Moving to Phase II

[Merge]

Could it be that fewer people are taking tests? Maybe those taking the tests are the ones who truly feel they have it. There could also be a backlog from notoriously slow labs. I don't know the actual numbers on this.

Could be a lot of reasons, but it shows that we are still too focused on testing people who are symptomatic.
Not really looking for who to blame here at this point. We can do that later for sure, but the fact is that we are failing now.

The way out is testing. A massive amount of testing.

 

[knowknow456]

Could be a lot of reasons, but it shows that we are still too focused on testing people who are symptomatic.
Not really looking for who to blame here at this point. We can do that later for sure, but the fact is that we are failing now.

The way out is testing. A massive amount of testing.

We've covered a lot of territory since this thread started but little of it has to do with moving to phase II. People have tried to quantify what a massive amount of testing would look like and the numbers are pretty big.

1. AEI was one of the first in late March - the link is in the first post. They estimated 750,000 tests per week.

2. The Center for American Progress doesn't give a number - all they say is - Ramping up testing to South Korean levels so that every individual who has a fever, and every member of a household of a positive case, has access to a test

https://www.americanprogress.org/is...3/national-state-plan-end-coronavirus-crisis/

3. The Edmond Safra Center for Ethics wrote a white paper entitled - "Why we must test millions a day"



I have no idea what the right answer would be but these three organizations are putting some thought into it. They are worth a glance, even if it is to disagree with their conclusions.

 

[Piratz]

Could be a lot of reasons, but it shows that we are still too focused on testing people who are symptomatic.
Not really looking for who to blame here at this point. We can do that later for sure, but the fact is that we are failing now.

The way out is testing. A massive amount of testing.

The testing is the only way to gather data to truly understand the virus’ behavior in spreading If we ever get to that level of testing, the asymptomatic rate is going to be shocking to people, I believe.

There is some early anecdotal info that shows the asymptomatic are carriers for a lot longer (30 days+) than those who are presymptomatic and actually fall ill. That is a big deal if true.

And for the love of God, could someone in the media please educate the public on the difference between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic. They are not the same.

 

[knowknow456]

The testing is the only way to gather data to truly understand the virus’ behavior in spreading If we ever get to that level of testing, the asymptomatic rate is going to be shocking to people, I believe.

There is some early anecdotal info that shows the asymptomatic are carriers for a lot longer (30 days+) than those who are presymptomatic and actually fall ill. That is a big deal if true.

And for the love of God, could someone in the media please educate the public on the difference between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic. They are not the same.

Using South Korea, usually mentioned as the gold standard for testing - they have processed 534,000 tests and found 10,591 cases (estimated numbers) - for a 2% positive rate.

As mentioned previously, NJ is at 44% positive rate.

If the US as a whole were to get to a 2% positive rate on 644,000 cases, we would have to have processed 32,000,000 tests. So far, the country as a who has process 3.2 million.

 

[The Crows Nest]

Number of deaths yesterday was a little depressing. I thought we were headed down but yesterday was the largest single day yet. Today doesn't look far behind either.

Unfortunately deaths will be the last thing to decline. But hopefully it is coming

 

[The Crows Nest]

Nope, but next time it happens let's not overhype it and shut everything down. Okay?

Look I’m not at all happy with this either but in this case I do believe it was warranted.
I am with you though that a fear is that politicians once fed with power, are reluctant to relinquish that power. That we must guard against.
Let’s hope we get to share a beer at a Seton Hall game next year with this in the rear view mirror

 

[The Crows Nest]

I think you’ll be hearing about special priced menus like between 2 and 5. So instead of a restaurant having that 3-4 hour gap, they’re going to try to turn the tables more. I also think towns are going to have be more lenient especially if a restaurant loses 5 tables inside, give them a few extra tables on the sidewalk to make up the difference.

I think there are a lot of good ideas in here and those that are most creative will fare well.
I do really feel for small businesses...I try to order take out a few times a week. Isn’t much but a little help hopefully

 

[The Crows Nest]

Why shouldn’t we have preventive measures for heart disease. Social distancing is a cure for Coronavirus. Great let’s do it. A cure for heart disease, childhood obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, etc is pretty much get rid of the shit that’s bad for you including the shit that’s advertised as healthy but it’s not. Why are you so against that? Don’t want your soda taken away? It’s a drain on the health care system as well as a cause for insane insurance costs. Plenty of areas in the world with almost no heart disease. Go see what they don’t eat. Let’s fight a war against Coronavirus, but let’s not fight one vs overall health. Heck we probably wouldn’t have so many preexisting conditions. Less preexisting conditions = less deaths from Coronavirus.

I’m not against preventing other illnesses. Have no clue where you got that.
You are arguing against the social distancing that is in place now, arguing they are the same as what we can do for heart disease.


That.... is nonsense

 

[Piratz]

Using South Korea, usually mentioned as the gold standard for testing - they have processed 534,000 tests and found 10,591 cases (estimated numbers) - for a 2% positive rate.

As mentioned previously, NJ is at 44% positive rate.

If the US as a whole were to get to a 2% positive rate on 644,000 cases, we would have to have processed 32,000,000 tests. So far, the country as a who has process 3.2 million.

You won’t be able to replicate the SK model here.

How the most powerful, resourceful, wealthy country on Earth wasn’t prepared on at least testing is government ineptitude at its finest. The stories will be taught in classrooms for generations.

The testing would’ve been gold. People being diagnosed with the flu or a bad cold had this. Would’ve also helped on the path out; IDing.

 

[HALL85]

The testing is the only way to gather data to truly understand the virus’ behavior in spreading If we ever get to that level of testing, the asymptomatic rate is going to be shocking to people, I believe.

There is some early anecdotal info that shows the asymptomatic are carriers for a lot longer (30 days+) than those who are presymptomatic and actually fall ill. That is a big deal if true.

And for the love of God, could someone in the media please educate the public on the difference between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic. They are not the same.

Agree. The key is getting the rapids tests out there that can be done at home or in a doctors office with a 5-15 minute result that can also test for asymptotic or post-symptomatic. There is a ton of financial motivation to get there and there are well over a hundred companies at various stages of FDA review. Like any test, accuracy is critical.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

I’m not against preventing other illnesses. Have no clue where you got that.
You are arguing against the social distancing that is in place now, arguing they are the same as what we can do for heart disease.


That.... is nonsense

I never once argued against social distancing, in fact I promoted when I posted about restaurants reducing tables and expanding dining outside or on rooftops. I argued it’s hypocritical that we’re looking to the government for a war on Coronavirus and the government has a long history of neglecting public health for economic wealth. Food lobbyists are working to sell products that will destroy our heart health and the government picks their side every time. In all honesty I would prefer them focus on heart health over Coronavirus because heart health will kill more, despite not killing any of us at a sporting event.

 

[HALL85]

I never once argued against social distancing, in fact I promoted when I posted about restaurants reducing tables and expanding dining outside or on rooftops. I argued it’s hypocritical that we’re looking to the government for a war on Coronavirus and the government has a long history of neglecting public health for economic wealth. Food lobbyists are working to sell products that will destroy our heart health and the government picks their side every time. In all honesty I would prefer them focus on heart health over Coronavirus because heart health will kill more, despite not killing any of us at a sporting event.

This is really the point. If we are going to criticize the government on the COVID response and measuring it by fatalities, then the outrage should be even greater considering how many die by these other means EVERY year while the government enables it.

 

[Merge]

I never once argued against social distancing, in fact I promoted when I posted about restaurants reducing tables and expanding dining outside or on rooftops. I argued it’s hypocritical that we’re looking to the government for a war on Coronavirus and the government has a long history of neglecting public health for economic wealth. Food lobbyists are working to sell products that will destroy our heart health and the government picks their side every time.

It's on us to manage our diets. We know what is bad for us, and we make our own choices.
While I want the government to tax unhealthy foods to subsidize the costs of healthier foods (or healthcare costs) we should be free to eat what we want.

 

[Merge]

This is really the point. If we are going to criticize the government on the COVID response and measuring it by fatalities, then the outrage should be even greater considering how many die by these other means EVERY year while the government enables it.

They are quite different though especially if you believe in personal freedoms and responsibilities.

I don't need the government to tell me what to eat, I do however need them to protect us from pandemics.

 

[HALL85]

It's on us to manage our diets. We know what is bad for us, and we make our own choices.
While I want the government to tax unhealthy foods to subsidize the costs of healthier foods (or healthcare costs) we should be free to eat what we want.

Then why should I have to subsidize someone’s healthcare that makes poor choices?

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Then why should I have to subsidize someone’s healthcare that makes poor choices?

There should be the soda tax and a sugar tax just like a tobacco tax to subsidize it for the people that want to make poor choices. I hate the fact that poor people have to make the choice of healthy food or $1 menu at McDonalds. Why don’t people care about giving them the same opportunity for health as the rich people? I could make for a decent Democrat lol

 

[HALL85]

There should be the soda tax and a sugar tax just like a tobacco tax to subsidize it for the people that want to make poor choices. I hate the fact that poor people have to make the choice of healthy food or $1 menu at McDonalds. Why don’t people care about giving them the same opportunity for health as the rich people? I could make a decent Democrat lol

Totally agree with everything you stated.

 

[shu09]

Well, well, well US intelligence now is increasingly confident the virus came from a Chinese lab. Shocker! (not)

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coronavirus-wuhan-lab-china-compete-us-sources

 

[Piratz]

I think the difference between COVID-19 and these other examples supporting not having anyone shutdown and distance is information and choice. You know the risks of what you eat, drinking, smoking, even driving, etc. The science of those risks is pretty well documented. COVID-19 was an unknown public health risk and highly contagious.

 

[Merge]

Then why should I have to subsidize someone’s healthcare that makes poor choices?

You shouldn't, that is why I said "I want the government to tax unhealthy foods to subsidize the costs of healthier foods (or healthcare costs) "

People who make bad choices should pay in more than the people how make healthier choices.

 

[Piratz]

Well, well, well US intelligence now is increasingly confident the virus came from a Chinese lab. Shocker! (not)

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coronavirus-wuhan-lab-china-compete-us-sources

Bears watching, but I need a little more than Brett Baier from Fox News in a tip from sources. The conservative agenda is targeting China and WHO for blame. Could be true, we’ll see.

Either way, poor handling or animal, China needs to be held to account.

 

[HALL85]

I think the difference between COVID-19 and these other examples supporting not having anyone shutdown and distance is information and choice. You know the risks of what you eat, drinking, smoking, even driving, etc. The science of those risks is pretty well documented. COVID-19 was an unknown public health risk and highly contagious.

I get that but not black and white. What about the innocent person killed by a drunk?

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

I think the difference between COVID-19 and these other examples supporting not having anyone shutdown and distance is information and choice. You know the risks of what you eat, drinking, smoking, even driving, etc. The science of those risks is pretty well documented. COVID-19 was an unknown public health risk and highly contagious.

Nobody is arguing that. The issue is the government needs to crack down on those other things. The preexisting conditions from those known issues have definitely impacted COVID-19

 

[Piratz]

Nobody is arguing that. The issue is the government needs to crack down on those other things. The preexisting conditions from those known issues have definitely impacted COVID-19

l can tell you there are many organized public health outfits lobbying for those. They try. They’re just not as powerful as industrial farming, etc. This stuff is killing people.

 

[shu09]

Bears watching, but I need a little more than Brett Baier from Fox News in a tip from sources. The conservative agenda is targeting China and WHO for blame. Could be true, we’ll see.

Either way, poor handling or animal, China needs to be held to account.

Brett Baier is a good reporter. So is John Roberts. They are not Sean Hannity.

It's not a "conservative agenda." Stop with that garbage because that's what it is, garbage.

 

[Piratz]

Brett Baier is a good reporter. So is John Roberts. They are not Sean Hannity.

It's not a "conservative agenda." Stop with that garbage because that's what it is, garbage.

Like said, when it’s corroborated outside of Fox we have something. Game on. If it’s true that will be easy. Same way I look at MSNBC’s stuff. I trust neither on their own.

 

[Hallsome]

But you said yourself the other day that there would be instances where a shutdown would be warranted, right?

So pretend this outbreak is Ebola, and there is a stay at home order in place.
What do you do if people disobey the order?

Covid is brutal.
But Ebola is not a good comparison.
Ebola death rate is absurd so I’m sure lockdowns would be more stringent but generally more people would comply compared to now.
The scope of this outbreak is unprecedented though ...

hope everyone here and fams are safe/healthy

Go pirates!

 

[Hallsome]

That's not what we're talking about. People who have the virus are, and should be, isolated. Those who DON'T have it should not face the same restrictions.

Generally agree but how do you address people carrying without symptoms? Testing of course which we don’t have. I know people criticize lack of tests - but is there any way we could’ve been prepared to test every person in the world (assuming that was necessary to implement restrictions that any reasonable person could live with)?

 

[shu09]

Like said, when it’s corroborated outside of Fox we have something. Game on. If it’s true that will be easy. Same way I look at MSNBC’s stuff. I trust neither on their own.

Well CNN.com has it now. I guess it's not just a "conservative" thing anymore. It came from real reporters, not talking heads.

 

[HALL85]

Generally agree but how do you address people carrying without symptoms? Testing of course which we don’t have. I know people criticize lack of tests - but is there any way we could’ve been prepared to test every person in the world (assuming that was necessary to implement restrictions that any reasonable person could live with)?

Great question and the answer is no. First of all you need to know what you’re testing for (which is where the “glitch” occurred.). Then you need to operationalize the test (how to run it in batches, scale up reagents, training, logistics, reporting). I believe this is why LabCorp and Quest got involved because the CDC and state just don’t have nearly the capacity and resources to run millions of tests that quickly. And by the way, you need to ensure that the test is accurate (Would be interesting to see the false negatives or positives by country for comparison).

Creates a civil liberty question going forward. Would we be in favor of mandatory testing for all. Depending on result you are then treated or certified (with date of test). And if you won’t test, should you be restricted from full public movement (can’t go to the supermarket or watch a sporting event?)

 

[Piratz]

Well CNN.com has it now. I guess it's not just a "conservative" thing anymore. It came from real reporters, not talking heads.

You can mock the take, call it "garbage", whatever you want. That's your right. We're debating media reporting here. Fact remains that for months the extreme right-wing conservative outlets - inferred by those in politics with the typical convenient plausible deniability to serve a political endgame - have been circulating real garbage in a much more sinister manner, like a Hollywood script, to serve a purpose by keeping focus on the blame and the President holding that accountable as opposed to accountability on why our Federal Government was so dismissive and, consequently, unprepared early on (even Fauci is in that group with Trump).

These outlets had alleged biowarfare, cover-ups with the Harvard professor, economic payback from China, and a series of completely debunked conspiracy theories. The misinformation was extreme. To suggest that wasn't an agenda is something we'll have to agree on to disagree on. The story Baier reported on the conjecture in the White House is much more tame than what's been circulating prior to that, even puts to rest the bioweapon portion (finally).

You get upset of me lumping Baier and Fox News in with those groups? Again, you're entitled to your opinion. It's been 20+ years of political hatchet jobs by these cable news networks - all of them - so yes I am skeptical on anything they report, especially when there's a background. They all traffic in this stuff. They're all Entertainment Tonight. Credibility is an issue for me.

On the same tangent, to think that either political party in this country won't use to COVID-19 to their advantage (Trump does it nearly every daily with these campaign rally pressers) is also naive. Wait until the Election cycle picks up. Trump will act like Moses, liberating the Americans from COVID-19 and lockdown. And the Dems will be a nightmare too, I don't care for them either. I need multiple sources to feel better about anything the political class says, reports, insinuates, whatever.

Now, with China, I've dealt with China for decades. I trust none of what I hear, half of what I see, lol. Even innocent matters have been made to look guilty because of their nature. We need to know how COVID-19 started. Did it unintentionally leak from a lab? Was it cross-contamination from uncontrolled wet markets? I have no idea and do not rule anything out. As more official reporting comes out we'll know. For now, again, as I initially said, it bears watching. We need to demand answers and get tough (one area where I like Trump, the guy is always craving a fight).

China has a major problem on their hands with future commerce because of this, and rightly so. Domestically they have another issue with the % of industry these wet markets represent since they were re-opened about 20-30 years ago (not a coincidence to these repeated novel coronavirus outbreaks over time).

 

[Pirate6711]

l can tell you there are many organized public health outfits lobbying for those. They try. They’re just not as powerful as industrial farming, etc. This stuff is killing people.

This is 100% true and I know from personal experience. Testing for chronic diseases and cancers (other than breast cancer) are very sophisticated and would be great if they were widespread. But they are not. So even with the best insurance, you cannot get tested until you are symptomatic, which is too late for so many diseases. Lobbying efforts are made with different groups consolidating forces to include multiple diseases and conditions in the same bill, but things don't go very far with these issues that are not aligned with any political party. The big exception is breast cancer lobbying and it'$ not hard to figure out why that i$ the ca$e.

Put more resources towards preventative chronic disease and cancer screening, genetic marker testing, and immunotherapy options and you would eliminate the need for high-cost reactive treatments (like chemo and radiation) and pandemic situations that lead to trillions of dollars down the drain.

 

[HALL85]

This is 100% true and I know from personal experience. Testing for chronic diseases and cancers (other than breast cancer) are very sophisticated and would be great if they were widespread. But they are not. So even with the best insurance, you cannot get tested until you are symptomatic, which is too late for so many diseases. Lobbying efforts are made with different groups consolidating forces to include multiple diseases and conditions in the same bill, but things don't go very far with these issues that are not aligned with any political party. The big exception is breast cancer lobbying and it'$ not hard to figure out why that i$ the ca$e.

Put more resources towards preventative chronic disease and cancer screening, genetic marker testing, and immunotherapy options and you would eliminate the need for high-cost reactive treatments (like chemo and radiation) and pandemic situations that lead to trillions of dollars down the drain.

It doesn't help the situation now, but innovation is happening very quickly in this area. Once we can complete genomic sequencing at a reasonable cost/patient, we will have the ability to prevent a good chunk of disease, suffering and downstream costs. It will also give the patient a personalized roadmap to follow. I believe we are only 3-5 years away from this.

 

[Piratz]

This is 100% true and I know from personal experience. Testing for chronic diseases and cancers (other than breast cancer) are very sophisticated and would be great if they were widespread. But they are not. So even with the best insurance, you cannot get tested until you are symptomatic, which is too late for so many diseases. Lobbying efforts are made with different groups consolidating forces to include multiple diseases and conditions in the same bill, but things don't go very far with these issues that are not aligned with any political party. The big exception is breast cancer lobbying and it'$ not hard to figure out why that i$ the ca$e.

Put more resources towards preventative chronic disease and cancer screening, genetic marker testing, and immunotherapy options and you would eliminate the need for high-cost reactive treatments (like chemo and radiation) and pandemic situations that lead to trillions of dollars down the drain.

Amen. Preventative measures (and the point @HALL85 made about emerging innovation and science) is where it's at if you want to do the right thing, and by that I mean trying to approach these problems from a real science and best practices standpoint.

But, to date, there has been so much big money in not doing it that way. That influence is a firewall.

 

[Hallsome]

Great question and the answer is no. First of all you need to know what you’re testing for (which is where the “glitch” occurred.). Then you need to operationalize the test (how to run it in batches, scale up reagents, training, logistics, reporting). I believe this is why LabCorp and Quest got involved because the CDC and state just don’t have nearly the capacity and resources to run millions of tests that quickly. And by the way, you need to ensure that the test is accurate (Would be interesting to see the false negatives or positives by country for comparison).

Creates a civil liberty question going forward. Would we be in favor of mandatory testing for all. Depending on result you are then treated or certified (with date of test). And if you won’t test, should you be restricted from full public movement (can’t go to the supermarket or watch a sporting event?)

Thanks

Good answers

I appreciate the ideas of all

I’m a big supporter of civ liberties but those with those concerns right now surely don’t have a wife working in a hospital, or mom and MIL working in ER, or child with severe asthma; nor have they gotten sick with this.

To address a related issue, everything politicians do is political in one way or another so I don’t blame them totally because it won’t change in this climate; ironically something like ebola would change pols.

But CNN, MSNBC, etc should be ashamed of themselves the way they are politicizing this. Sick stuff

 

[HALL85]

Listened to ex-Mayor of NYC David Patterson this morning (he does a morning spot on 710AM every Thursday (I know, who listens to AM radio...lol), but I find him refreshing, common sense and rises above the partisan nonsense. He was asked how he thought Trumps handling of the crisis would effect the election and he said that if predictions hold up and we start reopening the economy, it guarantees Trump will be re-elected. His point was that whether you love or hate Trump, he is on TV every day giving a briefing and leading the country through a recovery and there is no space for Biden at all, especially since he's not in any office right now. It's as if he is running unopposed. He then brought up a bunch of examples of President's sucking up the airwaves during disasters that they benefited in getting re-elected.

 

[shu09]

Listened to ex-Mayor of NYC David Patterson this morning (he does a morning spot on 710AM every Thursday (I know, who listens to AM radio...lol), but I find him refreshing, common sense and rises above the partisan nonsense. He was asked how he thought Trumps handling of the crisis would effect the election and he said that if predictions hold up and we start reopening the economy, it guarantees Trump will be re-elected. His point was that whether you love or hate Trump, he is on TV every day giving a briefing and leading the country through a recovery and there is no space for Biden at all, especially since he's not in any office right now. It's as if he is running unopposed. He then brought up a bunch of examples of President's sucking up the airwaves during disasters that they benefited in getting re-elected.

This is true, the power of incumbency is always underrated.

I think this is why you're seeing him push for a quick restart and why a lot of governors from the other party (Newsom, Murphy, Pritzker, Cuomo, Whitmer) are showing signs of resisting that. They're going to hide behind "public health," play politics and delay re-opening as long as they possibly can because they know opening up will help Trump.

 

[Piratz]

Listened to ex-Mayor of NYC David Patterson this morning (he does a morning spot on 710AM every Thursday (I know, who listens to AM radio...lol), but I find him refreshing, common sense and rises above the partisan nonsense. He was asked how he thought Trumps handling of the crisis would effect the election and he said that if predictions hold up and we start reopening the economy, it guarantees Trump will be re-elected. His point was that whether you love or hate Trump, he is on TV every day giving a briefing and leading the country through a recovery and there is no space for Biden at all, especially since he's not in any office right now. It's as if he is running unopposed. He then brought up a bunch of examples of President's sucking up the airwaves during disasters that they benefited in getting re-elected.

And Trump, personally, is a MASTER at this type of media play. He dominates it, has for decades, even going back to Page-6. He is a brander extraordinaire, a throwback. He's a unique breed, just suck the air out and promote. 2016 personified it. It enabled him all the campaigning power he needed.

If we reopen and all is under control - the science of treatment too - I think he wins over the undecideds and moderate Dems even, in some places. If he rushes a reopen and we have a backlash, forget it. I still don't know what's real and what's not because, again, the science has taken a backseat to the politicking from all angles.

Either way it's going to be political. 40% here saying this is all a rouse, 40% there saying he's killing people. You'll never bring those groups together. Too tribal. But even that will fade behind the point I made above about opening.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Well CNN.com has it now. I guess it's not just a "conservative" thing anymore. It came from real reporters, not talking heads.

Real reporters? Who are these people and who is employing them? I didn't know they existed.

The only person I really trust in today's media is Chris Wallace. He's a throwback. But I'm also sure he's not out going to China to ask the tough questions, so whoever is doing this research deserves recognition.

 

[The Crows Nest]

I never once argued against social distancing, in fact I promoted when I posted about restaurants reducing tables and expanding dining outside or on rooftops. I argued it’s hypocritical that we’re looking to the government for a war on Coronavirus and the government has a long history of neglecting public health for economic wealth. Food lobbyists are working to sell products that will destroy our heart health and the government picks their side every time. In all honesty I would prefer them focus on heart health over Coronavirus because heart health will kill more, despite not killing any of us at a sporting event.

ok so you have no problem with what is occurring now re COVID....you just want equal treatment for other ailments.

Well if thats the case, I agree re COVID, and will leave the rest for another day