in the process." He is hoisted on the petard of his own cynicism.
What is going to stop our thoughtless, dangerous, headlong dash into the 21st century in
which work once more becomes drudgery - albeit a high tech one - a drudgery which increasingly
consumes our lives.
In the mid-1990's the Apple Macintosh development team wore T shirts proclaiming "90 hours
a week and loving it!" Is that the kind of brave new world we want? We seem caught up in a momentum
about which many of us complain, but about which we seem to be able to do little or nothing.
We accept the new oppression with nary a critical word - so fearful are we for our jobs.
Now the cartoonist, of course, is not really supposed to be a social revolutionary, but is
Adams helping sustain a workplace environment which so often saps the human spirit by merely
encouraging us to laugh at it?
Or is he launching a long-overdue conversation about the place of work in human life? Is
Adams helping or hindering our headlong dash into the brave new world where we live faster and
faster, with more and more, for less and less meaning?
In 1987 social critic Jeremy Rifkin uttered these prophetic words:
"We have quickened the pace of life only to become less patient. We have become more
organized but less spontaneous, less joyful. We are better prepared to act on the future
but less able to enjoy the present and reflect on the past."
Is that to be the culmination of our evolution as spiritual creatures? That our work will
suck the life force from us, as it did for Scott Adams. Are you happy in your work? Does it
add meaning to your life? If so, good. If not, what are you, what can you, do about it?
The Dilbert solution of supine acquiescence in absurdity is a spiritually fatal position.
It is a study in how not to succeed in the business of life. Adams offers us no hope. The Gilbert
principle is that we need to manage the meaning of our lives in the workplace - for it is there,
increasingly, that humanity's fate is being decided. It would not be not enough for me to endure
the absurdity of the workplace, to find a humorous "haven in a heartless world." It is our task
to make that world less heartless.
Sources:
Business Week, 5/27/96, 46. U.S. News and World Report, 4/22/96, 77. Fortune, 5/13/96, pp. 99-110. Newsweek, 8/12/96, pp. 52-57. Windows, 5/95, reprinted in Utne Reader, 7-8/95, 88-9. Salon - on line USA Weekend, 7/26-28/96, 10, and 3/21-23/97, 18. Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, 2/23/97, 1E.
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
8
Anthony Fauci is shown testifying in a US Senate hearing in September. © Reuters 18 Follow RT on
Anthony Fauci used his last Friday night before the election to give an interview to the Washington Post in which he praised Joe Biden's attitude toward the Covid-19 pandemic and criticized President Donald Trump's.
Jordan Schachtel @JordanSchachtel · 19h Fauci has complete breakdown, resorts to crying to the media. Notice his little rant (loaded with extreme amounts of professional jealousy) has zero evidence, data, etc. A little character assassination attempt by the tiny totalitarian. Quote Tweet
Maggie Haberman @maggieNYT · 21h "I have real problems with that guy," Fauci said of Atlas. "He's a smart guy who's talking about things that I believe he doesn't have any real insight or knowledge or experience in...when you dissect it out and parse it out, it doesn't make any sense." https:// washingtonpost.com/politics/fauci -covid-winter-forecast/2020/10/31/e3970eb0-1b8b-11eb-bb35-2dcfdab0a345_story.html 18
© Evan Vucci, AP Images President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House.
ilsm said...
It is worth noting that prior to the conduct of the Surgisphere study, Dr. Fauci stated categorically that the use of HCQ had not been studied in relation to the coronavirus. "No proven drug": "Not Enough Known" . Nonsensical and false statements.
Lancet: the article was retracted
3 hours ago (Edited) Just sayen
Ms No, 4 hours ago Listen to this medical chick that saved millions from the EU and their swine flu vaccine that caused brain damage. They tried to have her "psychiatrized" which means locked away as crazy and probably tortured for the rest of her miserable life, being banged with blood draw needles, forced meds and put in a straight jacket. Close to Assange treatment.
5 hours ago Why is the video doctored right at the end to make Fauci say a damning sentence. You can see his head jerk to new positions as they piece together bits of video.
![Donald Trump wearing a suit and tie: President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House.]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"80","h":"53","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17jamr.img?h=746&w=1119&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=2395&y=851"},"dpi":1.4,"size3column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"42","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17jamr.img?h=584&w=874&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=2395&y=851"},"size2column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"42","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17jamr.img?h=584&w=874&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=2395&y=851"}})
© Evan Vucci, AP Images President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the
White House.
Bernie
Sanders: An Emergency Response to the
Democrats
join with Trump in bipartisan push for
US nursing home catastrophe: Increasing numbers of
'Immediate danger': Half of world's workforce could
Coronavirus pandemic is 'ACCELERATING,'
The
Decade
