LaxPower Back-Up Stick

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:02 am

RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:53 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:37 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:56 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:44 am Your quoting of my response without the reference video is not cool. You have once again, played judge, jury, and shot the messenger. The entire point of the video reference, was to discuss REAL DATA and MODELS from the UK that have significantly changed their projected outcomes. Why you continually want to find fault in everything befuddles me.

People already saw it and can see it again by scrolling up. we don't need exact quotes of posts, especially multiple posts. Just reminders.

Thanks.

That was indeed my intent youth.
No need to copy everything again and again.

But thanks for posting.
Not sure what aspect of my post was not appropriately responsive, much less "shot the messenger" if you mean you, youth. Certainly not intended.

I do think she was quite misleading or actually out of touch on the statement about beds and vents. Not sure which, or why.

On the second, I just pointed out the nuance of her statement as to timing and the reality of what she's saying. IE It won't that bad because we're actually doing something to prevent it.

But the conclusion shouldn't be to not worry about the challenge, but rather to stay the course.

I did take a 'shot' at anyone who mis-reads this to think the CV-19 should just be treated like another flu, just grind through it. There have been some rather stupid posts to that effect and I did challenge that ridiculous position...I haven't read you as being amongst that crowd, youth.

Hope you aren't.

How about this: (Twitter last night)


Marc Lipsitch

@mlipsitch

Infectious disease epidemiologist and microbiologist, aspirational barista. [email protected] Director @CCDD_HSPH

Boston, MA · hsph.harvard.edu/faculty/marc-l…

Tonight #DeborahBirx stated that models anticipating large-scale transmission of COVID-19 do not match reality on the ground. Our modeling (done by @StephenKissler based on work with @ctedijanto and @yhgrad and me) is one of the models she is talking about.

We received a request to model dozens of scenarios from the US government at 5pm on Tuesday. We responded to many of these on Wednesday evening, thanks to fast and careful work by @StephenKissler. This was done in good faith in order to help support the USG response.

Modeling the scenario of intense social distancing for a temporary period, followed by a letup, produces predictions of resurgent transmission and large epidemics, with the exact consequences depending on the degree and duration of reduced transmission during social distancing.

Dr. Birx's statements today https://t.co/AAff8ThmuF indicated that "when people start talking about 20% of a population getting infected, it's very scary, but we don't have data that matches that based on our experience."

True. We are near the beginning of the epidemic, with most people still susceptible. China and Korea have suppressed transmission by massive testing, combined in China with far more intense distancing than here and in Korea with significant distancing https://t.co/3xLNnFuGG7

If our social distancing works it is possible we will not just flatten the curve, but get a decline in cases. Under a best-case scenario, we will keep that policy in place long enough to get down to very, very few cases domestically.

If at the same time we ramp up testing capacity and the ability to trace contacts, in a very best-case scenario, we might conceivably be able to turn to a Korea- or Singapore-style mix of less intense distancing combined with super-intense contact tracing, isolation, quarantine

That will not be easy with this virus as our @CCDD_HSPH analysis has shown https://t.co/xmC114peJW but as some (mainly island) countries have shown, it may be just possible. We should do everything we can to reach for this goal, even if it is unattainable.

But here's why it is a best-case, likely unattainable scenario. 1) We have not proven that US-style social distancing can produce R_effective<1 (declining case numbers). On this I'm hopeful, but it's a hope not a fact.

2) we remain woefully behind on testing capacity, especially in many parts of the country. Like a forest fire, intense control in one place fails if there are sparks from other places. We must strengthen the weak links. But test reagents, swabs, PPE remain in short supply.

Solving the testing problems will not be easy, despite heroic local and state efforts to make up for the feckless federal efforts on this front. Supply chains are delicate and it may not be possible to come from behind and establish Korea-level testing capacity.

3) We have never accomplished contact tracing on the scale that will be necessary -- and again, to keep cases low, we will have to accomplish that everywhere, not just some places.

4) If we manage all of that, there will still be a world of COVID-19 transmission throwing sparks back at us. Like China today reuters.com/article/us-hea… we will be in a long-term effort to prevent these sparks from starting new chains of transmission.

The sparks from abroad won't be stopped by detection at the border; we don't do that too well as we showed empirically https://t.co/2N3skKoK22 and others @cmmid_lshtm showed theoretically https://t.co/2K6c3DoUXS

So the scenario Dr. Birx is "assuring" us about is one in which we somehow escape Italy's problem of overloaded healthcare system despite the fact that social distancing is not really happening in large parts of the US https://t.co/aNnoduaR3O

That is unlikely. Then the rosy scenario assumes we get to minimal numbers of cases everywhere, develop and maintain testing and tracing capacity, execute well on it, don't miss imported cases that spark new chains of transmission, and somehow maintain this delicate balance...

For the 12-18 months (best case under current models) till a vaccine. I desperately hope she is right, because much suffering will be avoided. But reassurance that this is likely, or even plausible, with the disorganized track record of the US response, is false reassurance.

We should work our hardest to create the conditions to make the scenarios being described here (one bad wave, contained by social distancing, and we're down to a point of controllable spread) a reality. Doing so will make us better prepared, even if they don't come to pass.

But it would be extremely naive to imagine that they are likely, and what do I know, but it seems like bad politics to "assure" the American people that they will come to pass when so many things could go wrong, any one of which leads to much worse outcomes.

On a simpler level, saying that "facts on the ground" are not consistent with 20% of the population getting infected is really quite deceptive. Likely, no population has 20% yet infected (though we can't be completely sure until serologic testing is widespread).

But this virus has shown in countries around the world that it can spread rapidly, and a small problem can become a big problem -- that is how exponential growth works.

It is a fundamental scientific error to take the current success of containment in some places as a sign that permanent containment is possible. We should work to make it possible, but 1918 flu and, frankly, the germ theory of disease show that containment is a temporary victory

From an expert, but my bolding...

Worth the read. Not sure those with reading comprehension issues or disdain for experts will bother, though.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:50 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:36 am You do realize that is pretty low for a president in a national emergency, right?

That's exactly right. During a crisis, approval numbers sky rocket. 60% is extremely low.

… and what happens as the crisis drags on for months??

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:44 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:00 am Random thought

I'm still shaking my head this morning at the concerted and overwhelming demand by the Left to remove this kid Ginn's post on Medium.

It's the ferocity and organization of such an effort, applauded by many here, which makes me wonder what the real deal is.

Medium posts based on data, interpreted incorrectly or 100% correctly, strike me as being such anodyne things in life. If a liberal writer posted a Medium post drawing from research that he said shows business owners to be fundamentally stupid, it wouldn't occur to me in a billion years to demand that it be withdrawn. I'd laugh at it, but it would not affect me in the least.

I'd love to have someone here (from the Left or Right) explain why this one post of Ginn's was such an affront that the Left demanded Medium take it down (though the post is now on over 1000 websites for anyone to read, critique, or applaud).

I guess I just do not understand this new world of book burning. Please explain and help a brother out.

Asked and answered (by others, PB) again and again and again.
Not sure why you keep bringing it up, at least here on this thread.
It's tedious.

I respectfully suggest you take this question to the Progressive Ideology thread as it sounds like that's what you want to critique, not actually have a rational discussion of CV-19 in any fresh way.

Challenging "the Left" and their general dismissiveness is just fine, it's just not relevant here.

Apparently Ginn's analysis has serious flaws and is already being proven on the ground to be wrong-headed. If you have something fresh to add on that topic otherwise, have at it.

Of course, that's just my opinion. Be well.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:21 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:50 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:36 am You do realize that is pretty low for a president in a national emergency, right?

That's exactly right. During a crisis, approval numbers sky rocket. 60% is extremely low.

… and what happens as the crisis drags on for months??

You do realize that during a crisis the MSM used to SUPPORT the President.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:21 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:50 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:36 am You do realize that is pretty low for a president in a national emergency, right?

That's exactly right. During a crisis, approval numbers sky rocket. 60% is extremely low.

… and what happens as the crisis drags on for months??

You do realize that during a crisis the MSM used to SUPPORT the President.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:07 am

Bart wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:05 am

Bart wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:02 am

RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:53 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:37 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:56 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:44 am Your quoting of my response without the reference video is not cool. You have once again, played judge, jury, and shot the messenger. The entire point of the video reference, was to discuss REAL DATA and MODELS from the UK that have significantly changed their projected outcomes. Why you continually want to find fault in everything befuddles me.

People already saw it and can see it again by scrolling up. we don't need exact quotes of posts, especially multiple posts. Just reminders.

Thanks.

That was indeed my intent youth.
No need to copy everything again and again.

But thanks for posting.
Not sure what aspect of my post was not appropriately responsive, much less "shot the messenger" if you mean you, youth. Certainly not intended.

I do think she was quite misleading or actually out of touch on the statement about beds and vents. Not sure which, or why.

On the second, I just pointed out the nuance of her statement as to timing and the reality of what she's saying. IE It won't that bad because we're actually doing something to prevent it.

But the conclusion shouldn't be to not worry about the challenge, but rather to stay the course.

I did take a 'shot' at anyone who mis-reads this to think the CV-19 should just be treated like another flu, just grind through it. There have been some rather stupid posts to that effect and I did challenge that ridiculous position...I haven't read you as being amongst that crowd, youth.

Hope you aren't.

How about this: (Twitter last night)


Marc Lipsitch

@mlipsitch

Infectious disease epidemiologist and microbiologist, aspirational barista. [email protected] Director @CCDD_HSPH

Boston, MA · hsph.harvard.edu/faculty/marc-l…

Tonight #DeborahBirx stated that models anticipating large-scale transmission of COVID-19 do not match reality on the ground. Our modeling (done by @StephenKissler based on work with @ctedijanto and @yhgrad and me) is one of the models she is talking about.

We received a request to model dozens of scenarios from the US government at 5pm on Tuesday. We responded to many of these on Wednesday evening, thanks to fast and careful work by @StephenKissler. This was done in good faith in order to help support the USG response.

Modeling the scenario of intense social distancing for a temporary period, followed by a letup, produces predictions of resurgent transmission and large epidemics, with the exact consequences depending on the degree and duration of reduced transmission during social distancing.

Dr. Birx's statements today https://t.co/AAff8ThmuF indicated that "when people start talking about 20% of a population getting infected, it's very scary, but we don't have data that matches that based on our experience."

True. We are near the beginning of the epidemic, with most people still susceptible. China and Korea have suppressed transmission by massive testing, combined in China with far more intense distancing than here and in Korea with significant distancing https://t.co/3xLNnFuGG7

If our social distancing works it is possible we will not just flatten the curve, but get a decline in cases. Under a best-case scenario, we will keep that policy in place long enough to get down to very, very few cases domestically.

If at the same time we ramp up testing capacity and the ability to trace contacts, in a very best-case scenario, we might conceivably be able to turn to a Korea- or Singapore-style mix of less intense distancing combined with super-intense contact tracing, isolation, quarantine

That will not be easy with this virus as our @CCDD_HSPH analysis has shown https://t.co/xmC114peJW but as some (mainly island) countries have shown, it may be just possible. We should do everything we can to reach for this goal, even if it is unattainable.

But here's why it is a best-case, likely unattainable scenario. 1) We have not proven that US-style social distancing can produce R_effective<1 (declining case numbers). On this I'm hopeful, but it's a hope not a fact.

2) we remain woefully behind on testing capacity, especially in many parts of the country. Like a forest fire, intense control in one place fails if there are sparks from other places. We must strengthen the weak links. But test reagents, swabs, PPE remain in short supply.

Solving the testing problems will not be easy, despite heroic local and state efforts to make up for the feckless federal efforts on this front. Supply chains are delicate and it may not be possible to come from behind and establish Korea-level testing capacity.

3) We have never accomplished contact tracing on the scale that will be necessary -- and again, to keep cases low, we will have to accomplish that everywhere, not just some places.

4) If we manage all of that, there will still be a world of COVID-19 transmission throwing sparks back at us. Like China today reuters.com/article/us-hea… we will be in a long-term effort to prevent these sparks from starting new chains of transmission.

The sparks from abroad won't be stopped by detection at the border; we don't do that too well as we showed empirically https://t.co/2N3skKoK22 and others @cmmid_lshtm showed theoretically https://t.co/2K6c3DoUXS

So the scenario Dr. Birx is "assuring" us about is one in which we somehow escape Italy's problem of overloaded healthcare system despite the fact that social distancing is not really happening in large parts of the US https://t.co/aNnoduaR3O

That is unlikely. Then the rosy scenario assumes we get to minimal numbers of cases everywhere, develop and maintain testing and tracing capacity, execute well on it, don't miss imported cases that spark new chains of transmission, and somehow maintain this delicate balance...

For the 12-18 months (best case under current models) till a vaccine. I desperately hope she is right, because much suffering will be avoided. But reassurance that this is likely, or even plausible, with the disorganized track record of the US response, is false reassurance.

We should work our hardest to create the conditions to make the scenarios being described here (one bad wave, contained by social distancing, and we're down to a point of controllable spread) a reality. Doing so will make us better prepared, even if they don't come to pass.

But it would be extremely naive to imagine that they are likely, and what do I know, but it seems like bad politics to "assure" the American people that they will come to pass when so many things could go wrong, any one of which leads to much worse outcomes.

On a simpler level, saying that "facts on the ground" are not consistent with 20% of the population getting infected is really quite deceptive. Likely, no population has 20% yet infected (though we can't be completely sure until serologic testing is widespread).

But this virus has shown in countries around the world that it can spread rapidly, and a small problem can become a big problem -- that is how exponential growth works.

It is a fundamental scientific error to take the current success of containment in some places as a sign that permanent containment is possible. We should work to make it possible, but 1918 flu and, frankly, the germ theory of disease show that containment is a temporary victory

From an expert, but my bolding...

Thanks, that is interesting indeed. This is if there is no seasonality to the virus, no evidence there is or isn't at this point.

seasonality (sunlight not heat) would indeed help some slow down, potentially enough to catch up with testing, tracing capacity...but only if we recognize that the fall will be coming very soon and prepare feverishly. Apparently that's what happened in the 1918 bug, the fall was much worse than the original outbreak.

Based on the numbers I am seeing, that won't be much of a spike. Which is great, but hard to explain. A whole country of 35 million with fewer deaths across the entire first wave than the entire US has in a 12 hour period. I guess it is the blessings of low population density.

That is exactly what Dr Fauci said in his Instagram chat with Steph Curry. He also indicated that if this seasonality did happen it would give them time to prepare for that next wave. What that is I suppose is to be determined.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:32 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:21 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:50 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:36 am You do realize that is pretty low for a president in a national emergency, right?

That's exactly right. During a crisis, approval numbers sky rocket. 60% is extremely low.

… and what happens as the crisis drags on for months??

You do realize that during a crisis the MSM used to SUPPORT the President.

Much of our media, with the exception of some of Fox, has become antagonists of Trump. You could plausibly argue that CNN and MSNBC have made it their primary mission to dent Trump's re-election chances. Many of their reporters post tweets all day long with little to no factual basis. I'd note that Kasie Hunt posted a tweet yesterday which stated categorically that NYC was already using "death panels" to determine who lives or dies, which was wildly irresponsible. And Kasie is considered half-normal. Julia Ioffe of GQ called America a "sh@thole country" (as a rejoinder to Trump having previously said as such about Haiti), because, if you believe statistics from China and Iran, our country's death rates exceeded theirs. Brian Stelter (CNN) every day repeats some innuendo about how Trump and Fauci hate each other, even though Fauci constantly denies so.

The juvenile tweeting is nothing but a massive transparency tell on the partisan nature of most of our journo's.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:39 am I guess it is the blessings of low population density.

calourie wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:27 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:21 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:50 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:36 am You do realize that is pretty low for a president in a national emergency, right?

That's exactly right. During a crisis, approval numbers sky rocket. 60% is extremely low.

… and what happens as the crisis drags on for months??

You do realize that during a crisis the MSM used to SUPPORT the President.

Here is the answer as to why it doesn't now, if you really care.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-never- ... 00857.html

calourie wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:45 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:32 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:21 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:50 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:36 am You do realize that is pretty low for a president in a national emergency, right?

That's exactly right. During a crisis, approval numbers sky rocket. 60% is extremely low.

… and what happens as the crisis drags on for months??

You do realize that during a crisis the MSM used to SUPPORT the President.

Much of our media, with the exception of some of Fox, has become antagonists of Trump. You could plausibly argue that CNN and MSNBC have made it their primary mission to dent Trump's re-election chances. Many of their reporters post tweets all day long with little to no factual basis. I'd note that Kasie Hunt posted a tweet yesterday which stated categorically that NYC was already using "death panels" to determine who lives or dies, which was wildly irresponsible. And Kasie is considered half-normal. Julia Ioffe of GQ called America a "sh@thole country" (as a rejoinder to Trump having previously said as such about Haiti), because, if you believe statistics from China and Iran, our country's death rates exceeded theirs. Brian Stelter (CNN) every day repeats some innuendo about how Trump and Fauci hate each other, even though Fauci constantly denies so.

The juvenile tweeting is nothing but a massive transparency tell on the partisan nature of most of our journo's.

I am reposting the response I sent to 6ft., Peter as I think you are more apt to digest it:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-never- ... 00857.html

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:02 am Worth the read.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:53 ambut believe me, many Americans hated the Clintons for ( among other matters) what we perceived as corrupt schemes as politicians and getting away from obvious crimes that normal folks would’ve been crushed for.

holmes435 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:03 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:53 ambut believe me, many Americans hated the Clintons for ( among other matters) what we perceived as corrupt schemes as politicians and getting away from obvious crimes that normal folks would’ve been crushed for.

Interestingly enough this is the same argument many on the left made before the election and make to this day about Donald Trump - and that the Republican party has lined up behind him to keep him safe.

ggait wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:42 am

That is exactly what Dr Fauci said in his Instagram chat with Steph Curry. He also indicated that if this seasonality did happen it would give them time to prepare for that next wave. What that is I suppose is to be determined.

A 4-5 month break would be extremely helpful. You could make lots of masks, ventilators, test kits, ICU beds during that time. Also time to see if any therapies (HCQ maybe) work. Time to get your plan pulled together. We should be able to do much better in the second go round.

Which means we could be doing targeted distancing measures as needed (scalpel), rather than blanket measures (chainsaw, sledgehammer).