Decentralization and direct action win again. They knew what they needed and they did it, telling the feds and the dumb bitch governor of South Dakota to go fuck themselves in the process. The money quote:
“Having no faith in the American system has saved us,” Bald Eagle said. “If we had put our faith in the American system we would be like the Navajo now.”
It seems like the sensible thing to do would have been to simply quarantine vulnerable populations, and providing them with massive amounts of assistance, rather than shutting the entire world down.
Krystal and Saagar give an update on coronavirus case numbers, watch CNBC Squawk Box anchors spar on-air over coronavirus death toll.
My best guess is that virtually everything in this is probably correct.
By Nexus X Humectress
The following is a thought experiment imagining what the most effective response could have been, keeping in mind that the infection rate is determined by the intensity of exposure to virus particles times the duration of exposure. I think these tactics could have greatly reduced the incidence if they began doing this on February 1st.
By Jennifer Medina and Robert Gebeloff
New York Times
The staggering American death toll from the coronavirus, now approaching 100,000, has touched every part of the country, but the losses have been especially acute along its coasts, in its major cities, across the industrial Midwest, and in New York City.
The devastation, in other words, has been disproportionately felt in blue America, which helps explain why people on opposing sides of a partisan divide that has intensified in the past two decades are thinking about the virus differently. It is not just that Democrats and Republicans disagree on how to reopen businesses, schools, and the country as a whole. Beyond perception, beyond ideology, there are starkly different realities for red and blue America right now.
Democrats are far more likely to live in counties where the virus has ravaged the community, while Republicans are more likely to live in counties that have been relatively unscathed by the illness, though they are paying an economic price. Counties won by President Trump in 2016 have reported just 27 percent of the virus infections and 21 percent of the deaths — even though 45 percent of Americans live in these communities, a New York Times analysis has found.
By Tim Stickings
- A JP Morgan study suggests lockdown measures have not only resulted in economic devastation but could have also resulted in more COVID-19 deaths
- Strict stay-at-home orders put in place in most states to stop the spread two months ago has so far seen nearly 39 million American lose their jobs
- There are now more than 1.6 million infections in the US and over 95,000 deaths
- The JP Morgan report says that restarting the US economy may not lead to a second surge in infections that health experts have feared
- Report says infection rates have been falling seen since lockdown measures were lifted in parts of the country
- Alabama, Wisconsin and Colorado are among those that saw lower infection rates (R rates) after lockdown measures were lifted, according to the report
- The R rate is the average number of people who will become infected by one person with the virus
- Here’s how to help people impacted by Covid-19
Coronavirus lockdowns have ‘destroyed millions of livelihoods’ but failed to alter the course of the pandemic given many US states have seen lower infection rates after easing restrictions, a JP Morgan study has claimed.
The statistical analysis has raised questions about the effectiveness of the lockdowns put in place across much of the United States two months ago to stop the spread of COVID-19.
It suggests that the lockdown measures have not only resulted in economic devastation but could have also resulted in more COVID-19 deaths.
The strict stay-at-home measures put in place by the governors of most states in mid-March has so far seen nearly 39 million American lose their jobs and forced businesses to close.
According to the most recent CDC data, roughly 1 in 3 people who become infected with COVID-19 are asymptomatic. Of people who display symptoms, about 0.4% (about 1 in 250) will die. For people over age 65, 1.3% (about 1 in 77) will die.
By Armand Azad
The CDC also says its “best estimate” is that 0.4% of people who show symptoms and have Covid-19 will die, and the agency estimates that 40% of coronavirus transmission is occurring before people feel sick.
The agency cautions that those numbers are subject to change as more is learned about Covid-19, and it warns that the information is intended for planning purposes. Still, the agency says its estimates are based on real data collected by the agency before April 29.
The numbers are part of five planning scenarios that “are being used by mathematical modelers throughout the federal government,” according to the CDC. Four of those scenarios represent “the lower and upper bounds of disease severity and viral transmissibility.”
The fifth scenario is the CDC’s “current best estimate about viral transmission and disease severity in the United States.” In that scenario, the agency described its estimate that 0.4% of people who feel sick with Covid-19 will die.
For people age 65 and older, the CDC puts that number at 1.3%. For people 49 and under, the agency estimated that 0.05% of symptomatic people will die.
One thing that Marxist-Leninist fundamentalist Jason Unruhe regrettably ignores in this commentary is that Christian evangelicals tend to be disproportionately concentrated among the poor and working-class (including both whites and minorities) and are therefore the people most likely to be in “essential jobs” and less able to practice social distancing. Even if they are not in service industries like healthcare, grocery stores, and superstores, they are often workers who still regularly visit public restrooms, gas stations, convenience stores, etc. during the course of the workday, or who are still exposed to co-workers in warehouses or delivery centers, rather than simply working in their living room from a laptop. Also, a lot of poor households have less physical space but more people living there. Yes, a lot of clerics are hucksters, but tighten your supposed class consciousness, Jason.
The problem with David’s analysis in this is that he seems fairly subjective and one-dimensional in his criticisms of “conspiracy theories.” The fact that the last three years of cable news (excluding FOX) was devoted to Russiagate hysteria shows that liberals and the Left are just as prone to hysterical conspiracy theories as anyone from the far-Right.
The big question about COVID-19 is what do we actually know about it based on demonstrable medical and scientific facts, discovered through legitimate empirical processes and subject to revision upon the receipt of new information, as opposed to mere speculation, abstract theorizing, inferences based on incomplete information, correlation/causation arguments, or ideologically-driven assumptions?
By Dr. Lissa Rankin, MD
A few days ago on Facebook, I made a casual comment questioning part of the dominant narrative (that the anti-viral remdesivir is indeed worthy of Dr. Fauci’s optimism and a lightning speed rush to FDA approval.) A physician and medical director challenged me, saying he was concerned I was dismissive of science and worried I might influence people in ways that would make them turn away from science. I welcomed his challenge and asked for his email so I could get him to peer review something I was writing about remdesivir. He peer reviewed what I wrote and wrote a cogent response, which he also ran by some of his trusted medical sources. I was grateful for his scientific engagement and for the opportunity to have a respectful discussion. However, I noticed as I read his response to what I had written that his response was based on assumptions I was questioning (assuming that Covid-19 tests or Covid-19 death rates are accurate, for example).
According to this new study, while about 1 in 1000 people who get the ordinary flu actually die, with COVID-19 it’s about 1.2 per 100 of symptomatic cases. So COVID-19 is roughly 10 times more deadly than the conventional flu.
Knowing the infection fatality rate (IFR) of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 infections is essential for the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Using data through April 20, 2020, we fit a statistical model to COVID-19 case fatality rates over time at the US county level to estimate the COVID-19 IFR among symptomatic cases (IFR-S) as time goes to infinity. The IFR-S in the US was estimated to be 1.3% (95% central credible interval: 0.6% to 2.1%). County-specific rates varied from 0.5% to 3.6%. The overall IFR for COVID-19 should be lower when we account for cases that remain and recover without symptoms. When used with other estimating approaches, our model and our estimates can help disease and policy modelers to obtain more accurate predictions for the epidemiology of the disease and the impact of alternative policy levers to contain this pandemic. The model could also be used with future epidemics to get an early sense of the magnitude of symptomatic infection at the population-level before more direct estimates are available. Substantial variation across patient demographics likely exists and should be the focus of future studies.
When different tribes create their own realities.
By Luke Conway
Although both groups live in the same country, conservatives and liberals in the U.S. do not seem to be experiencing the same COVID-19 pandemic. Liberals are very concerned about the disease; conservatives are comparatively apathetic.
This fact is puzzling because a long history of research in social psychology suggests that conservatives ought to be more worried than liberals about threatening diseases. Indeed, decades of research ties conservatism to threat sensitivity more broadly, and meta-analyses of dozens of studies reveal that conservatism is higher in societies with greater levels of disease threat.
Kim is rapidly becoming one of the very best commentators on the Left.
It makes sense that the poorest and most disadvantaged people in society would have the highest COVID-19 rates. The pandemic is a class issue.
Krystal and Saagar give an update on coronavirus case numbers in the U.S. at 1,336,700, and 79,552 deaths; Navajo Nation experiences outbreak at rates 10 times higher per capita than Arizona, two White House staff members test positive, and some officials fear the disease is already spreading rapidly through the West Wing.
By Tom Woods
How about that:
Locking down a whole society has negative consequences.
Benjamin Miller of the Well Being Trust in Oakland, California, is co-author of a study that seeks to determine how many “deaths of despair” (from drug or alcohol abuse or suicide) will occur as a result of the pandemic.
Their estimate: about 75,000.
To be sure, some of this has to do with anxiety about the virus itself, but according to the study it’s also related (obviously) to the unprecedented shutdown, extremely high unemployment, and months-long social isolation with (in many places) no clear end point.
Pakman is right that the coronavirus shutdowns are exacerbating the Red/Blue rural-suburban-urban divide, and that other countries have often been even stricter than the US.
Ivanka Trump’s personal assistant is among the latest at the White House to test positive for the coronavirus. Vice President Pence’s press secretary, Katie Miller, tested positive this week, as well as a White House valet. The White House insists it is taking precautions, but President Trump was not seen wearing a mask at a ceremony for WWII veterans. This comes as whistleblower Rick Bright spoke out on “60 Minutes” after being removed from his job for what he says was “putting science over politics.” Nikole Killion looks at the exclusive interview.