forums

UM's Plan To Reopen

Advertisement
I really don't want to get dragged into this, but I couldn't let this statement go unchecked:
Stop blaming Cuomo for what happened at a senior home, that has no bearing on the other 49 states. Cuomo is no favorite of mine, he's made some mistakes and he's done a pretty good (overall) job in spite of those mistakes. Stop acting like the federal government bears no blame.

When one state, NY, has 32% of all US deaths, and it's neighbor following basically the same policies adds another 11% (add the two and you're at ~44% of all US deaths from two states) I hardly can understand how the above statement fits the scenario. It was hardly "A senior home", and it was hardly a small mistake.

If you take out NY and NJ, you are left with 48,571 deaths for the rest of the country to date. With a US population, ex NY/NJ, of 302,574,738, that means the average American's chances of dying from coronavirus so far is 1 in 6,250. For comparison sake, one's chances of dying from a car crash are 1 in 103, and suicide is 1 in 95.
 
g8rh8rMD said:
I really don't want to get dragged into this, but I couldn't let this statement go unchecked:
Stop blaming Cuomo for what happened at a senior home, that has no bearing on the other 49 states. Cuomo is no favorite of mine, he's made some mistakes and he's done a pretty good (overall) job in spite of those mistakes. Stop acting like the federal government bears no blame.

When one state, NY, has 32% of all US deaths, and it's neighbor following basically the same policies adds another 11% (add the two and you're at ~44% of all US deaths from two states) I hardly can understand how the above statement fits the scenario. It was hardly "A senior home", and it was hardly a small mistake.

If you take out NY and NJ, you are left with 48,571 deaths for the rest of the country to date. With a US population, ex NY/NJ, of 302,574,738, that means the average American's chances of dying from coronavirus so far is 1 in 6,250. For comparison sake, one's chances of dying from a car crash are 1 in 103, and suicide is 1 in 95.
Click to expand...
The number of people sick or dead in NY is disgusting. Don't know who's to blame but Mother Nature put the whammy on that place. Biology doesn't wait for emotion...
 
JD08 said:
Here's a crazy thought. Maybe nobody took the concept of this type of pandemic as a serious possibility that could happen in our lifetimes. Maybe because we knew so little about how it spreads and how contagious it was we weren't prepared because we didn't know. Maybe China and the WHO failed to give us sufficient notice for whatever reason, exacerbating the problem.

Maybe the politicians aren't to blame?
Click to expand...

Crazy thoughts?

What do you think "this type" of pandemic is? A pandemic is a pandemic. There is nothing special about "this type" of pandemic that should have allowed anyone to dismiss it as a "serious possibility that couldn't happen in our lifetimes". As pointed out previously, there were THREE pandemics during Obama's time in office alone. Can we please stop feeding the myth of "oh, this is something that we could not possibly have imagined or prepared for"? We absolutely could have, would have, and should have been prepared for this.

"We know so little about how it spreads and how contagious it was"? We were warned about how contagious it was in January. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but is Coronavirus spread by any "new and unusual methods"? Does a face-hugger attach itself to your mouth and lay an egg in your stomach, and then explode out of your abdomen when it hatches?

Here's a thought. Coronvirus spreads by all of the normal methods. Human contact. Bodily fluids. Etc. etc. etc. It doesn't matter if someone tells you to wear a mask or not wear a mask, it is ALWAYS good to wear a mask. Most Asian countries have been taking this precaution for years.

Why are you blaming WHO? They were notified by China in late December. They were disseminating information in January, within weeks. If you insist on blaming China, I can't stop you, but AT MOST China screwed around for 10 weeks. WHO didn't waste any time.

Nobody is blaming politicians for every aspect of this. But on issues of planning, coordinating, and responding, it is a very fair assessment to blame the federal government, which actually had the intel in January.

This isn't the first pandemic ever, and it won't be the last. The myths of "oh, we didn't know" and "oh, how could we know/prepare" need to be destroyed once and for all.

This is the new reality. Pandemics could happen at any time. We need to be prepared, and we need to stop making an excuse every time there is a "new" (actually, a new mutation) of a virus or a flu.
 
1cf7df546db04bea09f51dd27319f565.gif
 
Advertisement
g8rh8rMD said:
I really don't want to get dragged into this, but I couldn't let this statement go unchecked:
Stop blaming Cuomo for what happened at a senior home, that has no bearing on the other 49 states. Cuomo is no favorite of mine, he's made some mistakes and he's done a pretty good (overall) job in spite of those mistakes. Stop acting like the federal government bears no blame.

When one state, NY, has 32% of all US deaths, and it's neighbor following basically the same policies adds another 11% (add the two and you're at ~44% of all US deaths from two states) I hardly can understand how the above statement fits the scenario. It was hardly "A senior home", and it was hardly a small mistake.

If you take out NY and NJ, you are left with 48,571 deaths for the rest of the country to date. With a US population, ex NY/NJ, of 302,574,738, that means the average American's chances of dying from coronavirus so far is 1 in 6,250. For comparison sake, one's chances of dying from a car crash are 1 in 103, and suicide is 1 in 95.
Click to expand...


Just stop it.

If one governor makes a mistake, that does not obligate 49 other governors to make the same mistake. I'm not arguing statistics with you. My point (which you ignored) is to point out that it is disingenous to "not blame" the federal government's response, while cherry-picking a Democrat governor for one mistake.

Aut if you HONESTLY believe that Cuomo's initial mistake with the elderly is responsible for a significant chunk of NY's stats, you are nuts. For instance, the "patient zero" in New Rochelle, for which they had to create an entire quarantine area, was not due to a nursing home mistake. It was just a guy who spread coronavirus to his family, his co-workers, and his religious congregation.

New York, and NYC specifically, is one of the most densely populated AND heavily travelled areas in the world. NY's stats didn't explode because of a mistake at a nursing home.

As for trying to compare coronavirus mortality to "car crash" mortality, I'm not even going to get into that insanity. Car crashes are not contagious. People have a much greater ability to control their own mortality from a car crash or suicide than they do from coronavirus.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I didn't say that you absolutely had to conclude one way or the other, and there is absolutely evidence to support what I am saying.

I just find it amusing that when the death tolls were "rising", "certain people" complained about the statistics and what they meant. And now that death tolls are "falling", those people are suddenly in love with the more favorable statistics.

Amusing.

www.businessinsider.com

Trump is pressuring the CDC to change its death-toll methodology and produce a lower figure, report says

The Daily Beast cited five unnamed administration officials as saying that Trump was pushing for changes that could produce a lower figure.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
Click to expand...

5 unnamed sources? An article from the Dailey Beast? Lol. That being said I'll play. I have no problem with the article.

One official told the news outlet that Trump worried that the criteria were so broad that it could include somebody with COVID-19 who died from falling down the stairs. Being to broad is a legitimate concern.

Trump has publicly supported the CDC's numbers, though other reports have described him and his circle as suspicious that the figures are too high. And they could be. They also could be too low. It is likely COVID-19 has been here since this fall. I has been in Great Britain. This has been an extremely virulent flu season and it started earlier than normal in California. Unless we exhume folks who died before Christmas I'm not sure we know how they died. Buddy of mine and I were talking the other day. He works in aerospace industry and lives outside of Dallas. His partner came back from Asia in early November and was out two weeks with an unknown respiratory illness. COVID-19? Maybe, maybe not. The Stanford, USC and Metro Dade anti-body studies show this to be much more widespread and here a lot longer than previously understood. Those studies no longer get talked about? Why is that?

According to The Washington Post, Birx said last week that she didn't trust the CDC's numbers, adding that they could be inflated by as much as 25%. Birx is hardly a partisan. She may be absolutely correct. Pennsylvania recalculated it death numbers.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Just stop it.

If one governor makes a mistake, that does not obligate 49 other governors to make the same mistake. I'm not arguing statistics with you. My point (which you ignored) is to point out that it is disingenous to "not blame" the federal government's response, while cherry-picking a Democrat governor for one mistake.

Aut if you HONESTLY believe that Cuomo's initial mistake with the elderly is responsible for a significant chunk of NY's stats, you are nuts. For instance, the "patient zero" in New Rochelle, for which they had to create an entire quarantine area, was not due to a nursing home mistake. It was just a guy who spread coronavirus to his family, his co-workers, and his religious congregation.

New York, and NYC specifically, is one of the most densely populated AND heavily travelled areas in the world. NY's stats didn't explode because of a mistake at a nursing home.

As for trying to compare coronavirus mortality to "car crash" mortality, I'm not even going to get into that insanity. Car crashes are not contagious. People have a much greater ability to control their own mortality from a car crash or suicide than they do from coronavirus.
Click to expand...

Source: Associated Press https://apnews.com/4042f05613ee4259b7a44d4466a0a02a

As of May 9, the date of the article, 5,300 nursing home deaths in NY, 20% of the total. Yes, I would call that a significant chunk.

I'm not interested in blaming anyone. I'm interested in discussing the massive amounts of misinformation and non-scientifically driven decisions that are being made which are damaging the economy, businesses, families, children, ending and irreperably altering the course of lives, and tearing at the fabric of society in the hopes of ending the madness before it gets any worse.

We are using a cannon to kill a mosquito and then politicizing everything.

Your concept of choice and control is strange to me.

Good day.
 
Pentagon Cane said:
5 unnamed sources? An article from the Dailey Beast? Lol. That being said I'll play. I have no problem with the article.

One official told the news outlet that Trump worried that the criteria were so broad that it could include somebody with COVID-19 who died from falling down the stairs. Being to broad is a legitimate concern.

Trump has publicly supported the CDC's numbers, though other reports have described him and his circle as suspicious that the figures are too high. And they could be. They also could be too low. It is likely COVID-19 has been here since this fall. I has been in Great Britain. This has been an extremely virulent flu season and it started earlier than normal in California. Unless we exhume folks who died before Christmas I'm not sure we know how they died. Buddy of mine and I were talking the other day. He works in aerospace industry and lives outside of Dallas. His partner came back from Asia in early November and was out two weeks with an unknown respiratory illness. COVID-19? Maybe, maybe not. The Stanford, USC and Metro Dade anti-body studies show this to be much more widespread and here a lot longer than previously understood. Those studies no longer get talked about? Why is that?

According to The Washington Post, Birx said last week that she didn't trust the CDC's numbers, adding that they could be inflated by as much as 25%. Birx is hardly a partisan. She may be absolutely correct. Pennsylvania recalculated it death numbers.
Click to expand...


I posted an article from Business Insider. Which does, in fact, then cite The Daily Beast.

I am not arguing that one viewpoint is correct, and another is not. As I stated, multiple times, I find it amusing that "people who didn't like science and stats two months ago" are now citing science and stats.

There is absolutely "debate" and pressure (from both directions) to either get the stats to "more accurately reflect higher numbers" or to "reduce the numbers". I am not evaluating the absolute merits of either approach. Someone acted as if there is "no evidence" of pressure to reduce the numbers, and I posted an article.

Not really much of a conspiracy theory to attack here.

And while we can both agree that "too broad" could potentially be a criticism of anything, the funniest bit was Trump's "concern" that a "person who falls down the stairs" would be reported as a Covid-19 fatality. Hilarious. I think we should also be concerned when really really fat people get into car accidents, and then auto fatalities are inflated, when we all know that fat guy was going to die anyhow.
 
g8rh8rMD said:
Source: Associated Press https://apnews.com/4042f05613ee4259b7a44d4466a0a02a

As of May 9, the date of the article, 5,300 nursing home deaths in NY, 20% of the total. Yes, I would call that a significant chunk.

I'm not interested in blaming anyone. I'm interested in discussing the massive amounts of misinformation and non-scientifically driven decisions that are being made which are damaging the economy, businesses, families, children, ending and irreperably altering the course of lives, and tearing at the fabric of society in the hopes of ending the madness before it gets any worse.

We are using a cannon to kill a mosquito and then politicizing everything.

Your concept of choice and control is strange to me.

Good day.
Click to expand...
Big gov't totalitarian lemming. My parents taught me about the type. I dismissed it as it could never happen in tbe U.S. Now it looks like I was completely wrong...
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I didn't say that you absolutely had to conclude one way or the other, and there is absolutely evidence to support what I am saying.

I just find it amusing that when the death tolls were "rising", "certain people" complained about the statistics and what they meant. And now that death tolls are "falling", those people are suddenly in love with the more favorable statistics.

Amusing.


www.businessinsider.com

Trump is pressuring the CDC to change its death-toll methodology and produce a lower figure, report says

The Daily Beast cited five unnamed administration officials as saying that Trump was pushing for changes that could produce a lower figure.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
Click to expand...
"unnamed sources": urged the CDC to exclude two categories of people from its death count: people who were presumed to have the virus but didn't have confirmed test results, and people who did have the virus but may not have died from it.

Where is the evidence that the CDC is doing this? And where is the evidence of Dr's being pushed to NOT list Covid19 as cause of death, when its the cause of death.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
AOC? That's where you go with your partisanship?

She was elected in November 2018. Pence ran for VP in 2016, and there were plenty of news reports at that time. I have a long memory, I don't need a first-term representative to provide media reporting that was widely available 4 years ago.

And, no, I'm not "downplaying" what happened to senior assisted living folks in NY. I'm actually acknowledging that Cuomo made a mistake. I don't blindly support politicians simply because they are of a particular party. I am saying that most of what Cuomo has done during this pandemic has been better than that one *****-up. I also don't overlook the fact that so many...people of a particular ideology...have been telling us that because the elderly are at the greatest risk, we should be tolerant of the "casualties" that occur among the elderly. So, I prefer context and balance.
As I mentioned, I never even liked Cuomo before 2020 (and let's not forget, Cuomo wasn't even considered to be one of the leading Democrats, even when the Democrats had, like, three dozen presidential candidates, he was not one of them), but I'm also not going to sit here and act like the mistake he made with a nursing home should be the only thing that I ever take into consideration (especially when the Republican Lt. Governor of Texas is, literally, volunteering the elderly to take their chances with the virus).

I'm not talking about "vehement disagreement" or "trying to change your mind". When you go into the voting booth, you are entitled to vote however you choose.

But if you want to cite a bunch of facts and statistics and talk about your experience in dealing with problems such as these (not to mention inaccurately blaming me for basing my positions on partisanship, when I don't even support every Democrat or condemn every Republican), you should try to be more a bit more consistent and honest.

It is ridiculous to "not blame" anyone in an elected/appointed role within the Federal executive branch, while you to apesh!te on Cuomo for making a mistake with a nursing home (as if that mistake led to our national crisis).

That's like saying that nobody on the bridge of the Titanic should be blamed, but then there was that one son-of-a-***** down in the engine room who put more coal in the furnace when he should have been shutting off the engines.

Come on, man, I'm not asking you to change parties and I'm not asking you to change your vote. It would just be nice to have a bit of non-partisan honesty once in a while.
Click to expand...

The criticism of Pence is based on not passing out sterile syringes to heroin addicts timely to stop the spread of HIV in a rural county. And that is a criticism that comes from the hard left. BTW, it reminds me of the story about the Dutch farmer who burned down his barn to kill the rats. Ocasio-Cortez was front and center with the criticism of Pence's appointment to lead the task force.

My only issue with Cuomo is what he did to those COVID-19 seniors. That is reprehensible because New York already had data that supported senior living centers were the most vulnerable. DeSantis took a completely different tact. There will be class action law suits against the State of New York. Same for Pennsylvania. Newsom has done a good job. Most of the Governors have done so. But they all better open up soon and start following the Swedish model. Or we are going to be back to my Dutch farmer analogy. Suicides are way up. Suicide hotline calls up 1000%. Drug addictions up 50%. Domestic violence up. People are not getting surgeries. Hospitals are going belly up. We've scared the **** out of people who won't go to the ER for heart or stroke symptoms. It is insanity.
 
Last edited:
Cuomo's decision re the seniors infected with the Chi Com Wuhan virus killed hundreds if knot thousands, allegedly.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I posted an article from Business Insider. Which does, in fact, then cite The Daily Beast.

I am not arguing that one viewpoint is correct, and another is not. As I stated, multiple times, I find it amusing that "people who didn't like science and stats two months ago" are now citing science and stats.

There is absolutely "debate" and pressure (from both directions) to either get the stats to "more accurately reflect higher numbers" or to "reduce the numbers". I am not evaluating the absolute merits of either approach. Someone acted as if there is "no evidence" of pressure to reduce the numbers, and I posted an article.

Not really much of a conspiracy theory to attack here.

And while we can both agree that "too broad" could potentially be a criticism of anything, the funniest bit was Trump's "concern" that a "person who falls down the stairs" would be reported as a Covid-19 fatality. Hilarious. I think we should also be concerned when really really fat people get into car accidents, and then auto fatalities are inflated, when we all know that fat guy was going to die anyhow.
Click to expand...

You are tossing out a red herring. What science and stats were there two months ago? All we had was wild-assed IHME projections that turned out to be off by a factor of 10 to 20, now being argued as though those "stats" were correct and citing "facts" that lockdowns were the foundational difference in what they projected and what happened.

There was very little science behind anything being discussed two months ago, and unfortunately, that hasn't changed a lot. What we do have now, however, is data, the foundation upon which real science is built. We can argue all day long about the validity of that data, but it's the only data we've got.

4-5 months ago, scientists would have at least said that there was some question as to the effectiveness of mass forced quarantine protocols, particularly in a free society. All of the sudden, it's become "fact" and "science" that "lockdowns save lives and stop the spread", yet no studies can be cited definitively establishing that position. Studies are, at best contradictory and inconclusive as to whether an untrained public wearing home made face masks is effective in reducing transmissibility of a viral contagion, yet anyone who even suggests that position is a selfish troglodyte "ignoring the science".

So don't tell me I'm a "people who didn't like science and stats two months ago who is now citing science and stats". But yes, I am well aware that you have cited this tripe repeatedly.
 
g8rh8rMD said:
You are tossing out a red herring. What science and stats were there two months ago? All we had was wild-assed IHME projections that turned out to be off by a factor of 10 to 20, now being argued as though those "stats" were correct and citing "facts" that lockdowns were the foundational difference in what they projected and what happened.

There was very little science behind anything being discussed two months ago, and unfortunately, that hasn't changed a lot. What we do have now, however, is data, the foundation upon which real science is built. We can argue all day long about the validity of that data, but it's the only data we've got.

4-5 months ago, scientists would have at least said that there was some question as to the effectiveness of mass forced quarantine protocols, particularly in a free society. All of the sudden, it's become "fact" and "science" that "lockdowns save lives and stop the spread", yet no studies can be cited definitively establishing that position. Studies are, at best contradictory and inconclusive as to whether an untrained public wearing home made face masks is effective in reducing transmissibility of a viral contagion, yet anyone who even suggests that position is a selfish troglodyte "ignoring the science".

So don't tell me I'm a "people who didn't like science and stats two months ago who is now citing science and stats". But yes, I am well aware that you have cited this tripe repeatedly.
Click to expand...
And our resident scholar said the other guy was killing it....
:pitbull:
 
Advertisement
Back
Top