Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 311: Ye says Nay

(+) Yeah! (+)

Now now, guys.

Do we know FOR SURE that Belgium doesn't have a population containing a sizable chunk of dumbasses who don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves and think being asked to wear a mask or self isolate is an affront to their personal freedoms? I mean, that's why the U.S. is fucking struggling to deal with a disease that most of the rest of the world is handling decently...so maybe that's what happened with Belgium too.

---

So I've been seeing a lot of fear-mongering on Twitter about the fact that Trump appears to have (partially) cut the CDC out of reporting COVID data. Have people been able to figure out how justified this is?

It obviously makes for a bad headline, but the CDC themselves seem to be saying that the motion makes sense. And the particulars that I've found seem to suggest that this is a legitimate attempt to increase the efficiency of the nation's healthcare response, and would not even be effective at surpressing broader information on virus spread from the public if that were the goal:

However, if hospitals are already directly reporting to state health departments, they can get a written release from the state to keep doing that. The information includes bed occupancy, staffing levels, the severity level of coronavirus patients, ventilators on hand, and supplies of masks, gowns, and other personal protective equipment. The CDC will continue to collect other data, like information about cases and deaths, from state health departments.

Quote from this news article: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/coronavirus-data-funneled-cdc-sparking-worries-71805842

Does anyone who is more informed on what this change actually does have a different understanding than mine?
---

And yet, they still have the virus under control. While we don't.

Belgium, New York, and Sweden all have the virus "under control." How did they do it? What's the commonality among those three places? It isn't lockdown policy. It isn't mask policy. It isn't isolation from the rest of the world. It isn't track and trace. It isn't population density.

No, they all got it "under control" by allowing it to circulate and infect pretty much the entire segment of the population that it would infect. The only real difference in terms of driving the deaths per million count is how effective you are at keeping it out of nursing homes. If you do a really good job of that, you look like the average to good EU countries with deaths per million in the 100-200 range. If you do a really bad job of that you look like the Northeastern US with deaths per million of over 1000. If you do a decent/average job, you probably end up in the 300-600 range which is right where you encounter the US, UK, France, Italy, Brazil, etc.

In any case, Texas and Florida and everywhere else in the US, (the places where there never was a first wave and virus spread was minimal to non-existent back in March when they locked down just because New York did it and they figured that meant they had to too) are on the verge of achieving that as well. Whether it technically counts as "herd immunity" in the scientific sense isn't a debate I care to have, but it seems pretty obvious that this general pattern is the same just about everywhere (with a few minor exceptions such as isolationist islands, totalitarian regimes, and third-world countries that probably aren't testing or counting deaths at all). The virus circulates, outside of nursing homes, it kills whoever it is going to kill, then it's done and it fades away. The only reason the US ex-Northeast is spiking now is because it didn't spike when the Northeast did. But there was never any realistic hope that we could avoid that same spike. It's not practical for US states to isolate themselves indefinitely the way that New Zealand or Hong Kong or Ireland can. (Except where it is! Hawaii and Alaska should be taken as proof that geographic circumstances matter a hell of a lot more than "political leadership" or "masks" or whatever other obviously false boogeyman is the latest trend in media hysteria).

---

Herd immunity doesn't really apply anyway since you can get it more than once

---

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/politics/russia-cyberattack-covid-vaccine-research/index.html

---

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/15/politics/tate-reeves-mississippi-coronavirus-herd-immunity/index.html

A little math from a Republican Governor and Economics major about why the people advocating for herd immunity are fucking morons.

---

smuffin is really going with "some people are going to die to the virus so we should just kill them quickly and get on with it," huh

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

smuffin is really going with "some people are going to die to the virus so we should just kill them quickly and get on with it," huh

He doesn't know anybody with the virus, so it clearly doesn't exist.

---

FFDragon posted...

Herd immunity doesn't really apply anyway since you can get it more than once

OK then we're fucked anyway and the solution is to re-engineer society to be in "lockdown mode" literally forever or just to move on and accept that we now have a new virus with a 0.1% fatality rate among us and that sucks but nothing can be done.

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

smuffin is really going with "some people are going to die to the virus so we should just kill them quickly and get on with it," huh

I mean that was literally Andrew Cuomo's policy to deal with the disease in New York.

---

SmartMuffin have you ever considered not talking about things you don't know about?

Deaths aren't the only bottom line here, a lot of people who have gotten this are going to have a lot of issues going forward. Your New York attacks are just meaningless. They got hit hardest because there was a fundamental lack of understanding about it early, but since then they have done a good job.

---

Using just the fatality rate is a bit disingenuous considering even if you survive you can be left with permanent organ and/or brain damage.

---

They got hit hardest because there was a fundamental lack of understanding about it early, but since then they have done a good job.

Why does the shape of Sweden's curve look approximately similar to that of New Yorks?

---

FFDragon posted...

Using just the fatality rate is a bit disingenuous considering even if you survive you can be left with permanent organ and/or brain damage.

But what does that have to do with anything I just said?

Even if that's true, it doesn't change the fact that pretty much every non-isolated non-totalitarian place who has "dealt with the disease" has done so by allowing it to spread, peak, and then fall off of its own natural accord.

Like, what specific intervention do you think New York implemented that caused cases/hospilizations/deaths/whatever else to dramatically fall? And how do you explain all kinds of places that didn't implement that specific intervention to also see cases/hospitalizations/deaths/whatever else dramatically fall?

The point is that the "shape of the curve" is about the same everywhere (with exceptions for extreme isolationism and strict totalitarianism). The peak is higher or lower based entirely on success of keeping it out of the nursing homes. Which strongly suggests all of your precious interventions are just bunk, just noise.

---

pyresword posted...

So I've been seeing a lot of fear-mongering on Twitter about the fact that Trump appears to have (partially) cut the CDC out of reporting COVID data. Have people been able to figure out how justified this is?

It obviously makes for a bad headline, but the CDC themselves seem to be saying that the motion makes sense. And the particulars that I've found seem to suggest that this is a legitimate attempt to increase the efficiency of the nation's healthcare response, and would not even be effective at surpressing broader information on virus spread from the public if that were the goal:

Quote from this news article: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/coronavirus-data-funneled-cdc-sparking-worries-71805842

Does anyone who is more informed on what this change actually does have a different understanding than mine?

I think that one of the biggest offenses from this is that data that was previously publicly available is now removed or inaccessible. It's also dystopian because if you'll recall early on in this disaster, an independent researcher began identifying cases around Seattle even as official sources refused to acknowledge those cases, iirc.

I can accept that there might be benefits going forward - if we didn't already have years of proof of this administration lying to protect themselves.

Finally, I saw that the data would now be handled by a private company that "won" a no contest bid from the hhs and has links to the trump family. So yeah, can't say i have any faith in anything that will come out of it!

---

The thing is that based on the information I have now, even if the administration lies by fabricating the data they now control, it will hardly do anything to protect them. And there are obvious benefits to this data being better streamlined. (And also I have read that this change now requires 100% of hospitals to report this data, which was not the case before, though I suppose this also could have been done without switching the reporting destination probably.)

This could easily be because the information I have now is wrong, but this is what my current understanding is at any rate.
---

pyresword posted...

So I've been seeing a lot of fear-mongering on Twitter about the fact that Trump appears to have (partially) cut the CDC out of reporting COVID data. Have people been able to figure out how justified this is?

It obviously makes for a bad headline, but the CDC themselves seem to be saying that the motion makes sense. And the particulars that I've found seem to suggest that this is a legitimate attempt to increase the efficiency of the nation's healthcare response, and would not even be effective at surpressing broader information on virus spread from the public if that were the goal:

Quote from this news article: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/coronavirus-data-funneled-cdc-sparking-worries-71805842

Does anyone who is more informed on what this change actually does have a different understanding than mine?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/trump-cdc-coronavirus.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/15/coronavirus-trump-administration-data-change/

Apologies for multiple links but the NYT and WaPo articles compliment each other pretty well in trying to get a picture of this because while they generally touch on the same areas they provide different information that can be put together.

WaPo reports that hospitals, particularly smaller ones, are concerned about having to have their staff learn how to use the new system in the middle of a pandemic. NYT in describing the system seems to portray it as a step back in that the new system is rather antiquated in its approach to data management.

Furthermore, putting the data in the hands of HHS directly and a private contractor would make it much easier to politicize which I think we can all agree is a reasonable concern with this administration. 4 former CDC directors wrote a public op-ed criticizing this very decision.

The article you linked even notes that the administration has been putting pressure on hospitals to use their system here in the form of "incentives" (as it existed previously alongside the CDC's collection and reporting to the states), saying that when they were seeing how to distribute treatments like remdesivir they sometimes used whether a hospital was using their system as a factor. So even if they're preserving the "report through the states" method that's uh... heavy-handed seems like a severe understatement in a literal life-or-death matter like distribution of treatments.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transparency-questions-hospitals-directed-report-covid-data-hhs/story?id=71803141

Another ABC News article notes that while it's said the CDC will retain the info, it's unclear whether that information will be made available outside the government (i.e. it's possible the CDC may well still have it all but only internally and it may not be available to the public/researchers/etc.) which would obviously be... very bad.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/07/15/trump-administration-orders-hospitals-not-send-covid-19-data-cdc/5441730002/

And indeed, just yesterday the CDC's COVID-19 data abruptly disappeared from public view and the CDC confirmed the disappearance was a consequence of the switch. Now, as of this morning, when news agencies started requesting comment from HHS on this, they said they'd instruct CDC to put it back up but that's not exactly a promising sign about the intent here.

---

pyresword posted...

The thing is that based on the information I have now, even if the administration lies by fabricating the data they now control, it will hardly do anything to protect them. And there are obvious benefits to this data being better streamlined. (And also I have read that this change now requires 100% of hospitals to report this data, which was not the case before, though I suppose this also could have been done without switching the reporting destination probably.)

This could easily be because the information I have now is wrong, but this is what my current understanding is at any rate.

I've seen agreement (indeed it's noted in some of those articles I linked) that the existing system could have done with some streamlining and centralization but reporting continuously shows health experts from hospital staff up to former CDC directors/Surgeon Generals being skeptical of this attempt to do so which makes it come off more as the administration's public shield in justifying it rather than an actual good faith improvement of the system.

---

As a Florida man, it's pretty laughable that anyone believes their numbers on deaths are even remotely accurate.

This is the same state that said all nonessential businesses are closed, got big fat check from Linda McMahon and said "oh wrestling is an essential business".

---

As a Florida man, it's pretty laughable that anyone believes their numbers on deaths are even remotely accurate.

I agree. There's lots of evidence to suggest that their case counts are wildly exaggerated and are not nearly as high as are being reported.

---

Yes if you're a crackpot.

For us in the real world there's major evidence it's been horribly undercounted.

---

First Corrik now Smuffin, you people.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

but since then they have done a good job.

I dispute that part, but carry on.

---

One thing I will say that is a bit hard to process is that, people want people to accept numbers and guidance from authorities when the numbers are what they want. But, they also want people to not believe numbers when they also want to assert things are actually the way they want also.

(Yadda yadda it's worse than you say there are deaths not being counted. Omg you are an idiot if you think they are simply adding deaths).

Like, the idea that things aren't true when it's your way but are true when it isn't your way is weird.

Be consistent. If you think the numbers don't tell the actual story, then stop using the numbers to argue your points elsewise against others.

---

Corrik posted this earlier, but since a lot of you have him ignored:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/politics/russia-cyberattack-covid-vaccine-research/index.html

Beyond disgusting. By the way, Red Sox, since youve asked why Russia isnt our friend, heres yet another example!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Corrik posted this earlier, but since a lot of you have him ignored:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/politics/russia-cyberattack-covid-vaccine-research/index.html

Beyond disgusting. By the way, Red Sox, since youve asked why Russia isnt our friend, heres yet another example!

Assuming this is real and not bad intel such as the claim that Iraq had WMDs, this is exactly why we should strive to be friends with Russia. If we were their friends, maybe they wouldn't try to hack us.

---

I thought we WERE friends with russia now that Trump is president.

North Korea too.

We have so many new friends and they are all such good friends who don't hack us and threaten to blow us up.

Pretty soon you're going to be sick of how many friends we have and how much like winning it feels.

---

I mean, what damage are these Russians doing, even allegedly? Maybe they just want the information on how to make a vaccine so they don't end up having to pay extortion-level prices to buy it from us.

---

red sox 777 posted...

this is exactly why we should strive to be friends with Russia

red sox 777 posted...

what damage are these Russians doing, even allegedly?

10 minutes apart. Is that a new record?

Apparently cyber crime is not real crime. And who knows what the purpose of the infiltration was, but is that the point?

And since our intelligence is saying "yeah we're confident it was Russian groups that have been previously linked with Russian intillgence"
And Russian Intellgence has said "nah, that wasn't us".
I wonder who our president will believe?

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

10 minutes apart. Is that a new record?

Apparently cyber crime is not real crime. And who knows what the purpose of the infiltration was, but is that the point?

And since our intelligence is saying "yeah we're confident it was Russian groups that have been previously linked with Russian intillgence"
And Russian Intellgence has said "nah, that wasn't us".
I wonder who our president will believe?

It does matter. If they are trying to stop our biotech companies from succeeding in getting a vaccine - obviously that's bad. If they are trying to "steal" a vaccine that can save a lot of lives in Russia - is that bad? I mean you know we also spy on our allies all the time right? If they just want vaccine tech, then sure, hacking isn't the nicest way of getting it and breaks our laws but it's a fairly small thing in the grand scheme of things.

---

Didn't Vietnam get way ahead of COVID by hacking the Chinese and revealing that they were covering it up?

---

https://www.facebook.com/5978057725/posts/10158390579672726/?d=n

In which the official Libertarian Party comes out as anti-racist and people get mad.

---

soon to branch off into the new Smuffin Party

---

The supposed thing I heard about the Redskins article is wild. Looking for a source now. Like legit insane.

---

I've seen multiple people hyping up this Redskins thing, whatever it is. Unless the organization has been sacrificing children to Cthulhu, I doubt it'll be THAT incendiary.

---

What I heard was... I haven't seen a source so it might be fake is...

Snyder was paying refs.
Snyder forced cheerleaders to pose nude for photos.
Snyder had sex parties and had cheerleaders giving sexual favors to suite owners.
Jay Gruden was very involved.
Jay Gruden and Bibbs were sleeping with the same woman and when Gruden found out he bunched Bibbs.
Bibbs purposely missed a block because he was pissed about it and Alex Smith broke his leg due to it.
Cheerleaders are filing sexual assault charges against Snyder.

Etc etc.

Might be fake facebook shit though. I dunno.

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/sports/football/washington-sexual-assault-harassment-dan-snyder.html

https://blacksportsonline.com/2020/07/rumors-jay-gruden-allegedly-benched-ex-redskins-rb-kapri-bibbs-because-they-were-sleeping-with-same-receptionist-that-led-to-alex-smith-almost-having-his-leg-amputated/

---

SmartMuffin posted...

What's your explanation for why the US has about half of the deaths per million as Belgium does? Is their political leadership 2x worse than Trump?

the belgium numbers are wrong

we've been over this before

---

the belgium numbers are wrong

You have no evidence that the US numbers are any better. If everyone knows the Belgium numbers are uniquely wrong, compared to everywhere else, then why don't they fix or revise them?

---

SCOTUS still finding time to deliver horrible rulings.

Remember how Florida voters passed a state constitutional amendment to allow felons who had served their sentence to have their voting rights reinstated? And then how the Florida GOP slapped a poll tax on it by tossing on an additional requirement that they pay all fees as well? Well, an injunction had been in place to allow them to vote while the legality of the GOP poll tax matter was decided in the courts. The Appeals Court wiped out the injunction and they went to SCOTUS to ask to put it back in place and...

SCOTUS decided to go "Nah, put that poll tax back in place while we wait."

Sotomayor (joined by RBG and Kagan) called out SCOTUS's pattern of consistently siding with making voting more difficult and called out the hypocrisy that they had overruled federal court level decisions intended to make voting safer in the pandemic because it was "too close to the election" but here? Apparently no problem to just throw this wrench into Florida's election right now in her dissent.

Now, by the time the matter is decided it'll likely be too late for voters in Florida to register for the general.

---

I don't know if "wrong" is the right word.

Isn't it just that they count even the most lightly suspected (but not confirmed) deaths as being COVID related causing inflated numbers? It's difficult to compare across countries when there isn't a standardized metric for "counting" cases.

---

SmartMuffin posted...

You have no evidence that the US numbers are any better.

true. but neither do you.

if we have no evidence that the numbers are correct, how can you make claims like "masks and lockdowns are not the answer"?

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I don't know if "wrong" is the right word.

Isn't it just that they count even the most lightly suspected (but not confirmed) deaths as being COVID related causing inflated numbers? It's difficult to compare across countries when there isn't a standardized metric for "counting" cases.

Uhhh, if anything the exact opposite is happening here.

For example, Texas and Florida both have something like 5x as many (supposedly non-Covid) pneumonia deaths from Feb-May this year than in a normal year according to CDC data

https://twitter.com/Buckleup36/status/1277023213118279680?s=20

Reg posted...

Uhhh, if anything the exact opposite is happening here.

For example, Texas and Florida both have something like 5x as many (supposedly non-Covid) pneumonia deaths from Feb-May this year than in a normal year according to CDC data

https://twitter.com/Buckleup36/status/1277023213118279680?s=20

And New York added probables, as did PA, and other states.

Which is what Belgium did. And then we have countries that didn't count at home or nursing home deaths at all.

So the numbers are just clusterfucks all around.

Why we are saying Belgium deaths are overeported (while not even looking at excess deaths) and are acting like New York are reported as is (when they also add probables) is just inconsistent talking points by Lasa.

---

Kemp upping the ante in being a piece of shit:

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1283893669624451073?s=21

---

Kemp is a worthless human being.

---

xp1337 posted...

Now, by the time the matter is decided it'll likely be too late for voters in Florida to register for the general.

Oh, it's even better than that. Some of them have already registered to vote, but if it turns out they haven't paid their fines then it would be a felony for them to do so. And there is no way for anyone affected by this to find out whether they have outstanding fines (or how much they owe or even who they need to pay).
---

Xeybozn posted...

Oh, it's even better than that. Some of them have already registered to vote, but if it turns out they haven't paid their fines then it would be a felony for them to do so. And there is no way for anyone affected by this to find out whether they have outstanding fines (or how much they owe or even who they need to pay).

How would you not be able to find out if you owe fines and how much?

---

Xeybozn posted...

Oh, it's even better than that. Some of them have already registered to vote, but if it turns out they haven't paid their fines then it would be a felony for them to do so. And there is no way for anyone affected by this to find out whether they have outstanding fines (or how much they owe or even who they need to pay).

jfc

---

Corrik7 posted...

How would you not be able to find out if you owe fines and how much?

Sometimes it can be complicated with interest calculations and all. It shouldn't be but sometimes it ends up being so with missing paperwork, slow clerks, etc.

---