Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Igloo1]

NEJM absolutely CRUSHING POTUS for his lack of coordinated response to Covid in a way that @sniderman can much appreciate

Dying in a Leadership Vacuum | NEJM

Editorial from The New England Journal of Medicine — Dying in a Leadership Vacuum

www.nejm.org

I've just read that but question whether some of those claims would bear much scrutiny quite honestly. I'm not a fan of scientists lecturing us on public policy having seen how some of them have advised us. We've seen their models, recommendations, policies and restrictions ... and you know where I stand on them. It reads to me like scientists trying to pass the buck for their own failings for this crisis onto someone else.

Trump is an easy target and a legitimate target, but there is no way he should be shouldering the blame for it. It is quite frankly ridiculous to suggest (as the article implies) that leadership from some other party would have altered the outcome or progress of the response to the virus. In the UK for example we have Labour simply agreeing to all restrictions proposed by the government uncritically. Is that the fault of Labour? Well, no, not really. What other choice do they have? Ultimately both sides have relied on the scientists to lead on this by agreeing to pour all the billions the scientists have asked for into health and research and operations into dealing with this crisis. They did what the scientists recommended. With respect to the USA, are red states faring any differently to blue states in their response to the virus because that is what the article implies we should expect to find.

Scientists trying to avoid blame is how I see it.

 

[davek]

New alert scheme coming in on Monday, according to Newsnight. Merseysdie to be placed in the red zone of that. Pubs and restaurants will be shut. The MPs of Merseyside and Greater Manchester will be discussing with the Chancellor measures to ease the lockdown from an economic perspective.

 

[davek]

This data indicates how much more severe COVID19 is for those over 35 when compared to flu.

View attachment 103724

Fatality rate pretty much under 1% up to mid-to-late 50s then climbs exponentially from there?

 

[SerenityNigh]

It reads to me like scientists trying to pass the buck for their own failings for this crisis onto someone else.

Honestly can't tell whether this is dumb or funny. Will re-read again later and see if I have any more insight.

 

[SerenityNigh]

This data indicates how much more severe COVID19 is for those over 35 when compared to flu.

View attachment 103724

Worth noting that this scale is not linear. (Is it a log scale? All non-linear scales look the same to me so I can't keep the names straight).

That's a YUGE difference in outcomes.

 

[davek]

COVID-19 vaccine likely to be ready by December – WHO

The World Health Organization (WHO), has hinted that a vaccine against the novel coronavirus disease may be ready by the

nairametrics.com

Misleading headline there. WHO DG says there is 'hope' that a vaccine will be in place by then, the website says 'likely' to be in place.

 

[the sniderman]

I've just read that but question whether some of those claims would bear much scrutiny quite honestly. I'm not a fan of scientists lecturing us on public policy having seen how some of them have advised us. We've seen their models, recommendations, policies and restrictions ... and you know where I stand on them. It reads to me like scientists trying to pass the buck for their own failings for this crisis onto someone else.

Trump is an easy target and a legitimate target, but there is no way he should be shouldering the blame for it. It is quite frankly ridiculous to suggest (as the article implies) that leadership from some other party would have altered the outcome or progress of the response to the virus. In the UK for example we have Labour simply agreeing to all restrictions proposed by the government uncritically. Is that the fault of Labour? Well, no, not really. What other choice do they have? Ultimately both sides have relied on the scientists to lead on this by agreeing to pour all the billions the scientists have asked for into health and research and operations into dealing with this crisis. They did what the scientists recommended. With respect to the USA, are red states faring any differently to blue states in their response to the virus because that is what the article implies we should expect to find.

Scientists trying to avoid blame is how I see it.

no ur right i am gonna disregard scientific consensus in the middle of a pandemic and instead listen to igloo1 on grandoldteam.com because a scientist got a projection wrong once.

 

[Neiler]

Fatality rate pretty much under 1% up to mid-to-late 50s then climbs exponentially from there?

Generally pretty much mate, but particularly in deviation from flu.

 

[orly]

no ur right i am gonna disregard scientific consensus in the middle of a pandemic and instead listen to igloo1 on grandoldteam.com because a scientist got a projection wrong once.

On this website we have experts on pandemics, kissing girls and cocaine because it is the world 's number one Everton site FrandOldTeam.com

 

[Igloo1]

no ur right i am gonna disregard scientific consensus in the middle of a pandemic and instead listen to igloo1 on grandoldteam.com because a scientist got a projection wrong once.

Here we go again. Scientific consensus? If you read what I wrote earlier you'll see that there is no scientific consensus. Some leading health figures have opposed (or are opposed) to the measures recommended and implemented. Sweden also disagrees with the approach that some democracies, like ours, have adopted.

I doubt you'll find scientists in Sweden that are blaming their government for their deaths, but that is what you and these writers at the NEJM would suggest we should find. No, their scientists suggested and advised their government to take a different route.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Here we go again. Scientific consensus? If you read what I wrote earlier you'll see that there is no scientific consensus. Some leading health figures have opposed (or are opposed) to the measures recommended and implemented. Sweden also disagrees with the approach that some democracies, like ours, have adopted.

I doubt you'll find scientists in Sweden that are blaming their government for their deaths, but that is what you and these writers at the NEJM would suggest we should find. No, their scientists suggested and advised their government to take a different route.

There is scientific consensus on almost all the clinical evidence, similarly there is scientific consensus on the necessary public health interventions. What differs is the application of mitigation depending upon the countries infrastructure and behaviours. Largely, a political decision.

A country like the US has infrastructure needed and the scientific expertise to effectively manage a pandemic.

 

[Jebus_lives]

I've just read that but question whether some of those claims would bear much scrutiny quite honestly. I'm not a fan of scientists lecturing us on public policy having seen how some of them have advised us. We've seen their models, recommendations, policies and restrictions ... and you know where I stand on them. It reads to me like scientists trying to pass the buck for their own failings for this crisis onto someone else.

Trump is an easy target and a legitimate target, but there is no way he should be shouldering the blame for it. It is quite frankly ridiculous to suggest (as the article implies) that leadership from some other party would have altered the outcome or progress of the response to the virus. In the UK for example we have Labour simply agreeing to all restrictions proposed by the government uncritically. Is that the fault of Labour? Well, no, not really. What other choice do they have? Ultimately both sides have relied on the scientists to lead on this by agreeing to pour all the billions the scientists have asked for into health and research and operations into dealing with this crisis. They did what the scientists recommended. With respect to the USA, are red states faring any differently to blue states in their response to the virus because that is what the article implies we should expect to find.

Scientists trying to avoid blame is how I see it.

'The response of our nation’s leaders has been consistently inadequate. The federal government has largely abandoned disease control to the states. Governors have varied in their responses, not so much by party as by competence. But whatever their competence, governors do not have the tools that Washington controls. Instead of using those tools, the federal government has undermined them.'

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Yank]

no ur right i am gonna disregard scientific consensus in the middle of a pandemic and instead listen to igloo1 on grandoldteam.com because a scientist got a projection wrong once.

Idk that's one smart igloo he's 1 right?

If it was 2 or 3 I'd question it. But the first igloo? How the hell can I question that