https://c8.alamy.com/comp/CBW4WP/mid...hat-CBW4WP.jpg
Printable View
Exactly, a bandana worn that way provides better coverage than almost any other mask people are wearing.
LOL! Tell it to the medical professionals who wear surgical type (double tie) masks. Why don't they take this faux mask route if it provides the best coverage? The LOOSE FITTING bandannas allow more germs to escape and possibly infect snowflakes who get w/in six feet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Of course...
https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2020/may/sba-ppp-guidance-on-laid-off-employees-refuse-to-be-rehired.html?fbclid=IwAR2T2qRGmyV-GWlLcOKDZsY9ZWgGg31tAumhkffkXSKZWUEJGqqoMTwuuYk
Yeah, I am not sure how you legally certify that you are searching for a job for purposes of claiming unemployment while turning down work. Gamble I wouldn’t want to take.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Btw, I feel sorry for the Instacart and other service workers that are not being laid off, taking high personal risk, and getting paid less than they would if they were laid off. That sucks.
Lina Hidalgo who is County Judge for Harris County in Houston, has put in place a snitch website for people to rat out businesses who are open. I thought a judge needed to have a law degree, guess you don't, you only need lots of money.
She also put out an order that everyone was required to wear a mask in Harris county, and had to back off on that when Gov Abbott stated that such an order was unconstitutional.
If you have a surgical mask, wear it. Most folks don’t have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Hidalgo is a much better leader than our sorry governor. Hidalgo is our County Judge because of Trump - a result of straight party ticket voting in 2018. The previous County Judge had widespread support.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
I happen to think Abbott has done a great job as Gov.. in many ways better than GWB as Abbott has had to deal with more stuff. I don't see a democratic Gov in Texas for a long time.
Not a double tie, but well sealed and only a tad over $1 each.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/5f8...0&odnBg=ffffff
The made in China bandannas cost over $2 each.
Why is Trump winding down his coronavirus task force?
IDK why.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Turning it back over to the agencies by late May.
You trusted the agencies and leadership Obama had in place, but Trump has wrecked them all right?
What are you talking about? The point of the task force is to have a coordinated response. Obama had a permanent one.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
He had a permanent China Virus task force? What are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
You've complained many times about Trump replacing Obama's people in charge of various agencies. That's what I was talking about.
Do you want doctors in charge of rebuilding the economy? They've done enough for economics thank you.
I know, let's just go with whatever Bill Gates says to do.
You really don’t see disease control as being inextricably intertwined with the reopening of the economy?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
He had a permanent pandemic response team with a director that reported directly to him. This coronavirus is a pandemic, FYI.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Not to the point of running scared like the models continue to demand. The docs want the models to control our future. Time means nothing to Doctors. IMO, we should be focusing on the demographic suffering the most instead of the entire population.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
So that's how they were able to handle the Swine Flu so well?:laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
obummer is the worst POTUS in history, a total eff-up! He accomplished nothing good for this country, not one damn thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Trump was 100% dead-on right about the Chicoms and has been doing what he can...without the help of Congress...to set matters right. He was also smack on with this China Virus. YOU scoffed when I posted months ago he knew about the China Virus, the whole Wuhan Lab thingy back in November. YOU said....what is he clairvoyant, WHO says it was late December when the outbreak started. And YOU were wrong again! You and your commie globalist cronies trying to protect your Chicom friends.
For the record, the best data points to November 17, 2019 as the date of Patient Zero. Japan and South Korea knew about it back then and their intelligence agencies were working closely with ours. That Australian doctor was evicted from China shortly thereafter, late November or so, and he brought out news that something was going on...perhaps a very bad flu epidemic. Of course we have since learned the extent of it. President Trump contacted the Chicoms himself, by late November, and offered to help, to send in our medical experts. Trump even mentioned how the obummer administration sent our teams to Africa to help deal with the Ebola outbreak. The difference being those African nations accepted our help. The Chicoms refused...part of the cover-up.
Yet, useful idiots like you want to blame Trump for this while holding up obummer as some great leader...:laugh:...(too funny!) It has been BLUE states hit the hardest. Trump is president for all 50 states...if he is so horrible and is solely responsible for this pandemic, why hasn't it spread equally? The common denominator is the POTUS...the difference is Dem guvs vs. Repub guvs. Hmmm....
And then there is the medical science. C-19 is a novel virus, a brand new strain. NO ONE knew a damn thing about it....save for the Chicoms, especially those in Lab 4 Wuhan, China. Unfortunately, even medical science is caught up in the TDS politics. Just saw reports on three more separate studies on the use of HCQ. All had wonderfully incredible results, 92% positive patient response, with ZERO bad side effects. Not a single patient, NOT ONE!!! had cardiac issues. None!! Unfortunately, the use of HCQ has been politicized because Trump mentioned it might prove helpful for patients. Can't have Trump being proved right...again! Useful idiots like you, Goosey, go around spreading false information and people die because of it. Shame on you.
BTW, if you would pull your head out of your ass for a moment...how do you think Trump came by that information, that HCQ is a useful drug to fight C-19? Do you think he labored long hours doing independent research, maybe on-line, and arrived at that conclusion totally on his own? Or...did someone on his task force, you know, a medical researcher, bring it to his attention and he then mentioned it during a press conference? Which one?
As much as I admire President Trump, a tireless champion for America!!! I doubt very seriously if he came upon the notion of using HCQ by himself. He passed on what some medical experts told him. And then merely expressed that perhaps it might work as a treatment. Bam! that was the kiss of death for that possibility! Apparently YOU give him more credit and think he did all his own research on the matter. Wow!
Oops! in my zeal to respond, I misspoke. obummer did rescue Capt. Phillip from those Somalian pirates, and he did take out Osama Ben Laden with a daring raid...rather than using a cruise missile. I give him credit for both decisions.
And blithering idiot Joe Biden counseled against both. He's such a dunce he was 0-2 on the only good things obummer did!
He also paid that ransom money to Iran...the money that Reagan stiffed them on. That made all his fellow Globalists happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
The 2009-10 Mexican Flu, yep. 61 million Americans infected, 12,500 deaths from a common flu. And now I am reading that those numbers are under-stated, it was much, much worse. First, to be PC the powers-that-be did not want to use the accepted naming practice for a virus outbreak with geography...nope! can't offend our Mexican friends, even though that's where it started. And, oh no! can't publish the real numbers...would make obummer look bad (even worse), so, tinker with the numbers and change the cause of death for thousands to something else.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Trump got the idea about HCQ from Tucker Carlson. He talked about it the night before Trump started promoting it. Fauci was always throwing cold water on the idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
If Trump was right about China, then why was he singing Xi’s praises for a month?
The swine flu is why he put the pandemic response team together.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
But his response to the swine flu was far more successful than Trump’s response to COVID.
Fauci has zero credibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And BS on his getting it from Tucker Carlson. How stupid are you? I know the whole timeline since it is public knowledge, but you are too entrenched in your TDS stupor so I won't waste the time posting it.
And, again, how stupid are you? Your pea brain can't allow the thought of what great leaders say out-loud and what they say only to their closest charges? No, of course not. Beyond that...what, should our leader(s) not try diplomacy first? Really? Should any POTUS immediately verbally attack other world leaders, even our adversaries, or should they at least try to broker some kind of deal to maintain world peace? I had no idea you were such a hawk!
Yes, history points to the escapades of Neville Chamberlain trying to appease Hitler. That is the shining example of a warning and reminds us of the words of Teddy Roosevelt "speak softly and carry a big stick." That's his actual quote, but over time it has changed to "walk softly..." I think EVERY POTUS should TRY to maintain world peace. Sure beats the alternative of plunging us into world wars, eh! But you condemn Trump for trying to find some ground with Xi and the Chicoms so a shooting war doesn't start. Man, what a piece of work you are.
Even NOW after this event, I still think it is better to TALK to Xi and the Chicoms vs. sending cruise missiles over. But, I suppose you will continue to criticize Trump for not starting a war that will kill billions...
When did Trump first talk about HCQ?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Here's the Washington Post timeline for HC and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...xychloroquine/Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Thoughts on the following? Indicating Fauci has known about HC since 2005.
https://onenewsnow.com/perspectives/...-needed-to-die
I can’t read the WaPo article. HCQ is a well known drug that I would expect any doctor to know about.Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonPieBlue
Would it not open? It usually blocks me from reading but on that link it let me in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Won’t let me in.Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonPieBlue
Can't read the first link because I'm not a subscriber (has that always been the case with WP?)Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonPieBlue
The second one is heavily biased. He has likely known about it a lot longer than 2005. "Nobody needed to die" tells you everything you need to know about the article. It is true that HCQ is a known drug and has shown to be effective against similar viruses. I think we have learned that it is not a magic bullet for Covid-19.
Forcing NYC residents to quarantine in high-rise apartment buildings was about the dumbest thing you could have done. Just absolutely STUPID.
Ordering nursing homes to admit coronavirus patients was equally stupid. STUPID!
Ironic that I read an article before the pandemic hit that was suggesting all citizens living outside of city limits be charged additional taxes for climate change. The theory was that they were less efficient in their carbon footprint and had to use transportation that was not "mass" transit to get where they were going, so they should be charged what amounted to a carbon tax.
It's the WAPO...consider the source, but, even it states Trump knew about HCQ many weeks before Tucker Carlson mentioned it for the first time on his show. Checkmate Goosey, on that tale.Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonPieBlue
Next!
For those of you who are making your own face mask here is some information that may help you if you want to increase its effectiveness. How do N95 or KN95 face masks compare to HEPA air purifiers?
You may see or hear about people wearing surgical masks or N95 or KN95 rated masks to prevent themselves and others from being exposed to Covid-19. One important thing to note is that these masks are not as effective as HEPA air purifier systems which is more efficient than KN95/N95.
N95 or KN95 face masks capture 95% of particles down to 0.3 micron. This means that 5% still get through the protection. HEPA air purifiers in contrast are 99.97% effective at 0.3 Micron and are much more efficient than face masks.
Since I can’t read the article can you answer my question?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
According to the article Tucker Carlson had a medical researcher on his show March 18 who spoke about HCQ's potential, and Trump "first mentions it" on March 19. That's publicly mentions it, at a press conference. But, Laura Ingraham had that same researcher on her show a week before, and the possible use of HCQ had been mentioned for at least a week on various shows and networks. Some with more enthusiasm than others... But, Trump had been briefed on HCQ and its possible use to treat virus patients in the first week of March. He hosted a meeting on March 4 that included the researcher, Rigano.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
So, it is just stupidly wrong to think Trump watched Tucker's show and had an ah hah! moment. Momentum had been building with many sources touting HCQ as a possible treatment.
Trump met with Rigano on March 4?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
This desire to open things up has driving some in left wing MSM to ask or say that all of us who value "freedom" is a dangerous thing...
This MSN dude, Anand Giridharadas, wants to know?quote:
There’s a primordial American tradition going back to the founders of being freedom-obsessed, even though we’re a country founded on slavery and genocide,” Giridharadas continued. “Being freedom-obsessed to the point where we’re always so afraid of the government coming for us that we’re blind to other types of threats, whether it’s a virus, whether it’s bank malfeasance, climate change, what have you.”
Yes, we'd all lump the China Virus and Climate Change together.:icon_roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Don't know if you guys have seen this, but it's been on the news a lot here in Dallas. Made national news as well
Dallas salon owner jailed for defying virus shutdown DALLAS -- A Texas' judge's decision to jail a hair salon owner for defying restrictions meant to limit the spread of the coronavirus has drawn criticism from the governor and state attorney general. Shelley Luther was booked in the Dallas County jail on Tuesday afternoon following a video hearing during which she was found in contempt of court and sentenced to a week behind bars. The hearing occurred as Gov. Greg Abbott relaxed more coronavirus restrictions statewide, allowing barbershops and hair salons to reopen FridayDallas County Judge Eric Moye said during the hearing that he would consider levying a fine instead of jail time if Luther would apologize and not reopen until she was allowed to do so, but Luther refused.
“Feeding my kids is not selfish,” she told Moye. “If you think the law is more important than kids getting fed, then please go ahead with your decision, but I am not going to shut the salon.”
Moye wrote in his judgment of contempt: “The defiance of the court’s order was open, flagrant and intentional.” He noted that despite being given the opportunity to apologize, Luther “expressed no contrition, remorse or regret” for her actions.
So Moye seems so egotistical that if she apologized to him, and bowed down to the government, he would not put her in jail.. Apparently someone setup a gofundme account and already hit almost 250K in 24 hours.
Why do you like freedom so much??? It's like that old saying.. "people on the inside can't explain it.. and people on the outside can't understand it.."Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Sounds like he is unhappy here. He is "free" to leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Apparently this whole lockdown is not having the effects that experts and lawmakers intended. In New York, 66% of the new admissions to hospitals for Covid-19 in the last 3 days have been from people who have been staying at home. They have not been going outside, they have not been taking public transportation, or private transportation. So how effective is the lockdown? Even Gov Cuomo said that this is surprising and he doesn't have an answer. Meanwhile NYC Mayor Deblasio said that NYC won't reopen until NYC gets the 7 billion more federal money that he wanted for lost tax revenue. Well you still have businesses shut down, so they can't earn money to provide you that tax revenue.. so sorry charlie..
Your first statement isn’t necessarily true. The new hospitalizations are going down. That is the predicted effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
The fact that others that don’t go out is also predictable. Especially nursing homes, which was 18% of the new cases coming into New York hospitals.
What this actually proves is that isolating the vulnerable doesn’t work. People that are isolated still see people that aren’t, though it is at a reduced rate than if they went out themselves. As a greater percentage of the population gets infected, the odds go up that someone that is bunkered down will be exposed through someone that isn’t.
When they quarantine you in the hospital, they make sure you are in a sealed section of the hospital and not sharing air or germs with any of the other parts. In a high rise apartment building (some of which were built 100 or more years ago) how much "sharing" of germs is going on? My guess is quite a bit. Quarantining you with sick people is akin to what they used to do with the chicken pox before the vaccine....put all the kids in the tub together and let them all get it and get through it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Cuomo has the tax thing figured out. He is taxing all those good Samaritans that answered the call to come to New York from other states and cities to help them with the virus. JERK!
Nursing homes continue to suffer greatly because Cuomo made them take in Covid patients. Genius.
Cuomo has been a disaster.
That is not what happens in most nursing homes. In most nursing homes it is one of the workers that brings it in, and then it spreads like wildfire.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
Dawg80? Is that what you were saying happened?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Nope. Not the NY nursing homes. They were forced to take Covid 19 patients. This was especially STUPID because they had empty temp hospitals and a Navy hospital ship set up with virtually no patients they could have used.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Protecting the vulnerable would indeed work. You pay people to work AND LIVE in the nursing homes until this is over. Pay them well. Keep the economy open. Keep people working.
Cuomo blew it. He is horrible.
Most of these homes don’t have places for the workers to live. Is the state prepared to pay all the overtime to keep workers there around the clock? Most of these folks make little more than minimum wage and have their own family obligations outside their job.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
I am interested to better understand your isolation strategy, because I know of no state that has figured out how to do it effectively yet.
Btw, since early April, Louisiana is no longer reporting clusters in Louisiana nursing homes.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.waf...outputType=amp
Yeah, it's obviously cheaper to eschew all state revenues, completely shut down an economy and pump 6 trillion (so far) dollars into a non-functional system rather than making accommodations for workers (and their families) to attend to the vulnerable among us and paying them overtime (I'd pay them a lot more than overtime....heck you could pay them a million each for giving up their life for three or four months and come out cheaper than we are now).Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Louisiana did not force nursing homes to take Covid 19 patients, as far as I am aware. Maybe you know different. Either way the elderly have been treated horribly in all this.
If you are isolating in one of the apartment complexes I described, which is many/most of them in NYC, you are not really isolating as much as you are exposing yourself to everything in the building. Heaven help you if you have to take your little metrosexual yap dog down to poop on the sidewalk and go get groceries, because then you are touching elevator buttons and door handles and breathing in the farts and sneezes of the folks that passed that way in the last ten minutes.
If you are under 50 and have none of the conditions that cause issues, you should be at work (social distancing, but working none the less). This isn't the plague or Ebola. It's not even as bad as the flu epidemic of 1918 (note I did not say "Spanish" flu because I don't want someone on here to start killing off Spaniards out of spite).
Apparently Louisiana nursing homes let COVID positive workers come back. I assume the same is true for their residents (if they survive).Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
Keep in mind if you are going to isolate the workers with the residents you will need multiple shifts therefore many more rooms that these nursing facilities don’t have. The isolation strategy just doesn’t work.
Why do you say this? Apparently?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
They did not KNOWINGLY allow infected workers to come in.
You have no evidence that Louisiana moved infected patients from hospitals to nursing homes.
Rapid testing is the only solution for the nursing home or LTC facility issues.
He changed his mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Ask the nursing home when the infected worker will come back to work.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
If they decide to come back it will be after they test negative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
In your haste to defend Governor "Piercing" you are ignoring the fact that he found a bunch of old people dispensable. Basically, he killed hundreds/thousands of people and refuses to acknowledge it. I'm not a fan our our governor, but I believe he has been locked up on things because of the nursing home/LTC dilemma.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
What happens to asymptomatic COVID positive residents of nursing homes?
Another 3 million newly unemployed.
That's not what happened in New York, but nursing home patients are being protected as much as possible by isolating them as much as possible. Not many, if any nursing home residents would be "asymptomatic" because they all fall into the pre-ex/age range.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Do you know of anyone above age 70 with comorbidities who is simply asymptomatic?
New York Governor https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...s-nipples.html
Yes, but that doesn’t mean they won’t develop symptoms. For example, resident of nursing home shows symptoms of Covid and tests positive, workers are tested and they test positive, other residents test positive but are currently asymptomatic.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Cuomo is a governor.
Yes he is and a total screw up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Again, the situation you describe is not at all what happened in New York which should be a top news story, but is being ignored by MSM.
MAYBE 10% of the residents in a nursing home could possibly be asymptomatic.
The numbers may be higher in an LTC facility.
Every Covid positive person is asymptomatic at some point.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
I don’t like the idea of sending a Covid positive person to a nursing home period. I would want to see multiple negative tests over the course of multiple days before sending them back. That is the system that guisslapp would run.
But there is a little more to the NY story
Another important timeline piece. The state mandate you are referring to was from March 25. The Comfort didn’t get sent to NY until March 30. New York was dealing with a health care system crisis at the time.Quote:
“They have to readmit COVID-positive residents, but only if they have the ability to provide the adequate level of care under Department of Health and CDC guidelines,” Cuomo said, referring to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“If they do not have the ability to provide the appropriate level of care, then they have to transfer that patient or they call the Department of Health, and the Department of Health will transfer that patient,” Cuomo added.
81% of New York voters approve of Cuomo's handling of the COVID 19 Pandemic according to the latest Quinnipiac poll.
Yes, every patient is asymptomatic just before they get the virus. Don't assume many, if any at all, of the nursing home patients have a lag from exposure to symptoms. I assume that is the testing window you think should be monitored. That is impossible to do with nursing home patients, but hopefully possible for the employees very soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
That would be a state guideline that he had the power to change as needed. He is blaming the CDC for something he had complete authority to handle properly. He hit the panic button and killed people.
He was looking for hospital beds so he took those likely to die anyway out of the hospital and sent them back to mix with others who were sure to die if they were infected...and they did. BTW, many of these sick people were sent back to the nursing homes AFTER the Comfort got there and after the pop up hospitals were built. Basically none of those facilities were used.
Before they knew how many nursing home patients he killed or are New York voters okay with genocide?Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
The results of this poll were released yesterday. I imagine they're no more pro-genocide than the Texas Lt. Governor.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Every symptomatic COVID patient was at one point asymptomatic but had the virus.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
A recent study (Reich) in the Annals of Internal Medicine calculates that the median incubation period for COVID-19 is just over five days and that 97.5 percent of people who develop symptoms will do so within 11.5 days of infection.
I wasn’t making up a hypothetical, I was describing something that is actually happening in nursing homes.
Right...you could have stopped at "New York voters" part of the post. That says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
Why are we only hearing about the ones in New York? I've heard about a couple of others and a VA Home, but not like in New York.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Well, we have heard about the ones in Washingon (the first major outbreak), New Jersey, California, Louisiana (at least before mid April).Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
https://www.wbrz.com/news/state-moni...usters-in-la-/
That list doesn’t include them all. “Why don’t we see more reporting” is a good question .
Poorly written to say the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
True, but this is what I am curious about:Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Quote:
The state has said it is no longer reporting the names of nursing homes with virus cases.
If you are unable to think outside of the box and have zero creativity, then you are correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I guess some folks just cannot see solutions until they have been implemented elsewhere and written in a book.
Because the state knows families will call BS when they realize deaths by “natural causes” are pretty much ALL labeled death by China VirusQuote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
They actually stopped doing that early on. At the very beginning they were listing them every time there was an outbreak in a nursing home. It became hard to keep track of them. I want to say that was 4-5 weeks ago that they stopped doing this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Your plan doesn’t work.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
That’s not it.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
New study says HCQ doesn’t work.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nol...19075.amp.htmlQuote:
health officials said the volume of homes made it too difficult to report the names of individual facilities.
Not sure I buy that either.
The rest of the article elaborates more on the strength of the lobby. Who knows? This article is better than the other one I posted.Quote:
Dr. Alex Billioux, assistant secretary for the state Office of Public Health, said his department decided to stop identifying nursing homes to focus on elderly patients. He was asked whether the nursing home industry had lobbied for the change, and replied, “The focus is on the patients.”
What I said above.
LOL. You're one of those simpletons I was speaking about, then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
You wear it well.
Congrats!Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
So your plan is to deprive workers of their rights to go home?Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
[QUOTE=PawDawg;1762898]What I said above.[/QUOT]
I think the tin foil is starting to cut off your circulation.
[QUOTE=Guisslapp;1762907]It’s called logic. Otherwise natural causes deaths are down and especially in the areas were China Virus deaths are at the highest. You got a model that proves me wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
It's logical that "natural cause" deaths would be down when there is a pandemic spreading at a nursing home.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
What he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
Plus, the clinical presentation of severe COVID is fairly distinct and prevalent. I don’t understand why Pawdawg’s insists that it is a conspiracy theory. Nurses and docs can tell you all about what they are seeing in their COVID patients.
This is not at all difficult. You have to stop thinking about what exists and think about what would work for this pandemic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
It's all volunteer on a contract basis for a defined period. The workers don't HAVE to be the workers that are there already, but they can be. If you wish to do it, you get compensated handsomely (like a whole lot...but this is still cheaper than the untold trillions we are spending now and this doesn't wreck the economy). You get to bring your partner with you. You get screened before you arrive. You sign on to quarantine with the patients and not venture out. You are tested before you arrive for your extended shift and additionally at some point during your tenure. If you have to change processes within the homes, you do it. The idea is limiting their exposure to the virus and keeping the economy open to people with less risky profiles or anyone else wishing to work. This is a reasonable place for federal funds to help out.
Think about this like going out to sea on a submarine with the US Navy, except a lot more lucrative and you get to have your family there if you wish. You can opt out after your contract is over (I have no idea how long such contract should be for), or you can do it again until the end of the pandemic.
Workers there already that choose not to work under this type of contract get furloughed and collect unemployment or find a new job somewhere else. Their employment status is not as important as not killing residents of the home.
I am sure something like this could be used as a starting point to hash out something that could be done. You just have to stop thinking about what exists and think about what your goal is.
Using Bing and asking "How well does HCQ work in treating Covid-19 patients?" Several pages of results was returned. I randomly opened 6 of the articles. 5 of the 6 were positive to Yes, HCQ is an effective treatment. The one negative article was about the Brazilian study, but even in that article it appears there was mixed-results.
Reading some of the sub-headlines in the articles was stuff like this: "International Study Shows Majority of Doctors Say HCQ Works." Then you start reading the paragraph and learn that of 6,200+ doctors surveyed, worldwide, 37% say emphatically HCQ works, 23% see some potential, and so on with a various, decreasing support for its use. Well, 37% is not a "majority" but it is a plurality of the responses.
Three studies, ranging from just 62 test subjects to 210, all show fantastic results. Like patients being "cured" who had it, and patients dying or needing intensive care if they didn't get HCQ. One study, of 181 test subjects, had 84 being treated with HCQ and 97 not. Critics of the study point to the unequal numbers used. So? Reading the summary ALL 84 patients treated recovered and are doing fine, and of the 97 not treated, there was variety of results from increased symptoms, to needing intensive care, to death in some cases. Even IF you want to say, well, the study doesn't prove anything, you should at least acknowledge, well, there appears to be something to this.
IDK...
I don't know, if like in the case of the horrible VA study that really murdered patients, that ANY of these studies are legit. For instance, in the case of the 84 and 97 study...did the researchers hand pick the 84 who had mild symptoms and the other 97 were in bad shape...one foot in the grave? If so then the results are null. A true study would literally select test patients randomly. Like assigning the 181 patients a number and drawing from a hat. The criticisms of that study mention no such thing, such as being selective to assure the results the researchers wanted.
What I do know is that by a preponderance of the evidence there appears to be some measurable positive results using HCQ to treat C-19 infected patients. Certainly enough to warrant a study (or studies) that we can all trust as legit...whatever the results may be.
One more thing...while there are studies on the use of HCQ dating back to February, and from all over the world, I purposely picked more recent ones. Ranging from April 24 to May 6.
Dawg80, that is not scientific at all.
No it isn’t. Claiming deaths by China Virus for those who would have died anyway is totally illogical, but it helps the numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
How consistent are deaths for a natural cause of death for a given week from year to year?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
So, every death in a nursing home should be labeled as natural causes? I mean, they would've died anyway...they are in a nursing home. You do know that most of the deaths in a normal year are cardiac and alzheimers right?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Because when I look at the very limited data set you provided earlier...Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/health...NUgAlwgScMobYg
...you can see that deaths were running below trend before any COVID deaths happened in the US. And the chart really ends very early, well before COVID deaths started to hit on a 2k+ per day rate.
Is this the data you are drawing your inference from?
100 people died in 2019, but in 2020 only 30 of those people died. That’s your logic.
That isn’t what the data says. And what is the expected variability year to year even without a pandemic?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
There was or has been very little variability until you needed it to help your ChinaVirus death tally.
The CDC death statistics prove that deaths are not up in 2020. We worked through this a couple of weeks ago.
But they were below average on a weekly basis even before COVID - assuming we are working off that chart I linked. What is your data source?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Once you include data from a significant number of COVID deaths (rather than weekly deaths falling with the historical variability), the picture looks a bit different.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
And a nice Tableau chart illustrating in the context of historical variability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...ess_deaths.htm