CR: COVID-19 --Political Talk

[Bullneck 19027]

6 hours ago, elfenix said:

there's people in this country who wake up in a cold sweat, heart pounding, because some person who has fuck all has too much. 

People that are hurting because lazy entitled idiots didn't do their job.  So much extra money just handed to them for free! (and will be spent on food and rent in 3 weeks).

[TornACL 7687]

7 hours ago, Grade of D as in David said:

Last week he was mad they weren't recycling masks and wondered why they had to use a new one each time.

 

He's desperate and throwing anything, literally anything against the wall hoping it will stick as a defense of his inactions.

He's your average Twitter dipshit. Pretending to be an expert on all subjects and criticizing everything at will. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

6 hours ago, elfenix said:

there's people in this country who wake up in a cold sweat, heart pounding, because some person who has fuck all has too much. 

 

6 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

People that are hurting because lazy entitled idiots didn't do their job.  So much extra money just handed to them for free! (and will be spent on food and rent in 3 weeks).

Well, yeah. Don't you know 'those people' have *checks notes* cell phones and big screen televisions? Oh wait, no, I checked the wrong notes. It's supposed to be people who are homeless because they lost their jobs and have no health insurance. No, that can't be it, because the homeless are dirty and should go somewhere else, pull up their bootstraps, and find a job. But don't come to my town, because you might be sick from having no health insurance and I'm not going to rent to you because you have no job. Ah, screw it, let's just give the money to the rich. They'll know what to do with it. 

 

 

Sigh. I wonder sometimes how the brains don't implode as the little gray cells gasp for oxygen in that desolate environment of Trumper logic.

My heart hurts today.

[EMAWesome 101]

This is the assistant director of the WHO and this is why no one should give a shit what the WHO thinks.  (This also dovetails nicely into the post I made in the media bias thread about the New York Times writer who used this piece of shit as a source for why we should be handling this more like China.)  The guy clearly heard the question about Taiwan but wanted nothing to do with answering it.

 

[zork 629]

Trump said yesterday there had been over 1 million tested in the USA as of yesterday.  If that is true, with more positives coming from testing the last 48 hours before that announcement, it should be at about 250k positive tests.  That means roughly 70% of the testing is showing negative for Covid.  Is that a normal ratio given the well documented strictness with which the testing has being performed?  

The numbers seem to be even worse, wrt identifying who should be tested in Texas.

Not a big deal for sure but is it a bunch of hypochondriacs, overly zealous doctors, or what?

[Bullneck 19027]

EMAW and Zork back to back posts!  

 

 

Quote

Trump said yesterday . . . .  If that is true

Quote

this is why no one should give a shit what the WHO thinks

 

[Bateshorn 9908]

Again: America is a deeply racist nation.  The idea that a black person who doesn’t jump, run, or  make music might possibly have money (or worse, agency, GASP!) is so offensive to half the  white population of this country that they would prefer all poor people starve.

[deech 2251]

32 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

This is the assistant director of the WHO and this is why no one should give a shit what the WHO thinks.  (This also dovetails nicely into the post I made in the media bias thread about the New York Times writer who used this piece of shit as a source for why we should be handling this more like China.)  The guy clearly heard the question about Taiwan but wanted nothing to do with answering it.

 

With all due respect, who gives a shit?  Someone from WHO ducked a question about Taiwan like a bitch.  And?   I mean I get that they are talking at times with praise at how China handled the crisis, but I could care less what anyone things.  I just want this administration to do everything in its power to minimize the wave of deaths around the corner.  When we are all on the other side of this virus, I'm sure I will give a shit about Taiwan and Hong Kong again.

[TwiceHorn 31322]

42 minutes ago, zork said:

Trump said yesterday there had been over 1 million tested in the USA as of yesterday.  If that is true, with more positives coming from testing the last 48 hours before that announcement, it should be at about 250k positive tests.  That means roughly 70% of the testing is showing negative for Covid.  Is that a normal ratio given the well documented strictness with which the testing has being performed?  

The numbers seem to be even worse, wrt identifying who should be tested in Texas.

Not a big deal for sure but is it a bunch of hypochondriacs, overly zealous doctors, or what?

Of course it isn't true.  As of March 30, CDC reports analysis of fewer than 140,000 tests https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html  

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

We're a bunch of cats, you see? Two balls of red yarn resembling COVID 19 that's been sprayed with politicism catnip. We have to decide which string to chase and which string to pull. Do we pull on the one over here that unravels the US pandemic response and falls apart or do we chase the one over there that involves China? The whole time there is a laser pointer flashing back and forth. Herding cats is hard work.

Focus on the ball closest to home.

[TwiceHorn 31322]

1 hour ago, EMAWesome said:

This is the assistant director of the WHO and this is why no one should give a shit what the WHO thinks.  (This also dovetails nicely into the post I made in the media bias thread about the New York Times writer who used this piece of shit as a source for why we should be handling this more like China.)  The guy clearly heard the question about Taiwan but wanted nothing to do with answering it.

 

In case you haven't been paying attention, Taiwan has been a diplomatic problem vis a vis China for its entire existence and that's about 75 years now.  US Presidents have all had to tiptoe around the issue to varying degrees.  WHO is a UN agency and that's one of the primary places that has had to tiptoe around China.

Noone is debating whether China is asshole.

And you know who else praised China's response to coronavirus?  Give you one guess.

Your post in the media bias thread was also a big pile of word and thought salad.  You seem to have difficulty with thinking clearly on an issue.

Edited March 31, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[zork 629]

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Of course it isn't true.  As of March 30, CDC reports analysis of fewer than 140,000 tests https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html  

 

140k tests but 160k+ positive without the 2-48+hr wait for results?

Edit:  Abbott was saying less tahn 20% positive results, way less, for Texas.  So what is the answer on big numbers of negative tests, is it normal?

Edited March 31, 2020 by zork

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Of course it isn't true.  As of March 30, CDC reports analysis of fewer than 140,000 tests https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html  

 

I believe the CDC does not report the totals from private labs, which some states are using. The COVID tracker blog does, to the best of their ability and they did say that milestone would be reached this week, several weeks past what Azar said they would have.

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

Wait, never mind. I was referring to US, not Texas specific. Ignore me, I'm slow today.

[zork 629]

4 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Wait, never mind. I was referring to US, not Texas specific. Ignore me, I'm slow today.

no, trump was talking about us totals.  abbott about texas.  both would indicate yuge, 60-70-80+% negative tests.  Why?

Edit: Why specifically since there seems to be a negative impression on the amount of testing.  If the testing is so bad you would think the positive testing % would at least be 50-50?  Or are we, in Texas, or nationwide, not asking the right questions on who should be tested even with the now expanding testing available?

Edited March 31, 2020 by zork

[cactusflinthead 27595]

What Biden said was not nearly as ear-catching as how he expressed himself and how he responded to questions from the public. He dispensed personal advice (call a relative who is alone, don’t think young people cannot get the virus) and shared how he interacts from a distance with his grandchildren. Normal. Kind. Empathetic.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/31/biden-podcasts-talking-rationally-americans/

Empathy and kindness. Sounds good. I'll take it. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

12 minutes ago, zork said:

no, trump was talking about us totals.  abbott about texas.  both would indicate yuge, 60-70-80+% negative tests.  Why?

Edit: Why specifically since there seems to be a negative impression on the amount of testing.  If the testing is so bad you would think the positive testing % would at least be 50-50?  Or are we, in Texas, or nationwide, not asking the right questions on who should be tested even with the now expanding testing available?

It's math. Something that takes awhile for me to grasp.

California has tested but their private lab has a bottleneck. What also compounds the issue, I believe (not know, but believe as I'm not sure how this works) is how do multiple testings of one individual work? Or someone who tests negative and then comes back positive? What I mean is, there are numbers of tests vs numbers of individuals tested. Not the same thing. Probably doesn't happen all that much, but still....Very muddy and it will take me a long time to comprehend how all of this works. I'm not even sure if they know since nothing is centralized.

Edited March 31, 2020 by Mrs Whiggins
Edit

[zork 629]

7 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

It's math. Something that takes awhile for me to grasp.

California has tested but their private lab has a bottleneck. What also compounds the issue, I believe (not know, but believe as I'm not sure how this works) is how do multiple testings of one individual work? Or someone who tests negative and then comes back positive? Very muddy and it will take me a long time to comprehend how all of this works. I'm not even sure if they know since nothing is centralized.

I left the multiple tests per person out of my query.  It is a valid point. 

Also, things like Fort Worth had been holding back some test results from their reporting for those that were tested but their demographics weren't complete.  They had been holding them out but decided over the weekend to add them in anyway.(so more numbers for Tarrant county over the weekend with not all of it from over the weekend, and maybe some of them not Tarrant county residents)

Edited March 31, 2020 by zork

[Tuco 5076]

16 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

You know, I'd have a lot more sympathy for the Boomers as the butt of such distasteful comments if they hadn't spent the last quarter-century bitching about Millennials* (and spending the quarter-century before that bitching about Gen X).  From the time Millennials were teenagers, they've been told by Boomers how they're lazy, self-centered, and self-entitled.  That the people upon whom they have heaped so much scorn derive some derisive pleasure from their demise shouldn't really surprise anyone.

 

 

* And yes, I would acknowledge that the patient's grandson is almost certainly too young to be a Millennial.  But the Boomers don't really distinguish between anybody who's younger than 40.

Not only did the boomers give them shit in general, they specifically gave them shit for being pussies about things medical related - wearing bike helmets, drinking out of the garden hose, no sea tbelts, etc., frequently comparing it to all the things they did with the inevitable closer "..and I survived."  Well...That being said, not all boomers did this, and not all millennials are assholes about COVID.  

 

11 hours ago, UDontKnow said:

For those like me who were ignorant to the situation in New York and where Cuomo failed to prepare. Disclaimer: This post in no way supports this piss poor effort made by Trump and his "administration."

https://wsyr.iheart.com/featured/bob-lonsberry-syr/content/2020-03-25-numbers-show-governor-andrew-cuomo-failing-in-coronavirus-fight/

 

Yeah, a governor can't just say "hey, I think there is a risk there; I'm going to spend $50M to fix it."  He can work on the plan to best utilize the resources that have been budgeted, but he can't just generate more resources. I have no idea if Cuomo prioritized medical gear in budget talks with the NY legislative branch. But obviously concerns over a global pandemic were not his only priority, nor were they the only priority of his constituents. 

 

 

[Hookah Horns 3082]

8 hours ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

It took people dying in your neighborhood to speak up against Donald Trump? This is on you too Mike, as well as every person who supported him. Donald Trump is handling covid-19 exactly like you'd expect if you've been paying attention. Christ, he bragged about his own skyscraper's height soon after the towers fell on 9-11-01. That's who he is and you knew it.

Zactly. People like Mike almost piss me off even more than the brainwashed straight ticket zealots. 

[Tuco 5076]

15 minutes ago, zork said:

no, trump was talking about us totals.  abbott about texas.  both would indicate yuge, 60-70-80+% negative tests.  Why?

Edit: Why specifically since there seems to be a negative impression on the amount of testing.  If the testing is so bad you would think the positive testing % would at least be 50-50?  Or are we, in Texas, or nationwide, not asking the right questions on who should be tested even with the now expanding testing available?

I don't think I've seen any estimates that 50% of the population is currently infected.  So, I honestly don't know what point you think you're making. Are you seriously questioning whether the lack of testing is a legitimate problem?  Are you really that stupid? 

[TXSG8R 3360]

13 minutes ago, zork said:

no, trump was talking about us totals.  abbott about texas.  both would indicate yuge, 60-70-80+% negative tests.  Why?

Edit: Why specifically since there seems to be a negative impression on the amount of testing.  If the testing is so bad you would think the positive testing % would at least be 50-50?  Or are we, in Texas, or nationwide, not asking the right questions on who should be tested even with the now expanding testing available?

I think it’s largely symptomatic of how and where we are doing the testing. Early testing was extremely limited in scope. You either traveled from a hotspot, had direct contact with traveling from a hotspot, or you were rich. We are now performing a lot more tests, but without knowing where, it’s hard to answer your questions on why the positive results are so low. Are we scattering tests to each state and allowing them to disburse them?  Are they testing everyone with flu symptoms at this point along with a flu test to get a firmer answer?  Are we wasting resources on podunk towns instead of doing large scale testing in urban centers first?  I’m not sure anyone has a real grasp on our testing methodology since our federal government keeps trying to absolve themselves of all responsibility for the pandemic and drop it in the laps of state governments. 

[zork 629]

1 minute ago, Tuco said:

I don't think I've seen any estimates that 50% of the population is currently infected.  So, I honestly don't know what point you think you're making. Are you seriously questioning whether the lack of testing is a legitimate problem?  Are you really that stupid? 

50-50 on the tests results dipshit.  We have the strictest, according to many, testing standards to try and keep the limited tests to those who really need to know.  yet 70% or more are negative test results.  doesn't that seem odd to you?

[DixonHur 11238]

1 minute ago, zork said:

We have the strictest, according to many, testing standards to try and keep the limited tests to those who really need to know. 

Wait, so now the talking point is that the US not testing people on the scale of SK, and others, is strategy? 

[TwiceHorn 31322]

39 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Of course it isn't true.  As of March 30, CDC reports analysis of fewer than 140,000 tests https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html  

 

My bad, I thought all tests were still forwarded to CDC for confirmation.  They are not as of 3/14.  Also, only CDC and public laboratories in that data.

[Hiphopopotamos 20865]

1 minute ago, zork said:

50-50 on the tests results dipshit.  We have the strictest, according to many, testing standards to try and keep the limited tests to those who really need to know.  yet 70% or more are negative test results.  doesn't that seem odd to you?

No.  It presents like the flu.  It presents like pneumonia.  It can present with gi issues.  It can look like the common cold.  Even with our stringent testing we our going to have more negatives than positives.

And stringent testing is the fucking problem.  We should be testing everyone.  Everyone.  That way we know who to quarantine.  Thats what SOuth Korea is doing and thats why they have been so successful.

Instead this administration used the two month head-start they had to do fuck-all.

But now it was strategy?

[TwiceHorn 31322]

6 minutes ago, zork said:

50-50 on the tests results dipshit.  We have the strictest, according to many, testing standards to try and keep the limited tests to those who really need to know.  yet 70% or more are negative test results.  doesn't that seem odd to you?

We had the strictest criteria due to shortage of tests.  Those criteria virtually insured that the asymptomatic would not be tested.  That has skewed the data, no doubt.

Edited March 31, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

It's hard to know where to begin, though. You have many different tests right now. Who knows which ones are

Accurate

Administered correctly

Assessed correctly

And so on. This isn't as easy as peeing on a stick.

 

[Tuco 5076]

10 minutes ago, zork said:

50-50 on the tests results dipshit.  We have the strictest, according to many, testing standards to try and keep the limited tests to those who really need to know.  yet 70% or more are negative test results.  doesn't that seem odd to you?

No, it doesn't.  Even if there are 3M people currently infected (15x of those currently confirmed), that's only 1% of the population.  There are probably 10% of the population who present "symptoms" that are more likely to be regular colds or allergies.  Hopefully tests are regularly going to medical staff, elder care facilities, etc., who are not presenting symptoms.  I think they are testing patients who are scheduled for non-elective surgeries.  And, of course, for the 155k currently active cases, they get periodic tests that would not add to the numbers.  

Once again, what point are your trying to make?  Are you saying that lack of testing is not a serious issue?  Or, are you "just asking questions"?

Edited March 31, 2020 by Tuco

[zork 629]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

We had the strictest criteria due to shortage of tests.  Those criteria virtually insured that the asymptomatic would not be tested.  That has skewed the data, no doubt.

if asymptomatic were tested there would be even more negative tests as a percentage of the whole.    there has been big commenting here that people were only/mainly being tested after getting negative flu test results.  

Still seems fubar.

[Bullneck 19027]

31 minutes ago, zork said:

no, trump was talking about us totals.  abbott about texas.  both would indicate yuge, 60-70-80+% negative tests.  Why?

Edit: Why specifically since there seems to be a negative impression on the amount of testing.  If the testing is so bad you would think the positive testing % would at least be 50-50?  Or are we, in Texas, or nationwide, not asking the right questions on who should be tested even with the now expanding testing available?

What are you trying to say, specifically?  

 

[TXSG8R 3360]

3 minutes ago, zork said:

if asymptomatic were tested there would be even more negative tests as a percentage of the whole.    there has been big commenting here that people were only/mainly being tested after getting negative flu test results.  

Still seems fubar.

I believe that was true early. Now that more tests are available I would assume that more doctors are testing anything that presents as a possible case since the results take so long to come back. 

[Bullneck 19027]

4 minutes ago, Tuco said:

No, it doesn't.  Even if there are 3M people currently infected (15x of those currently confirmed), that's only 1% of the population.  There are probably 10% of the population who present "symptoms" that are more likely to be regular colds or allergies.  Hopefully tests are regularly going to medical staff, elder care facilities, etc., who are not presenting symptoms.  I think they are testing patients who are scheduled for non-elective surgeries.  And, of course, for the 155k currently active cases, they get periodic tests that would not add to the numbers.  

Once again, what point are your trying to make?  Are you saying that lack of testing is not a serious issue?  Or, are you "just asking questions"?

Zork reminds me of those machines that grade SAT essays.

[zork 629]

3 minutes ago, Tuco said:

No, it doesn't.  Even if there are 3M people currently infected (15x of those currently confirmed), that's only 1% of the population.  There are probably 10% of the population who present "symptoms" that are more likely to be regular colds or allergies.  Hopefully tests are regularly going to medical staff, elder care facilities, etc., who are not presenting symptoms.  I think they are testing patients who are scheduled for non-elective surgeries.  And, of course, for the 155k currently active cases, they get periodic tests that would not add to the numbers.  

Once again, what point are your trying to make?  Are you saying that lack of testing is not a serious issue?  Or, are you "just asking questions"?

1 million tests is the population I am referring to, and also whatever test population tested in Texas that Abbott referred to over the weekend.  Within those two populations of testing sets is a percentage of positive or negative(I don't believe inconclusive would be an option but possibly) results.  You take that set of results, in both sets, and turn it into a percentage of positive and the reflexive number as the negative.  I realize you are a nubber and the n is for nowledge, but math really isn't that hard.

[Fozzz 152]

lmao

 

[Tuco 5076]

Just now, zork said:

1 million tests is the population I am referring to, and also whatever test population tested in Texas that Abbott referred to over the weekend.  Within those two populations of testing sets is a percentage of positive or negative(I don't believe inconclusive would be an option but possibly) results.  You take that set of results, in both sets, and turn it into a percentage of positive and the reflexive number as the negative.  I realize you are a nubber and the n is for nowledge, but math really isn't that hard.

You answered my question: you really are that stupid.  Fucking Trumpstains. 

[TwiceHorn 31322]

11 minutes ago, zork said:

if asymptomatic were tested there would be even more negative tests as a percentage of the whole.    there has been big commenting here that people were only/mainly being tested after getting negative flu test results.  

Still seems fubar.

Not necessarily.  The criteria required symptoms and exposure.  If you tested those exposed, but asymptomatic, it probably goes up.

I don't think we'll ever just test complete randos.

[TXSG8R 3360]

13 minutes ago, zork said:

1 million tests is the population I am referring to, and also whatever test population tested in Texas that Abbott referred to over the weekend.  Within those two populations of testing sets is a percentage of positive or negative(I don't believe inconclusive would be an option but possibly) results.  You take that set of results, in both sets, and turn it into a percentage of positive and the reflexive number as the negative.  I realize you are a nubber and the n is for nowledge, but math really isn't that hard.

Tests performed doesn't necessarily correlate to tests results known.  With the lag time of 2-7 days on results, we could have quite a lot of test results still pending, especially since testing ramp up is a recent thing.  Again, until someone starts posting more actual data, or consolidating that raw data in one place, we are just flinging shit at a wall.  Tests performed is a big number that the WH can point to and say "see, we are doing a lot."  Actual tests per capita is shit.  Test result waiting time is shit.  Test availability is shit.  And most importantly, without broad testing that includes the asymptomatic, what youre grasping at is shit.  You cant glean much out of the numbers because the numbers are flawed from the jump.  

[Incredulity 11566]

24 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

lmao

 

Constituents way up her ass.

[jimmyjazz 45605]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

Again: America is a deeply racist nation.  The idea that a black person who doesn’t jump, run, or  make music might possibly have money (or worse, agency, GASP!) is so offensive to half the  white population of this country that they would prefer all poor people starve.

Speaking of black people who can jump, run, and even more:  I saw former FSU & NFL safety Dr. Myron Rolle interviewed on CNN yesterday.  Dude is a neurosurgery resident at Massachusetts General. 

Good thing it wasn't aired on FOX, because a lot of Republicans' heads would have popped off.  Imagine having a darkie cutting into your skull -- no way, right?

 

[DixonHur 11238]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Speaking of black people who can jump, run, and even more:  I saw former FSU & NFL safety Dr. Myron Rolle interviewed on CNN yesterday.  Dude is a neurosurgery resident at Massachusetts General. 

Good thing it wasn't aired on FOX, because a lot of Republicans' heads would have popped off.  Imagine having a darkie cutting into your skull -- no way, right?

 

Dr. Carson would like a word

[Fozzz 152]

Weird how no heads popped off over Ben Carson.  

 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6556]

11 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Dr. Carson would like a word

He's different because he is just drilling in your skull to get the Non-Christian demons out of it.

[WhatTheBuck 28721]

10 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Dr. Carson would like a word

Dr. Carson should probably keep quiet. When he speaks, he can't compete with Dr. Rolle. 

 

[Fozzz 152]

Just because Ben is a shameless grifter doesn't mean that he was not, at least at some point in his life, exceptionally skilled in his field.  The guy was director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins.  

[Beantown Express 2.0 6556]

5 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Dr. Carson should probably keep quiet. When he speaks, he can't compete with Dr. Rolle. 

 

He is very well spoken for a neurosurgeon.

[jimmyjazz 45605]

9 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Weird how no heads popped off over Ben Carson.  

 

"I'm not a racist, my neurosurgeon is black!"

[DixonHur 11238]

6 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Just because Ben is a shameless grifter doesn't mean that he was not, at least at some point in his life, exceptionally skilled in his field.  The guy was director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins.  

Yes, he was in a sense, a surgical savant, because outside the surgical theater, he's completely loony tunes.

I mean pyramids as grain silos?  

Edited March 31, 2020 by DixonHur

[zork 629]

Apparently NYC is ok on ventilators currently.(some still not in use, nor installed, future need notwithstanding)

Quote

...

The facts, okay Zack, somebody said on one of the cable news shows the ventilators that New York needed aren’t even being deployed. They’re in a stockpile. Yes, they’re in a stockpile because that’s where the supposed to be because we don’t need them yet. We need them for the apex. The apex isn’t here, so we’re gathering them in the stockpile so when we need them they will be there. We don’t need them today because we’re not at capacity today. That’s why they’re not deployed because they’re not needed.

...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/28/gov_cuomo_on_ventilators_in_nyc_they_are_in_stockpile_we_dont_need_them_until_the_apex.html

[Biff Tannen 45512]

17 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

He's different because he is just drilling in your skull to get the Non-Christian demons out of it.

That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me.