CR: COVID-19 --Political Talk

[Pig Bellmont 8746]

46 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Whatever happened to Putin's vaccine?

It’s being administered first to frontline medical professionals and military if I remember right from the articles. 

[Degenerate Gardner 4104]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Whatever happened to Putin's vaccine?

Unfortunately Navalny seems to have had an adverse reaction to it.

Edited August 25, 2020 by Degenerate Gardner

[RomaVicta 30072]

11 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Maybe resident doctors can chime in, I thought some doctors working in hospitals worked on a bonus structure that included some type of percentage of generated revenue?

I could totally be wrong.

Side note - I haven't, nor am I trying to imply doctors are actually falsely doing this (they can certainly assume COVID with any symptom until they rule it out and still qualify), all I've provided is that there is a financial incentive for a hospital to have a patient marked COVID.

You're arguing by surmise and outright guess. You throw in a sly just asking questions framework, too. 

You take a report or fact then you plant it into the heavily fertilized soil of your common sense where it grows into a deeply rooted belief. It's a weed. Abandon it. Kill it with actual evidence.

Embracing it is dishohesty. 

You came here to repeat a tired talking point that has been thoroughly refuted. 

[RomaVicta 30072]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 

I think we're done here. Q-anon. Trump cult. Kardashians. Open carry assault rifles. Anti-science. Maps for D'Iraq. Fear. Hate. Ugh.

 

 

[MonkeyDoughnut 10439]

27 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

You're arguing by surmise and outright guess. You throw in a sly just asking questions framework, too. 

You take a report or fact then you plant it into the heavily fertilized soil of your common sense where it grows into a deeply rooted belief. It's a weed. Abandon it. Kill it with actual evidence.

Embracing it is dishohesty. 

You came here to repeat a tired talking point that has been thoroughly refuted. 

I not arguing anything other than there is a clear, factual, documented, financial incentive tied to COVID tagging.

 

CDC Director Redfield discussing just this on July31st:

“I think it is less operable in the cause of death although I won’t say there are not some cases,” he said. “I do think, though, when it comes to hospital reimbursement issues for individuals that get discharged, there could be some play in that for sure.”

[GRHorn 105]

Siap 

 

[Brisketexan 105569]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Siap 

 

Didja read the WSJ piece?  Did you really?  What does it recommend as the steps to go forward that will allow for avoiding further lockdowns?

Because I absolutely agree with those, and think that we should take those steps.  But I see a couple of problems.  See if you can spot them.

[TXSG8R 3362]

6 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

They why is there concern already that the majority of the disbursed money has gone to hospitals with majority private insurance patients?

Your theory doesn't match the documents and statements that HHS has put out. 

Please...please get off the train here that anyone is implying this is a money making racket. Far from it, but it is an expense reducing outlet.

Adding link since I know you like them:

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/distribution-of-cares-act-funding-among-hospitals/

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/press-release/hospitals-with-more-private-insurance-revenue-larger-operating-margins-and-less-uncompensated-care-received-more-federal-coronavirus-relief-funding-than-others/

You're conflating relief funding with per-patient reimbursement.  That's why your links are referencing funds per bed, not per patient.  They don't have to treat a single COVID patient to be eligible for relief funding due to lost revenue from closing down stuff like elective surgeries.  

Quote

More than $127 billion for the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including, among other things, $100 billion to reimburse hospitals and other health care entities responding to coronavirus for health care-related expenses or lost revenues attributable to coronavirus. It also includes $275 million for Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) coronavirus-related activities through certain programs, including $90 million for the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program.

 

[TXSG8R 3362]

1 hour ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I not arguing anything other than there is a clear, factual, documented, financial incentive tied to COVID tagging.

 

CDC Director Redfield discussing just this on July31st:

“I think it is less operable in the cause of death although I won’t say there are not some cases,” he said. “I do think, though, when it comes to hospital reimbursement issues for individuals that get discharged, there could be some play in that for sure.”

Again, you cant just tag a patient as positive and get money.  You would have to show a treatment record to be eligible for the reimbursement bonus.  The only real area a hospital could presumably fudge would be for someone that comes in for some respiratory distress and they tag it as COVID treatment instead (important to note again, the reimbursement is for hospitalization treatment, not an ER visit where you throw a scrip at a guy and send him on his way).  A guy cant come in for a broken arm, get tagged for COVID, and the hospital get reimbursed for treating his broken arm.  Like many have stated, the risk really outweighs the rewards.  A hospital isn't going to risk its license over $40k. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

2 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I not arguing anything other than there is a clear, factual, documented, financial incentive tied to COVID tagging.

 

CDC Director Redfield discussing just this on July31st:

“I think it is less operable in the cause of death although I won’t say there are not some cases,” he said. “I do think, though, when it comes to hospital reimbursement issues for individuals that get discharged, there could be some play in that for sure.”

The problem with your argument and many other arguments in this day in age of google.  A uneducated or non-expert in the field finds one piece of information or fact and argues with that against people that are educated or experts in said field that have MOUNTAINS of evidence that conclude something differently entirely. But you don't care, you search google for your version of the facts, and snippets of testimony, or opinions on data sets and try to argue against the professional. There are many flaws in this method. First off, you don't understand the data in which you reference and thus the professional has to explain it to you with their wealth of knowledge on the subject, citing articles and studies, etc, but it's a waist of time because....upon receiving this contradictory information, you either ignore it or go find another snippet of truth to fight against the entire mountain of evidence of the other side. 

It's tiring for everyone involved and most people give up trying to convince the flat-earther the earth isn't flat even after they've sailed them around the world. 

 

[Sawbonz 27777]

2 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I not arguing anything other than there is a clear, factual, documented, financial incentive tied to COVID tagging.

 

CDC Director Redfield discussing just this on July31st:

“I think it is less operable in the cause of death although I won’t say there are not some cases,” he said. “I do think, though, when it comes to hospital reimbursement issues for individuals that get discharged, there could be some play in that for sure.”

Link the whole quote please

[Francisco 2.0 32432]

The FDA's twitter recently became a lot more involved, so to speak.

 

Here's the culprit:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2020 by Francisco 2.0

[softlynow 1848]

12 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Link the whole quote please

That quote is in the second video below:

 

[MonkeyDoughnut 10439]

46 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

The problem with your argument and many other arguments in this day in age of google.  A uneducated or non-expert in the field finds one piece of information or fact and argues with that against people that are educated or experts in said field that have MOUNTAINS of evidence that conclude something differently entirely. But you don't care, you search google for your version of the facts, and snippets of testimony, or opinions on data sets and try to argue against the professional. There are many flaws in this method. First off, you don't understand the data in which you reference and thus the professional has to explain it to you with their wealth of knowledge on the subject, citing articles and studies, etc, but it's a waist of time because....upon receiving this contradictory information, you either ignore it or go find another snippet of truth to fight against the entire mountain of evidence of the other side. 

It's tiring for everyone involved and most people give up trying to convince the flat-earther the earth isn't flat even after they've sailed them around the world. 

 

I can't disagree with most of this... EXCEPT.... there are a shit ton of round Earthers that won't give up.

I didn't think posting a link to a HHS.gov document that outlines their reimbursement policy would put me "on a side" other than "here it is". There is no MOUNTAIN of evidence needed to refute as I'm not trying to suggest anything other than that financial incentive is there and does not require any illegal, immoral or false behavior to claim. I'm going to leave the written policy to speak for itself and accept many like yourself don't think there is financial incentive to make sure you code as COVID if at all possible.

[Sawbonz 27777]

31 minutes ago, softlynow said:

That quote is in the second video below:

 

Looks like he acknowledges it could happen then goes on to point out all cases where cause of death is tagged as covid are reviewed at the national level. He goes on to state tagging patients who are discharged “could” be an issue as they are not reviewed at the national level. 
 

As the physicians are the ones who assign the diagnoses, not hospital administrators, I just don’t see how you are going to get them to play ball in that scenario, given the high risk involved without opportunity to collect any of the funds

[Bama Chick 28596]

I can't disagree with most of this... EXCEPT.... there are a shit ton of round Earthers that won't give up.
I didn't think posting a link to a HHS.gov document that outlines their reimbursement policy would put me "on a side" other than "here it is". There is no MOUNTAIN of evidence needed to refute as I'm not trying to suggest anything other than that financial incentive is there and does not require any illegal, immoral or false behavior to claim. I'm going to leave the written policy to speak for itself and accept many like yourself don't think there is financial incentive to make sure you code as COVID if at all possible.

Jesus.

The problem is YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE ‘WRITTEN POLICY’.

And as such you are misrepresenting how that policy is actually being utilized out here in the real world.

You want to be right more than you want to learn.

[TXSG8R 3362]

1 hour ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I can't disagree with most of this... EXCEPT.... there are a shit ton of round Earthers that won't give up.

I didn't think posting a link to a HHS.gov document that outlines their reimbursement policy would put me "on a side" other than "here it is". There is no MOUNTAIN of evidence needed to refute as I'm not trying to suggest anything other than that financial incentive is there and does not require any illegal, immoral or false behavior to claim. I'm going to leave the written policy to speak for itself and accept many like yourself don't think there is financial incentive to make sure you code as COVID if at all possible.

All you did was reinforce his point.  You fail to understand the difference between relief funding (the links you cited) and per-patient medicare bonus reimbursement (what Jensen was using as an alternative rationale for the COVID case spike as opposed to, you know, a real pandemic that some people were willingly blind to).  Its a 20% premium paid on hospitalization treatment (aka in-patient) of medicare patients.  This isn't a blanket payment for every patient that walks into a hospital and tests positive.  It also directly contradicts your links because primary private insurance hospitals would get less money from the bonus reimbursement because their patients don't qualify for the medicare bonus reimbursement.  Read that again and really think on it before replying.  

You're also wrong that its not illegal, immoral, or false behavior to make a COVID claim if that medicare (hoping the bold will help this point sink in) patient wasn't treated in a hospital for COVID to get that bonus payment.  Its outright fraud.  

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verify/verify-are-hospitals-gouging-medicare-to-treat-covid-19-patients/507-a08a1e94-baae-48c4-9ff1-4bbf4854ee08

Quote

“COVID-19 may be new, but inappropriate billing to boost profit is a very old story,” she said. Data analyses, done when claims are submitted, detect “upcoding” and unusual billing patterns, she said.

Hospitals also file an annual Medicare Cost Report, which is examined by Medicare auditors, whose work then faces an additional review.

Tipsters to the OIG fraud hotline also spark audits. And whistleblowers have an incentive to report fraud; they can receive 10% of recovered funds.

When suspicions arise, Medicare and OIG investigators swoop in for a harder look at the numbers. “If a Medicare provider inaccurately bills for services provided based on a beneficiary’s diagnosis, then CMS can recoup the payment and/or the provider can be disenrolled from the Medicare program,” a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokesman said.

Violators risk prison time. Depending on the circumstances, the punishment for defrauding Medicare ranges from five to 30 years, the Department of Justice says.

You want individual incentives?  Please explain how coding to give a hospital some extra scratch outweighs the personal incentive to get 10% of a whistleblower payment or avoid a prison sentence.  

[Nivek 17036]

24 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Jesus.

The problem is YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE ‘WRITTEN POLICY’.

And as such you are misrepresenting how that policy is actually being utilized out here in the real world.

You want to be right more than you want to learn.

can't you feel his truth though?

[softlynow 1848]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

Looks like he acknowledges it could happen then goes on to point out all cases where cause of death is tagged as covid are reviewed at the national level. He goes on to state tagging patients who are discharged “could” be an issue as they are not reviewed at the national level. 
 

As the physicians are the ones who assign the diagnoses, not hospital administrators, I just don’t see how you are going to get them to play ball in that scenario, given the high risk involved without opportunity to collect any of the funds

I agree. I didn't post it before, but if you cut an post the quote above into google, it shows up a total of 1 time. How many times do things show up in a google search with one hit? It was The Christian Post. Not sure there's anything special about that, just the lack of other coverage. It seems that Redfield acknowledged what anyone would in his shoes, that money is a possible motivator for fraud. Not that he thought it was happening to any significant degree.

[bolverk 29809]

2 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Jesus.

The problem is YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE ‘WRITTEN POLICY’.

And as such you are misrepresenting how that policy is actually being utilized out here in the real world.

You want to be right more than you want to learn.

He's hanging on to his argument and not letting go like a monkey with a doughnut.

[Brisketexan 105569]

1 hour ago, softlynow said:

I agree. I didn't post it before, but if you cut an post the quote above into google, it shows up a total of 1 time. How many times do things show up in a google search with one hit? It was The Christian Post. Not sure there's anything special about that, just the lack of other coverage. It seems that Redfield acknowledged what anyone would in his shoes, that money is a possible motivator for fraud. Not that he thought it was happening to any significant degree.

I mean, this is the silly part.  Monkey seems to be trumpeting the amazing truths that 1) money is a motivator, and 2) if you lie, you could make more money......and then "just asking questions" about whether it is happening.

You DO understand, of course, that literally ALL medical coding/reimbursement, for everything, is subject to the same truisms.  A facility could lie about the person admitted for a broken leg, and bill it out as a much higher-paying treatment.  I mean, if they want more money, all they have to do is lie, and money is a great motivator, therefore.....therefore what?  What's your fucking point?

What's also fascinating is that he ignores the counter-motivation -- CMS will pop your ass silly if you defraud them.  And further, if a facility had a practice of doing so, an individual could make bank by whistleblowing it.  

God, this whole discussion is so mind-numbingly stupid, it's really the perfect 2020 "debate."

[MonkeyDoughnut 10439]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I mean, this is the silly part.  Monkey seems to be trumpeting the amazing truths that 1) money is a motivator, and 2) if you lie, you could make more money......and then "just asking questions" about whether it is happening.

You DO understand, of course, that literally ALL medical coding/reimbursement, for everything, is subject to the same truisms.  A facility could lie about the person admitted for a broken leg, and bill it out as a much higher-paying treatment.  I mean, if they want more money, all they have to do is lie, and money is a great motivator, therefore.....therefore what?  What's your fucking point?

What's also fascinating is that he ignores the counter-motivation -- CMS will pop your ass silly if you defraud them.  And further, if a facility had a practice of doing so, an individual could make bank by whistleblowing it.  

God, this whole discussion is so mind-numbingly stupid, it's really the perfect 2020 "debate."

Agree with every point, especially the last and I probably should have stopped multiple replies ago.... probably should stop now... but being that its the Politics board... no matter how many times I said otherwise its been implied I thought hospitals or doctors were fudging numbers or inflating cases. I've not made such clams, nor do I believe it to be so.

Your medical coding truism might help explain though:

There is a financial incentive for hospitals to make sure they code (actual, real, non fraudulent) presumptive COVID or COVID positive cases correctly.

The financial incentive is real, the links I gave provided the policy, dollars and breakdowns. That's it.  Ok... I'll try and stop now...even I don't care at this point...

 

[Brisketexan 105569]

1 minute ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

There is a financial incentive for hospitals to make sure they code (actual, real, non fraudulent) presumptive COVID or COVID positive cases correctly.

There's a financial incentive for hospitals to code all real claims correctly.  

That's one of the most meaningless -- accurate, but meaningless -- statements ever.

So what was your point in stating it?  We're not stupid.  You tried to argue by implication, based on incomplete information, and you got pantsed.  It happens.  Learn from it.

[Pig Bellmont 8746]

Hey look a troll has managed to distract from our lack of national response, failure to provide adequate testing to aid reopening, and 175,000+ dead Americans- mostly because the President pushed states to open before they could contain the virus. 
 

Biden has said he’d issue a national mask mandate on Day 1. The simplest thing for Trump to take away that talking point and show seriousness about the virus is to issue the mask mandate himself. But he’s an incompetent idiot who intends to wish the virus away instead of doing even the most basic common sense bullshit. 

[softlynow 1848]

13 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Hey look a troll has managed to distract from our lack of national response, failure to provide adequate testing to aid reopening, and 175,000+ dead Americans- mostly because the President pushed states to open before they could contain the virus. 
 

Biden has said he’d issue a national mask mandate on Day 1. The simplest thing for Trump to take away that talking point and show seriousness about the virus is to issue the mask mandate himself. But he’s an incompetent idiot who intends to wish the virus away instead of doing even the most basic common sense bullshit. 

And by Troll you mean Trumpist Intellectual. It was said in another thread that the GOP should replace the elephant for the troll face as it’s logo. It’s all they even pretend to offer as cover for all the gritting and the rape of our political traditions and norms. 

[David Dennison 19117]

 

Edited August 26, 2020 by David Dennison
Sorry. Already posted.

[Guest Lobo]

I'm sure Clorox loves being the fucking repeated stock photo for these kinds of stories.  "You fucking assholes realize we're only 30% of the fucking marketplace goddamnit!  And actually, we're only 26% of the bleach-related fatalities...so there cocksuckers.  The fucking diamond shaped logo is intended to look like a trucking hazmat symbol, what the fuck?!?!?!?"  

Edited August 26, 2020 by Lobo

[Jhawkmvp 1507]

 

12 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

It’s being administered first to frontline medical professionals and military if I remember right from the articles. 

And Filipinos. Duterte volunteered the Philippines to be guinea pigs for it starting in October.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Jhawkmvp

[Bama Chick 28596]

Agree with every point, especially the last and I probably should have stopped multiple replies ago.... probably should stop now... but being that its the Politics board... no matter how many times I said otherwise its been implied I thought hospitals or doctors were fudging numbers or inflating cases. I've not made such clams, nor do I believe it to be so.
Your medical coding truism might help explain though:
There is a financial incentive for hospitals to make sure they code (actual, real, non fraudulent) presumptive COVID or COVID positive cases correctly.
The financial incentive is real, the links I gave provided the policy, dollars and breakdowns. That's it.  Ok... I'll try and stop now...even I don't care at this point...
 

Oh my god.

Again, there is no “financial incentive” for coding a Covid patient.

As I pointed out yesterday, reimbursement for Covid care is based on historical data of comparable costs of treatments for similar respiratory conditions. Reimbursements for Covid patients requiring ventilation is based on historical data of the average cost of patients who require ventilation regardless of cause.

The extra CARES money is designed to help hospitals cover the costs of uninsured Covid patients and to cover the extra expenses hospitals are facing for needing unprecedented amounts of PPE and extra clinical staffing.

Calling it an “incentive” is a weasely way to imply a greedy motive and to make people think hospitals get some benefit from having more Covid patients.

Let me let you in on a secret - hospitals have a “financial incentive” to code all patients with any illness correctly because if they don’t it could be fraudulent. But the main reason is THEY DON’T GET PAID AT ALL.

CMS and private insurance companies don’t just use the honor system.

“Oh look, General Hospital claims they did 500 hip replacements last month. Go ahead and cut them a big fat check! No need to look at the charts and records and documentation and verify their claims! We trust them!”

I hope your physician knows the ICD-10 code for “Died on a hill of stubborn ignorance” so your family isn’t stuck with a hospital bill your insurance refuses to pay.

[jimmyjazz 46470]

5 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

As I pointed out yesterday, reimbursement for Covid care is based on historical data of comparable costs of treatments for similar respiratory conditions. Reimbursements for Covid patients requiring ventilation is based on historical data of the average cost of patients who require ventilation regardless of cause.

Wait . . . hospitals are reimbursed proportional to cost of treatment, not the name of the underlying disease?  You're gonna blow MonkeyDoughnut's mind.

[MC Fresh Breath 4074]

Nearly 9,000 Florida Children Diagnosed With Coronavirus in Two Weeks as Schools Reopen


https://www.newsweek.com/nearly-9000-florida-children-diagnosed-coronavirus-two-weeks-schools-reopen-1527587

[MC Fresh Breath 4074]

And on the political side:


WASHINGTON (AP) — Forty lobbyists with ties to President Donald Trump helped clients secure more than $10 billion in federal coronavirus aid, among them five former administration officials whose work potentially violates Trump’s own ethics policy, according to a report.

The lobbyists identified Monday by the watchdog group Public Citizen either worked in the Trump executive branch, served on his campaign, were part of the committee that raised money for inaugural festivities or were part of his presidential transition. Many are donors to Trump’s campaigns, and some are prolific fundraisers for his reelection.


https://apnews.com/2edf8670a491a702ecfb7312f507f83a

[WhatTheBuck 28825]

15 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

And on the political side:


WASHINGTON (AP) — Forty lobbyists with ties to President Donald Trump helped clients secure more than $10 billion in federal coronavirus aid, among them five former administration officials whose work potentially violates Trump’s own ethics policy, according to a report.

The lobbyists identified Monday by the watchdog group Public Citizen either worked in the Trump executive branch, served on his campaign, were part of the committee that raised money for inaugural festivities or were part of his presidential transition. Many are donors to Trump’s campaigns, and some are prolific fundraisers for his reelection.


https://apnews.com/2edf8670a491a702ecfb7312f507f83a

"Trump's own ethics policy."

Like that's a thing. 

[Mdhorn 6093]

14 hours ago, David Dennison said:

 

I see absolutely no problem with this.  If anything, they should probably drink this in addition to Hydroxychloroquine for best results.  We may have an answer to Trump's voter suppression.  Just need to get his followers to take his medical advice.  

Edited August 26, 2020 by Mdhorn

[Anastasis 23498]

I think it likely that a good bit of the bleach "ingestion" is result of people using bleach inappropriately for disinfectant purposes, greater access to children, etc. rather than people chugging from the bottle. At least that is my hope, that people are not that fucking stupid.   

[Gap03 3345]

3 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

I see absolutely no problem with this.  If anything, they should probably drink this in addition to Hydroxychloroquine for best results.  We may have an answer to Trump's voter suppression.  Just need to get his followers to take his medical advice.  

DOn'T FoRGeT tHe ZInC!1!

[Captainant 27970]

19 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

At least that is my hope, that people are not that fucking stupid.   

bro, have you been paying attention?

[Gap03 3345]

The WH takeover of the CDC seems to be nearing completion.  The CDC is now indicating that asymptomatic people that have been in contact with COVID-infected people need not get tested - a position that seems right out of Trump's "we need to stop testing so much so that we can get the numbers down" playbook.  When coupled with the GOP pressure to get kids back into school no matter what, it's becoming increasingly clear that we're going to get hit hard in the fall.  While they may have some luck in suppressing case numbers in the short term, people are going to start showing up in the hospitals at some point before the election.  They really are some incredibly short-sighted, stupid fucks.

 

 

[Anastasis 23498]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

bro, have you been paying attention?

A little more color to the types of the reports, older from April.  I would really like to see a systematic review of the types of cases being taken on instead of tweets. 

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/coronavirus-covid19-poison-control-bleach-cdc-hand-sanitizer

 

The health authority found that calls about exposures to chemicals and disinfectants increased by 20 per cent from 2019 to 2020, with children five years old or younger making up the majority of the victims.

The report gave two case examples. One was an adult woman who heard on the news that people should clean all recently purchased groceries before eating. The woman then filled her sink with a mixture of 10 per cent bleach solution, vinegar and hot water to soak her produce.

“While cleaning her other groceries, she noted a noxious smell described as ‘chlorine’ in her kitchen. She developed difficulty breathing, coughing, and wheezing, and called 911,” the report stated. She was taken to the hospital in an ambulance, where it was determined she had low oxygen in the blood and wheezing. She was discharged hours later.

In the second case, a preschool-aged girl was found unresponsive at home after she consumed an unknown amount of ethanol-based hand sanitizer. Her family said she became dizzy after ingesting the sanitizer, fell and hit her head. While on the way to the emergency, she threw up and was poorly responsive. Her blood alcohol level was more than three times the limit set for driving. The girl recovered after staying in intensive care overnight and went home after two days.

 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5138]

22 minutes ago, Gap03 said:

The WH takeover of the CDC seems to be nearing completion.  The CDC is now indicating that asymptomatic people that have been in contact with COVID-infected people need not get tested - a position that seems right out of Trump's "we need to stop testing so much so that we can get the numbers down" playbook.  When coupled with the GOP pressure to get kids back into school no matter what, it's becoming increasingly clear that we're going to get hit hard in the fall.  While they may have some luck in suppressing case numbers in the short term, people are going to start showing up in the hospitals at some point before the election.  They really are some incredibly short-sighted, stupid fucks.

 

 

Sadly, until January at the earliest, I don't disagree with this approach.  If I'm asymptomatic, what's the point of me getting tested if my positive test is going to have absolutely no bearing on anything?  We aren't doing contact tracing, we aren't enforcing lockdowns for positive cases, we aren't doing anything at all. A test for an asymptomatic is just wasted money until we are actually committed to doing something about positive test results.

[jimmyjazz 46470]

2 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Sadly, until January at the earliest, I don't disagree with this approach.  If I'm asymptomatic, what's the point of me getting tested if my positive test is going to have absolutely no bearing on anything?  We aren't doing contact tracing, we aren't enforcing lockdowns for positive cases, we aren't doing anything at all. A test for an asymptomatic is just wasted money until we are actually committed to doing something about positive test results.

Well, I don't know about you, but if I thought I had been exposed, gone in for testing while asymptomatic, and received a positive result, I personally would notify anyone I had been in contact with, which most obviously includes my immediate family in my household (5 people besides myself).  It doesn't take government policy for some good to come out of testing.

[Gap03 3345]

18 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Sadly, until January at the earliest, I don't disagree with this approach.  If I'm asymptomatic, what's the point of me getting tested if my positive test is going to have absolutely no bearing on anything?  We aren't doing contact tracing, we aren't enforcing lockdowns for positive cases, we aren't doing anything at all. A test for an asymptomatic is just wasted money until we are actually committed to doing something about positive test results.

I understand this pragmatic view point, especially if test results are still taking a week to turn around.  My problem is that people may interpret this shift in guidance as, "Hey, I'm not really a risk to anyone if I don't have symptoms" and head into the office in the fall, even though they should be quarantining.  If they're going to go down this path, they should at least reiterate that people should quarantine if they've been in close contact with someone that has tested positive and acknowledge why the position has changed (i.e., by the time you wait a week to test + a week for results, you'll either be symptomatic or non-contagious by the time you get the results).  Of course, that would involve admitting that our testing regime is shitty, and they'll never do that, so here we are.

[cactusflinthead 27615]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

"Trump's own ethics policy."

Like that's a thing. 

That's the second good laugh I've had today. Thank you. 

[pyrohornIII 4838]

16 hours ago, Lobo said:

I'm sure Clorox loves being the fucking repeated stock photo for these kinds of stories.  "You fucking assholes realize we're only 30% of the fucking marketplace goddamnit!  And actually, we're only 26% of the bleach-related fatalities...so there cocksuckers.  The fucking diamond shaped logo is intended to look like a trucking hazmat symbol, what the fuck?!?!?!?"  

Clorox worked hard to get that brand name recognition.   Funny how making yourself the leading brand through marketing can turn around on you.    

I think Trump is going to learn the same lesson soon.

1 hour ago, Gap03 said:

The WH takeover of the CDC seems to be nearing completion.  The CDC is now indicating that asymptomatic people that have been in contact with COVID-infected people need not get tested - a position that seems right out of Trump's "we need to stop testing so much so that we can get the numbers down" playbook.  When coupled with the GOP pressure to get kids back into school no matter what, it's becoming increasingly clear that we're going to get hit hard in the fall.  While they may have some luck in suppressing case numbers in the short term, people are going to start showing up in the hospitals at some point before the election.  They really are some incredibly short-sighted, stupid fucks.

 

 

Well stated.   Fits very nicely into getting kids back in school.   

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

God bless the projector trolls.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

"Trump's own ethics policy."

Like that's a thing. 

It is actually. They violated his policy by not giving him the right percentage of the take.

[SizzleChest 8291]

 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5138]

26 minutes ago, Gap03 said:

I understand this pragmatic view point, especially if test results are still taking a week to turn around.  My problem is that people may interpret this shift in guidance as, "Hey, I'm not really a risk to anyone if I don't have symptoms" and head into the office in the fall, even though they should be quarantining.  If they're going to go down this path, they should at least reiterate that people should quarantine if they've been in close contact with someone that has tested positive and acknowledge why the position has changed (i.e., by the time you wait a week to test + a week for results, you'll either be symptomatic or non-contagious by the time you get the results).  Of course, that would involve admitting that our testing regime is shitty, and they'll never do that, so here we are.

Oh on this I'm 100% in agreement. The problem is, that IS what the government is telling us.  It's not a big deal, go forth and spend your money.  I want the messaging to be completely different than it is, and I want our actions to be exactly what they are.  But we're going to have to wait for a change in leadership before that's going to happen.  

[TexEx15 17812]

 

[WhatTheBuck 28825]

Uh, yeah. Duh.