quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
Iirc, Dubya even changed the reporting in CDC, for HIV. But, he never changed that the info was reported to them just how it was shown to the public.

I’m just hoping jhu continues to get their numbers from labs. For what it is worth, pa changed how they report but it was partially explained why. There were two different method too! The original I liked better but I believe it made it harder for the counties to calculate their compliance! Our head of public health, for the state, has been quite informative and seems similar to Fauci in explaining changes etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
I wish DJT would stop messing with things, he’s only fooling himself and maybe his base!

quote:

Originally posted by Stop The Madness:
 
DJT knows that he is going to LOSE in his bid for re-election. He sees his base slowly eroding day after day (as at least some of them begin to WAKE UP and he has KILLED OFF many others with his arrogance and inaction and continuing lies, in the face of this pandemic). So, being truly desperate now, he is trying to re-ignite the IGNORANCE in his BASE by attacking (a most familiar tactic of his, lacking any credibility or any factual basis for his ludicrous comments)... calling everyone a LIAR (except for himself--the BIGGEST LIAR OF ALL--with 20,000+ documented LIES, to date)!

13 July 2020:
DJT, aka the AHOLE-IN-CHIEF, tweets (screams) ‘Everyone is lying’
as he attacks the CDC, Media, Democrats, his Administrations' Doctors

quote:

17 July 2020
Americans’ views of President Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic have deteriorated significantly as cases rise across the country and personal fears of becoming infected persist, a Washington Post-ABC News poll finds.

The Post-ABC poll shows 38 percent of Americans approve of his handling of the outbreak, down from 46 percent in May and 51 percent in March. Sixty percent disapprove, up from 53 percent in May and 45 percent in March.

More than half of the public — 52 percent — now disapproves “strongly” of Trump’s handling of the outbreak, roughly double the percentage who say they strongly approve of his efforts and an increase from 36 percent in strong disapproval since March.

Trump has sent mixed messages throughout the pandemic and has often been at odds with scientists and health officials in his administration. He now faces clear credibility problems with the public. More than 6 in 10 say they do not trust what he says about the outbreak, including 2 in 3 political independents and nearly 3 in 10 Republicans.

Trump’s disconnect with the public is clear on questions about reopening the economy and the wearing of masks. While Trump has called on states to lift business restrictions in an effort to boost the economy, Americans say that controlling the spread of the virus is a higher priority.

A 63 percent majority say it is more important to try to control the spread of the virus even if it hurts the economy, up from 57 percent in May. The share who “strongly” favor controlling the virus’s spread over restarting the economy has grown from 41 percent in May to 52 percent in the latest survey.

Trump’s worsening ratings on management of the outbreak reflect not only a drop in approval among Democrats but also declines among some groups that have been core parts of his coalition since 2016. Trump’s ratings for handling the coronavirus have dropped by 16 percentage points among white evangelical Protestants to 68 percent today; by 15 points among white men without college degrees to 56 percent; and by 11 points among rural residents to 48 percent approval.

Political independents continue to give Trump negative marks for his handling of the outbreak by a wide margin, with 39 percent approving and 58 percent disapproving in the latest survey. A scant 4 percent of Democrats approve of Trump’s efforts. Among Republicans, nearly 4 in 5 approve, but a notable 19 percent disapprove.

more...

quote:

Topic Title: DJT's COVID-19 "killing fields" (he's doing it "yugely")

quote:

Months into the coronavirus pandemic...

Facts First: It remains unclear if those already infected with the virus are immune to any reinfection. Additionally, it's unknown how long any sort of immunity would last.

It's currently impossible to know from an antibody test whether someone is immune to the coronavirus, according to Dr. Celine Gounder, an epidemiologist and clinical assistant professor at New York University.

"All you can say from an antibody test is that somebody has been exposed," Gounder told CNN. "You can't really say anything about immunity."

In April, the World Health Organization warned against the creation of immunity passports suggested by some governments, noting that "no study has evaluated whether the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 confers immunity to subsequent infection by this virus in humans."

Aubree Gordon, associate professor of epidemiology at the University of Michigan, told CNN the issue with Paul's claim is that "we really don't know."

"Yes, the grand majority of people that have had Covid-19 do develop an antibody response," Gordon said. "However, although the scientific community is generally optimistic, we do not know whether people that have been infected and recovered are generally 'immune' to infection or whether they can be reinfected."

During a briefing in late April, the Infectious Diseases Society of America warned that those previously infected shouldn't assume they have immunity from the virus.

"We do not know whether or not patients who have these antibodies are still at risk of reinfection with Covid-19," said Dr. Mary Hayden, spokesperson for IDSA and chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Rush University Medical Center. "At this point, I think we have to assume that they could be at risk of reinfection."

"We don't know even if the antibodies are protective, what degree of protection they provide -- so it could be complete, it could be partial -- or how long the antibodies last," Hayden added.

Timeline of antibodies:

more...

quote:

22 July 2020
AMA: How many COVID-19 cases are going undetected?

Reported U.S. case figures of COVID-19 infection are likely underestimating the disease’s spread—potentially by a large magnitude—a study published this week in JAMA Internal Medicine found. The study also found that most of the inhabitants of areas from which data was collected had not been infected by the virus during the period analyzed.

The study examined the prevalence of virus antibodies, using serologic testing figures from 10 U.S. regions—the San Francisco Bay area; Connecticut; South Florida; Louisiana; the Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud metro area; Missouri; the New York City metro area; the Philadelphia metro area; Utah; and western Washington.

Utilizing more than 16,000 samples compiled from late March through mid-May 2020, the data indicated that “the number of infections was much greater than the number of reported cases throughout the study period.” The prevalence of antibodies among studied sample varied widely by region, with New York reporting a 6.9% figure in late March and the Bay Area reporting around 1% in late April.

From comparing the number of estimated cases to reported case figures on the last day of sample collection, the study’s authors estimated that there were six times as many COVID-19 infections in Connecticut, the lowest figure, and potentially 24 times the number of infections in Missouri than were reported.

In examining potential causes of the disparity between reported cases and actual cases, the study’s authors offered two explanations: mild or asymptomatic cases or symptomatic cases in which infected people did not seek care or were not tested.

Why it’s important: In concluding remarks, the study’s authors shed some light on what the uncertainty surrounding COVID-19 case figures means for the public.

“Because persons often do not know if they are infected with [the virus], the public should continue to take steps to help prevent the spread of COVID-19, such as wearing cloth face coverings when outside the home, remaining six feet apart from other people, washing hands frequently, and staying home when sick,” they said.

An editorial published based on the study looked at how the figures discredit the concept of so-called “herd immunity.” That theory is based on the significant prevalence of antibodies in the general population—somewhere around 70%.

“Increasing evidence suggests that acquired immunity may be short-lived in some persons with [COVID-19] infection, particularly those with mild or asymptomatic infections,” the editorial’s authors contend. “Importantly, whatever protection population-level seropositivity might confer may be less durable than initially anticipated.”

quote:

So, as is typical of him (likely, all of his life),

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:

quote:

So, as is typical of him (likely, all of his life),

According to Mary Trump that’s quite true!

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
If you get a chance to borrow the book, it’s short, it’s confirms a lot of what you already expect. Parental approval, needing to be the center of attention etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
It’s written more like a observation than an attack. The audible route sounds good!

I used the idea that she was a clinical psychologist to influence my reading it! It doesn’t read like excuses but you do come away with the felling of how could he be anything else!

the installer, AudibleSync.exe, was detected (and instantly quarantined) by my anti-malware. The reason was given as Behavior.CodeInjector

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
Hmmm. I couldn’t remember why I didn’t use audible, you may have hit on it. I pretty much hate clouds and certainly try to avoid them all I can, especially for personal stuff. I’m beginning to find more and more stuff I can’t put on some devices because of their needing cloud support of some type.

Be sure that you have ample emergency supplies of masks and hand sanitizers (along with your usual emergency supplies of medicines, food, water, clothing, etc.) because there very likely will not be any/ample supplies of those forth-coming from FEMA (for example) as they scramble to obtain their own such supplies (PPE, including N95 masks and hazmat suits). Also, be sure to maintain "social distancing" while cooped-up in those shelters!

* listened to our intelligence agencies warnings in late 2019 and beyond

* listened to our medical and science experts' warnings as well

* in short: LISTENED and ACTED on expert advice instead of pretending that HE KNOWS IT ALL and that "all is well" (being concerned only about himself and his money)

covid-19 in homeless shelters

covid-19 in storm shelters

covid-19 in domestic violence shelters

Too Much But Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man

quote:

14 August 2020
The CDC clarifies that COVID-19 immunity and antibodies are still a mystery

New guidelines on quarantining send a mixed message.

Update: This post has been amended to reflect clarification from the CDC.

On Friday the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated its guidelines for quarantining to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Most notably, the agency now excludes “people who have had COVID-19 within the past three months” from the need to self-isolate after coming into contact with individuals infected with the virus. This guidance does not apply to people who have recovered and then develop symptoms again; the CDC still recommends they get tested to rule out an ongoing or repeat infection.

While the guidelines appeared to imply that recovered COVID-19 patients could assume they have some immunity to the virus for 90 days, the CDC released a statement later on Friday reiterating that the immune response to virus is still largely unknown:

Nsikan Akpan
@MoNscience
New from @CDCgov: Updated Isolation Guidance Does Not Imply Immunity to COVID-19.

"Contrary to media reporting today, this science does not imply a person is immune to reinfection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in the 3 months following infection."

According to the agency, the updated guidelines don’t refer to a person’s likelihood of catching the virus that causes COVID-19, but rather to the likelihood that testing them for re-infection might not yield accurate results.

When you get a cold, the flu, or another virus, cells within your adaptive immune system design antibodies to find and kill it. Antibodies remain in your body once the virus is gone, and they recognize the invader if it mounts a repeat attack, making you far less likely to get sick from the same strain a second time.

But that doesn’t mean you’re invincible to infection forever; viruses can mutate to the extent that your immune system won’t recognize them anymore, and antibodies can also fade over time. While immunity to measles and the chicken pox typically lasts for life, researchers have found that several types of coronavirus—a family that includes both the virus that causes COVID-19 and some that cause the common cold—are able to infect the same host repeatedly within a short period of time.

more...

quote:

FDA's Hahn Apologizes For Overselling Plasma's Benefits As A COVID-19 Treatment

At a White House event Sunday with President Trump, FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn used a deeply misleading statistic to claim that a treatment the agency had just authorized for treating the coronavirus would save 35 lives out of every 100 people who get the treatment.

But that particular coronavirus study lacked a comparison group – everyone in the study got convalescent plasma. Some people got it earlier in the course of their treatment than others. So to look for signs of efficacy, the study compared the effects in people who received it in the first three days of hospitalization with the results in people who got the treatment later. Researchers then compared the mortality rate of these two groups, both after seven days and after 30 days.

After seven days, the mortality rate of the group that got convalescent plasma early in their disease was about 9%, compared with a 12% mortality rate among people who got it later. At 30 days, the mortality rate was 22% for the early-treatment group versus a 27% mortality rate for the people who got later treatment.

So mortality apparently improved by 3 or 5 percentage points. That's the "absolute" risk reduction to which Hahn's tweet refers. Getting to a 35% "relative" reduction in mortality involves comparing the before and after groups in a way that dramatically exaggerates the effect of the treatment.

more...

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
I was glad he walked his statement back. However, claiming there wasn’t a contradiction seemed more like the twilight zone!

Today's numbers, from the BING COVID-19 Tracker:

5,850,278 (cases) divided by 180,375 (deaths) equals 3.0832 % mortality

How is that measured 3.0832 % number significantly different from the latest "trump"ed up study's number (of 3 to 5%)?

Answer: IT IS NO DIFFERENT, PERIOD!