|
Post by kcrufnek on Apr 6, 2020 8:07:08 GMT -6
How are Trump's kids in cages doing? Are they still drinking out of toilets?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 6, 2020 18:11:53 GMT -6
Dr. Mehmet Oz joined Lou Dobbs on Monday to discuss the latest on the coronavirus pandemic.
During their conversation Dr. Oz revealed that Governor Andrew Cuomo shut down his study to determine the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in the early treatment of the coronavirus. And, Dr. Oz is not pleased with the governor’s actions.
Dr. Oz: Well the trial that I was helping with at my institution was shut down when the governor banned the use of hydroxychloroquine for prescription use for outpatients. And I was trying to see if it could prevent, well there was a prevention trial that was approved, but I was trying to see if it could actually treat early disease and replicate what has been done in China and in France. Unfortunately, those trials have been held back. I don’t know of a trial in New York State. I have been searching for the one that has been spoken about… I spoke this morning to the famous French Infectious Disease specialist Didier Raoult, he’s the one who’s actually been pioneering the hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin, it’s not published yet, but he shared the results of his first thousand patients who have been on that protocol. Seven people died. They were all older and frail individuals. That is lower than what you would expect from people who have been admitted to the hospital. And he’s had 20 got to the ICU, again lower than I would expect… Well, I’m upset because I wanted to do the trial. Also I wanted it to be legal in my state for a doctor to talk to a patient about the COVID-19 and treat them as they saw appropriate
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 6, 2020 18:16:21 GMT -6
CBS News was caught once again posting a fraudulent video to make it look like President Trump is failing in his response to the Coronavirus pandemic.
CBS on Sunday morning posted a video of a “nurse in tears” who says she quit her job after she was asked to work in a Coronavirus ICU without a face mask: “America is not prepared, and nurses are not being protected.”
The fake news tweet from CBS with the viral video is STILL UP and has received over 6 MILLION VIEWS!
“America is not prepared, and nurses are not being protected,” the ICU nurse said sobbing. “I quit my job today. I went into work and I was assigned to a COVID patient on an ICU unit that has been converted to a designated COVID unit. None of the nurses are wearing masks.”
WATCH
CBS never even verified the story. They just posted the video because orange man bad.
It turns out the woman is indeed a nurse, however she took time off to pursue a blogging/’social media influencer’ career.
She went back to work as a nurse for ONE DAY, then quit.
The woman admitted on Facebook just a few days before her dramatic viral video that she suffers from anxiety and bi-polar depression, hadn’t been working in the hospital for over a year and didn’t know if she was ready to return.
|
|
|
Post by redrex on Apr 6, 2020 18:39:02 GMT -6
Bitch
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Apr 7, 2020 2:23:15 GMT -6
Laura Ingraham used to play clips of illegals moaning about being illegal. She used to call them Immigration Sob stories. Here we have C 19 Sob stories.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 8, 2020 8:12:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 4:17:10 GMT -6
Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. “Last Friday I received a 7-page document that told me if I had an 86-year-old patient that had pneumonia but was never tested for COVID-19 but some time after she came down with pneumonia we learned that she had been exposed to her son who had no symptoms but later on was identified with COVID-19, then it would be appropriate to diagnose on the death certificate COVID-19,” Dr. Scott Jensen said. Dr. Jensen explained that this is not a normal procedure. Dr.. Jensen said for example if the same patient had pneumonia during flu season and he didn’t have a test confirming the patient also had influenza, he would never diagnose the patient with influenza on the death certificate. www.scribd.com/document/455607875/US-HHS-Document-to-Doctors-on-How-to-Certify-COVID-19-Deaths-including-Related-Deaths#from_embed
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 4:19:42 GMT -6
thehill.com/homenews/media/491787-democratic-senators-call-for-funding-for-local-media-in-coronavirus-stimulus#.Xo39_MMy7AE.twitterDemocratic senators call for funding for local media in coronavirus stimulus More than a dozen senators are calling for any future stimulus package addressing the economic fallout from the novel coronavirus to include funding for local journalism, saying that communities across the U.S. are at risk of losing their source of news because of the pandemic. “Local news is in a state of crisis that has only been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic,” the senators wrote in a letter sent to the upper chamber’s leadership on Wednesday. The letter was signed by 18 Democratic senators, including Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and Joe Manchin (W.Va.), as well as Independent Sen. Angus King (Maine). The letter notes many of the struggles the news industry has felt over the last two decades as big tech platforms swallow up a majority of the ad revenue that was a key source of profit during the print age. Newsroom employment has significantly decreased and about 1,800 local newspapers have ceased their operations since 2004, according to a University of North Carolina report. Reactions:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 6:57:02 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2020/04/09/chuck-todd-is-wrong-again-there-are-huge-downsides-to-the-media-being-overly-alarmist/WUHAN VIRUS Chuck Todd Is Wrong (Again): There Are Huge Downsides To The Media Being Overly Alarmist A good leader should balance what the coronavirus-limited 'experts' are arguing for with all other health, safety, security, and well-being concerns. Mollie Hemingway By Mollie Hemingway APRIL 9, 2020 There are no costs associated with being “overly alarmist” in the face of a global pandemic, “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd claimed on Sunday. His comment encapsulates the attitude of the media and other elites as they drive people and state and local governments deeper into a panic that has resulted in the loss of tens of millions of jobs, the likely permanent closures of hundreds of thousands of businesses, a general inability to pay rent and other monthly bills, a lack of treatment for non-coronavirus health problems, the closure of churches and schools, the exacerbation of disparities by socio-economic status in educational attainment, disruptions to the supply chain, and the destruction of trillions of dollars of American wealth. Pushing governors and other politicians to do even more to shut down communities and their economies, Todd asked former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, “Are you surprised that more politicians aren’t erring on the side of caution here? Because there seems to be if you’re wrong about this, boy, is that a bad way to be wrong. If, if you’re wrong and you’ve, and you’ve been overly alarmist, well, nobody’s, nobody extra has died. But if you’re wrong and you’ve underplayed, boy, you’ve got a lot to answer for.” Define ‘Caution’ What Todd portrays as “caution” people should strongly encourage is a radical destruction of systems. Since no one in a position of political authority is arguing for a “let it burn” approach, what Todd portrays as the reckless alternative option is merely the more moderate approach of extreme social distancing and other public health measures such as mask-wearing and continued testing to slow the spread of the virus without closure of nearly everything outside American homes. Regardless of your feelings about the unprecedented national shutdown plan, it is the less cautious of the two approaches. Some view that as a feature in the war against the coronavirus, while others are worried it might be a dangerous overreaction. Still, Todd unwittingly reveals the political pressure that many leaders face and the fear that many of them feel about being on the wrong side of expertise. If you follow experts, they reasonably surmise, no one can fault you, even if you destroy the economy. Doing anything other than a continued shutdown runs contrary to what many credentialed experts are instructing, so many leaders follow those experts. The problem is that the experts who are being listened to so carefully are solely focused on minimizing mal effects from the coronavirus, all other considerations notwithstanding. If that means ending all mammography, colonoscopy and other screenings, so be it. If that means suspending physicals that catch early signs of disease and enable treatment and reversal, so be it. If that means bearing an increase in spousal and child abuse, suicide, and mental health problems, or substance abuse, so be it. If that means setting disadvantaged kids back even further than before the crisis began, so be it. If that means cratering an economy or risking national security, so be it. A good leader should balance what the coronavirus-limited “experts” are arguing for with all other health, safety, security, and well-being concerns. Too few realize that. What many are doing instead is claiming that they are following “experts” when really they’re only listening to select few epidemiologists. Some put forth extremist platitudes, such as “you can’t have an economy if everyone is dead.” This problem is exacerbated by a media that incentivizes such narrow thinking. Few if any reporters at the daily White House briefings, much less in countless state and local briefings, have pushed political leaders to explain how they’re balancing non-coronavirus concerns with coronavirus concerns. Our media’s general struggle with providing context, predisposition to sensationalism, longstanding near-exclusive focus on New York City, and unbridled irrational hostility to President Trump have all led to much alarmism. And yes, it does have downsides. 24/7 Hype Machines To be fair, Todd is not alone in his sentiment, in part because of public health models that projected shocking levels of catastrophic death. Once many in the media finally began paying attention to the Wuhan coronavirus in a non-dismissive way, they swung wildly into another direction of hyping models that predicted millions of dead Americans, and millions of dead in other countries. The Imperial College study that generated so much attention projected more than 2 million dead Americans if nothing was done, but even 1 million dead Americans if a rigorous “suppression” model weren’t followed until a vaccine might be developed in a couple of years. All the public health advice given by experts to the media was to “flatten the curve.” There was no stopping the deaths that were to come, we were told, but if they could be slowed down to occur over a longer period of time, that would help hospitals not exceed their capacity by too much, and the pandemic would be less difficult to endure. There is no financial liability for the model-makers for any potential erroneous projections, no matter the chaos they induce. And the acceptance and promulgation of these models did have an effect. The Projections Are Wildly Inaccurate The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation has issued state and national projections for hospital capacities, ostensibly to help policymakers plan. Media and governments up to and including the federal government have largely accepted these projections as reasonable. While the government has been using these projections to set policies, IHME’s projections have routinely been off by a factor of as much as 10. They also fluctuate wildly, almost exclusively in a downward direction. The Institute has at times claimed the discrepancy is a result of the success of social distancing, although all of its models have stated that they assumed “full social distancing through May” even as the projections change. On April 1, IHME projected that the United States would need a peak of 262,092 hospital beds on April 15. In the latest update, that projection had dropped to a projected peak need of 95,202 beds on April 13. On April 1, the group said the United States would need 38,849 ICU beds and 31,082 ventilators. By April 8, that projection had dropped dramatically to a projected need of 19,438 ICU beds and 16,524 ventilators. Incidentally, The New York Times repeatedly claimed that the United States would need as many as 1 million ventilators — a tad higher than the current projected nationwide need of 16,524. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said that his experts were leading him to ask for an additional 30,000 ventilators. President Trump received a great deal of media criticism for questioning whether New York would actually need that many. It turns out that Trump wasn’t just right but really right. On New York’s claimed peak use day of April 7, only 5,038 ventilators were potentially needed, according to the IHME model. The actual use was probably even lower. Particularly during legitimate global health pandemics such as the one we’re in now, undue alarmism can wreak havoc. Overreacting because of erroneous models, inappropriate reactions to models, or other problems can and absolutely does take place. Scrambling to secure tens of thousands of unnecessary ventilators has costs associated with it, contrary to Todd’s claim that alarmism has no downsides. Not only is there just the cost of ramping up production for ventilators that won’t be used, and the opportunity cost of those factories not producing something more useful, there are the problems caused by governors competing with each other for ventilators, driving up the cost. Also, the panic about lack of ventilators further entrenches community shutdown with its previously noted heavy costs. And ventilators are just one tiny example. Media Initiate, Strengthen, Perpetuate Economic Debacle Todd’s show was built around a quote from Amy Acton, director of public health in Ohio. “She said this on March 13th. And [U.S. Surgeon General, Vice] Admiral [Jerome Adams], it has been haunting me ever since. And this is what she said. ‘On the front end of a pandemic, you look a little bit like an alarmist. You look a little bit like a Chicken Little. The sky is falling. And on the back end of a pandemic, you didn’t do enough.’ Are those words that we should all be living by, which is you may be hesitant right now if you’re a leader about debating health versus the economy, hindsight you’re going to wish you had done more?” These words comfort those who encourage extremely strong measures in the face of pandemic, and there is definitely truth to them. When faced with unforeseen situations, it is extremely wise to over-prepare. Further, it is at least arguably difficult to get large populations to appropriately prepare or work to prevent problems without overstating the need. But that doesn’t mean there is no reasonable limit to the amount of preparation. The notion that there are no risks to a panicked response to a global pandemic is absurd and nonsensical on its face. The notion that there are no downsides to extreme government action is something even our scandal-driven media would deny. Taken to an extreme, you could have military patrolling in the streets to ensure more social distancing. The Chinese government welded families into their homes, sealing doors to keep them inside, for crying out loud. The United States absolutely could be doing more to further flatten the curve. The fact that we are not shows that we know that there are costs to certain actions, many of which are not acceptable. So the question isn’t whether there are costs associated with our actions but whether they are justified. The real costs of alarmism are clear, and we’re seeing them in hospital staff being furloughed, unemployment lines getting longer, businesses being shut down, and disadvantaged children not getting their education. It could be that once the tally is calculated, people will decide the costs were more than worth it. It is odd, however, that media aren’t willing to engage in the conversation about the appropriate cost to endure. Further, as the hospital projections — and even death projections — change radically, continuing to be dropped drastically down day after day, it is imperative that we have the discussion about the costs of continued lockdown. Alarmism Has Serious Downsides The radical steps being taken by political leaders and encouraged uncritically by the media may be justified, even as the dire predictions continue to be overstated. But Todd’s refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of downsides to alarmism, much less the very real downsides that are already on display, is journalistic malpractice. It could also lead to further erosion of already cratering public confidence in institutions including the media. Tucker Carlson recently said, “If the coronavirus shutdown was crushing college administrators or nonprofit executives or green energy lobbyists, it would have ended last week. Instead, it’s mainly service workers and small business owners who have been hurt, and they’re not on television talking about what they’re going through. You need to look closely to see their suffering.” The relatively privileged status of our media might make their endurance of the community shutdown easier to bear. They should not be fooled, however, into thinking that there is no downside to their preferred path.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 9:13:30 GMT -6
Democrats once again showing their true colors: www.dailywire.com/news/democrats-block-mcconnells-bid-for-emergency-funds-to-save-small-businessesDemocrats Block McConnell’s Bid For Emergency Funds To Save Small Businesses Senate Democrats blocked an emergency measure designed to inject an additional $250 billion into a swiftly depleting fund to bolster Americans small businesses Thursday, telling Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that they want “add-ons to help businesses in disadvantaged communities and additional funding for states and hospitals” in addition to the extra funding. The news comes amid a Department of Labor report showing an astounding 10% of the American workforce has now applied for unemployment insurance and concerns that small businesses are rapidly running out of survival time, especially as most states have now extended coronavirus-related lockdowns until the end of April. Originally, an emergency coronavirus relief measure, negotiated by the Senate, featured a $350 billion fund for small businesses, but demand has far exceeded supply, leaving Republicans begging Democrats to help pass an emergency cash infusion to save American entrepreneurs. The measure is designed to expand the Paycheck Protection Act, which “helps businesses with under 500 employees apply for loans up to cover eight weeks of their payroll, benefit and rent expenses. The loans will be converted to grants and fully forgiven if 75% of the loan is used to keep employees on the payroll,” per Fox News. The program is “on track to be depleted” by the end of this month. “The extra funding is being sought amid concerns that the original $350 billion program to help businesses stay afloat during coronavirus pandemic could run dry in the near future in the face of an enormous demand,” Fox News reports. “McConnell pleaded with Democrats to pass a measure that would change the funding for the program from $350 billion to $600 billion total in a ‘clean’ emergency measure.” Since the Senate is in recess and most Members are in their home districts, sheltering in place to avoid spreading the coronavirus, McConnell had hoped to get the measure passed with a small group of in-town Senators, and by unanimous consent. Democrats, who likely sensed an opportunity to pass additional funding for pet projects. Unsurprisingly, they say their package will cost “double” what Republicans are asking.
“Democrats say they’ve got a better plan, and want additional provisions and protections to help businesses in disadvantaged communities,” Fox News adds. “Their proposal would cost roughly double the Republicans’ and include additional funding for hospitals and local governments.”
McConnell was left incensed.
“This does not have to be nor should it be contentious,” he said, adding that lawmakers who want greater handouts to “disadvantaged communities” can include that in the fourth coronavirus relief bill, currently being drafted by the House of Representatives.
“To my Democratic colleagues, please do not block emergency aid you do not even oppose just because you want something more,” he added. “The country cannot afford unnecessary wrangling or political maneuvering.”Democrats contended that McConnell’s plan was a “stunt” and that, while the measure might have passed the Senate by unanimous consent, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) wasn’t about to allow it through the House without significant debate, particularly given that she has her own relief plan on the agenda for when Congress returns to work in three weeks.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 9:17:25 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/08/ca-gov-newsom-stimulus-checks-to-illegals-being-considered/CA Gov. Newsom: Stimulus Checks to Illegals ‘Being Considered’ California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) is reportedly considering issuing cash payments to the state’s illegal immigrants as part of a Golden State “Disaster Relief Fund” for the state’s illegal immigrants, according to a Wednesday Associated Press report. When asked about giving potential financial assistance to illegal immigrants impacted by the coronavirus crisis, Newsom reportedly replied on Tuesday evening that “all of that is being considered.” According to the report, Newsom said that the broader state-level stimulus package, which he hopes to roll out in May and is discussing with legislators, will have “some economic stimulus strategies at a state level, not just waiting for the federal government to do that for us.” “Californians care deeply about undocumented residents in this state,” Newsom reportedly added. The coronavirus relief bill that President Donald Trump signed will issue cash payments to individuals and couples who meet the income requirements and have Social Security numbers. Illegal immigrants are not eligible to receive the federal stimulus checks or the extra $600 a week in unemployment benefits. Three House Democrats, two of whom are from California (Reps. Judy Chu and Lou Correa), recently introduced the Leave No Taxpayer Behind Act to amend the stimulus bill to issue stimulus cash payments to everyone with an ITIN (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number), which many illegal immigrants have, who qualifies. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) initially wanted the relief bill to issue cash payments to everyone with an ITIN, and high-profile progressives like Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) have been more vocal about the need to issue cash payments to illegal immigrants with ITINs. If you don’t believe undocumented workers should have access to relief during #COVID19, does that mean you’re willing return the billions they pay in taxes each year? Will you defund your schools? Or, in this moment, will we recognize that we should just take care of each other? — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@aoc) April 8, 2020 The Associated Press, citing a California Latino Legislative Caucus report, noted that there are “about 2 million people in California” who are “suspected of living in the country illegally.” The California Latino Legislative Caucus has reportedly asked Newsom to create the “Disaster Relief Fund” to issue cash payments to illegal immigrants impacted by the coronavirus crisis reportedly “until the state’s emergency proclamation is lifted or they are able to return to work.” Our undocumented workers are either on the frontlines as essential workers w/o healthcare, adequate sick days & safety equipment or they’ve lost their job without ability to access the unemployment insurance or stimulus that they have helped pay into. We must do more. t.co/xMY6CDctbT— Lorena (@lorenasgonzalez) April 7, 2020
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 9:22:44 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/08/house-gop-demand-kennedy-center-answer-for-layoffs-return-some-of-25-million-coronavirus-relief/Republicans on the House Committee on Oversight and Reform have sent a letter to Deborah Rutter, president of the Kennedy Center, demanding answers on the decision to lay off and furlough scores of employees — including members the National Symphony Orchestra — after the center got $25 million in coronavirus relief funding. Fox News reported on the letter, which also asks that the center to return some of the funding: www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republicans-demand-answers-after-kennedy-center-lays-off-employees-despite-taking-stimulus-moneyAfter Democrats came under fire for successfully pushing for the center’s bailout, the organization announced that it is furloughing nearly 60 percent of its full-time administrative staff from April 6 to at least May 10, and that this is “apart from the 725 hourly and part-time employees already impacted.” In a letter Tuesday to Kennedy Center president Deborah Rutter, the GOP representatives demanded answers and the return of at least some of the funding they just received. “These layoffs, whether temporary or not, are counter to the spirit of the CARES Act and are concerning to Congress,” the letter said. These furloughs were on top of what was going to be an additional furlough of musicians with the National Symphony Orchestra. According to the Washington Post, the Kennedy Center announced Tuesday that they reached a deal with the orchestra to avoid furloughs, but that musicians will take a significant pay cut at least through September. “The public’s perception is that the Kennedy Center leadership took taxpayer funding and left their employees holding the bag,” Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio, said in a statement. “Congress, and more importantly the public, deserves answers to the questionable decisions made to furlough employees after receiving funding to prevent that.” Joining Gibbs as signatories of the letter were Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC).; Ralph Norman (R-SC); Carol Miller (R-WV); Mark Green (R-TN); Greg Steube (R-FL); Glenn Grothman (R-WI), and Fred Keller (R-PA). Fox News reported: The letter further demanded that the center provide information in the form of a briefing that addresses why they needed to go through with ‘any and all furloughs, layoffs, or reductions in pay,’ a plan to prevent further similar measures, and a ‘delineated explanation of expenses’ for the center. This is the second letter from Congress to the center. One week ago, two Republican lawmakers introduced legislation to reclaim the $25 million allocated to the center in the CARES Act. Rep. Bryan Steil, (R-Wi), who introduced the bill to get the funding returned, said the bailout was always a “mistake,” Fox News reported. Keller called the $25 million payout was “unconscionable” given that the U.S. economy is basically shut down and some ten million Americans have lost their jobs.
“What’s worse, the Kennedy Center took the government’s money and laid off all their workers and musicians,” Keller said in a statement included in the Fox News report.
“This is an affront to the spirit of Congress’s relief effort and tantamount to a fleecing of the American taxpayer,” Keller said.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 9:24:26 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2020/04/09/celebrities-organize-major-benefit-for-china-complicit-who/Celebrities Organize Major Benefit For China-Complicit WHO There are better partners than an organization that has made headlines for bending over backwards to defend the Chinese Communist Party amidst a tragedy it played a part in spreading worldwide. Emily JashinskyBy Emily Jashinsky APRIL 9, 2020 The Wuhan coronavirus outbreak is finally forcing a conversation about our vast economic entanglements with communist China. While we’re reevaluating those ties, celebrities are flocking to TikTok and raising money for the China-complicit World Health Organization. Lady Gaga is helping organize a major star-studded special on April 18, set to air across CBS, ABC, and NBC. The list of celebrity participants is long and full of A-listers. Make no mistake, this is a major television event. It’s also funding and legitimizing the WHO, which has defended the Chinese Communist Party’s reprehensible response to the outbreak. But that’s where Gaga’s benefit will direct people to send donations. “In addition to raising awareness about social distancing measures that can slow the spread of the virus, the virtual special will encourage donations to WHO’s COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund, which provides protective equipment and medical supplies for healthcare workers,” according to Forbes. The WHO is obviously at the center of efforts to facilitate a global response to this global virus, but there are better partners than an organization that has made headlines for bending over backwards to defend the CCP amidst a tragedy it played a part in spreading worldwide. An editorial in National Review put it well when it said, “The record is clear: The WHO has lent its imprimatur to Chinese disinformation and blessed China’s slow response to its domestic outbreak, which likely caused a 20-fold increase in cases, according to a University of Southampton study.” As Richard Tren wrote in The Federalist, “The WHO praised and supported China in spite of the fact that Chinese authorities had been consistently attempting to cover up the pandemic and lied about it publicly. Not only that, as National Review has documented, the Chinese punished those brave physicians who attempted to raise the alarm. As a result, what could have been a local or perhaps regional health problem became a global pandemic, the likes of which we have not experienced for 100 years.” Tren continued, “For years, Taiwan has sought membership in the WHO, but China has blocked it, claiming the independent and democratic nation as a province. To date, the WHO has kowtowed to China, even though Taiwan has a better record on public health than the communist dictatorship.” Recall WHO aide Bruce Aylward’s tellingly absurd dodge to a question about Taiwan just last month. Complicity with the CCP, by the way, means complicity with a regime that attempted to cover up the outbreak, costing lives in its own country and others. There’s also its repression of ethnic minority Muslims and other human rights violations, but we already know the entertainment industry actively turns a blind eye to that. All this to say Gaga and co. could have found a much better charity than the WHO. To be perfectly clear, I’m sure their efforts will be of great benefit to the brave health-care workers who need resources right now. I pray that’s the case. Rather than accomplishing that through another charity, however, they’re legitimizing the WHO, which is complicit with the corrupt CCP.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 9:40:56 GMT -6
Can't wait for this "racist" card to be played soon: www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/04/07/coronavirus-is-infecting-killing-black-americans-an-alarmingly-high-rate-post-analysis-shows/?arc404=trueThe coronavirus is infecting and killing black Americans at an alarmingly high rate As the novel coronavirus sweeps across the United States, it appears to be infecting and killing black Americans at a disproportionately high rate, according to a Washington Post analysis of early data from jurisdictions across the country. The emerging stark racial disparity led the surgeon general Tuesday to acknowledge in personal terms the increased risk for African Americans amid growing demands that public-health officials release more data on the race of those who are sick, hospitalized and dying of a contagion that has killed more than 12,000 people in the United States. A Post analysis of available data and census demographics shows that counties that are majority-black have three times the rate of infections and almost six times the rate of deaths as counties where white residents are in the majority. In Milwaukee County, home to Wisconsin’s largest city, African Americans account for about 70 percent of the dead but just 26 percent of the population. The disparity is similar in Louisiana, where 70 percent of the people who have died were black, although African Americans make up just 32 percent of the state’s population. In Michigan, where the state’s 845 reported deaths outrank all but New York’s and New Jersey’s, African Americans account for 33 percent of cases and roughly 40 percent of deaths, despite comprising only 14 percent of the population. The state does not offer a breakdown of race by county or city, but more than a quarter of deaths occurred in Detroit, where African Americans make up 79 percent of the population. And in Illinois, a disparity nearly identical to Michigan’s exists at the state level, but the picture becomes far starker when looking at data just from Chicago, where black residents have died at a rate six times that of white residents. Of the city’s 118 reported deaths, nearly 70 percent were black — a share 40 points greater than the percentage of African Americans living in Chicago.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 9:43:13 GMT -6
www.businessinsider.com/who-no-need-for-healthy-people-to-wear-face-masks-2020-4WHO says there is no need for healthy people to wear face masks, days after the CDC told all Americans to cover their faces On April 6, the World Health Organization released new guidance saying that healthy people don't need to wear face masks to prevent coronavirus spread. Masks should be for the sick, their caretakers, and healthcare workers, the WHO guidance said. Scientists and public-health organizations can't agree on the best face-mask protocol, and the WHO guidelines go against the CDC's face-mask recommendations. The use of face masks on healthy people during the coronavirus pandemic has been a major point of contention and confusion among scientists and the public. On Friday, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that all Americans wear face masks when they are in public. But new guidance from the World Health Organization released on Monday says healthy people don't need to wear face masks and that doing so won't provide added protection from the coronavirus. There's some evidence that caretakers of infected people can protect their health by wearing masks, the WHO guidance said, but "there is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can prevent them from infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19." WHO also said community masking could lead to a "false sense of security" and cause people to ignore other evidence-based measures like handwashing and self-isolation. WHO said masks should be reserved for people who have COVID-19 or are in regular close contact with people who have the disease, like caretakers and hospital workers. People with COVID-19 symptoms like a cough or shortness of breath should wear masks even if they haven't tested positive, and they should self-isolate, seek medical advice from home, and practice good hygiene, including handwashing and changing their masks, WHO said. The organization also said that healthcare workers should use medical-grade masks, not makeshift cloth masks, when they can after one study showed that medical workers who used cloth masks were at increased risk of infection compared with those who used medical-grade masks. "If production of cloth masks for use in health care settings is proposed locally in situations of shortage or stock out, a local authority should assess the proposed PPE according to specific minimum standards and technical specifications," the WHO report said. Masks could slow transmission, but there's room for infection-causing human error Some health experts believe community masking efforts can't hurt. "The argument ... about everybody wearing a mask is not that it will prevent everyone from getting infected — it's that it will slow down transmission in the community a bit," Ben Cowling, a professor of epidemiology and a mask researcher at the University of Hong Kong's School of Public Health, previously told Business Insider. "That's already useful. Just to have even a small effect is useful." At the same time, Cowling recognized that face masks aren't a perfect public-health tool because they allow room for user error, a point made in the WHO guidance. WHO officials said healthy people who wear masks might touch their own faces more often than necessary, which could increase their risk for COVID-19. Cowling said user error was a potential reason studies have yet to show community masking is effective at preventing disease spread. "Randomized trials don't support a big effect of face masks, but there is the mechanistic plausibility for face masks to work, right? So why not consider it?" Cowling said. "If you don't wear the mask properly, and if there's a lot of chances for you to get infected, then the mask may not do a lot of good." But with much of the world already dealing with severe outbreaks, Cowling said masking efforts for the healthy are unlikely to stop the spread at this point in time. "I think it's too late to do a lot for the current epidemic because it's already spread such a lot, and then the cases that you're getting now are people infected two or three weeks ago. And the lockdowns that are in place will hopefully really slow down infections," Cowling said. "Adding masks now I don't think would make a lot of difference to that trajectory." You can protect yourself without a mask The coronavirus is typically spread through tiny droplets that are ejected when an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks, and the droplets land on another person or surface. Scientists are still studying to understand to what extent coronavirus-containing aerosols linger in the air, which would make face-mask wearing more important, Business Insider previously reported. So far, evidence suggests that the virus does not linger in the air outside hospital settings, where certain procedures, such as intubating a patient, can aerosolize virus particles. For people who isolate at home and practice social distancing when outdoors, aerosols are likely not an issue. Running outdoors alone without wearing a mask, for example, is safe if you feel healthy, Business Insider previously reported. As such, WHO said, practicing self-isolation, good hygiene, and social distancing are the best ways for healthy people to stay safe. The organization said it would also update its face-mask guidance based on new information as it comes out.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 10:46:14 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 10:49:57 GMT -6
She’s channeling her inner Joe Biden:
Dr. Birx: “Many of you have done the analysis of the same models that we utilized. And if you do the models of the models you end up with that range… and they have consistently decreased the mortality… That is modeled on what America is doing. That is happening.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 10:52:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Apr 9, 2020 11:32:18 GMT -6
More unnamed sources. Who should America believe?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 11:41:21 GMT -6
Last night Senator Dr. Scott Jensen from Minnesota went on The Ingraham Angle to discuss how the AMA is encouraging American doctors to overcount coronavirus deaths across the US.
This was after Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator, told a local station he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus.
Dr. Jensen also disclosed that hospitals are paid more if they list patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis. And hospitals get paid THREE TIMES AS MUCH if the patient then goes on a ventilator.
Senator Dr. Scott Jensen: Right now Medicare is determining that if you have a COVID-19 admission to the hospital you get $13,000. If that COVID-19 patient goes on a ventilator you get $39,000, three times as much. Nobody can tell me after 35 years in the world of medicine that sometimes those kinds of things impact on what we do.
Makes one wonder, how much are the "experts" getting for blowing this out of proportion?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 11:44:12 GMT -6
Because the truth would hurt their cause too much: dailycaller.com/2020/04/09/cnn-edits-headline-cut-criticism-senate-democrats/CNN Headline Rewritten Within The Hour — Editing Out Criticism Of Senate Democrats A CNN headline was the subject of a quick-change Thursday — a headline that appeared critical of Senate Democrats was edited within an hour to be less critical. The story, posted by CNN after the Senate reached a stalemate over a boost to the small business coronavirus relief program, detailed the competing proposals put forward by Democrats and Republicans. (RELATED: NYT Quietly Edits Headline On Failed Coronavirus Deal To Protect Democrats — Twice) The original headline read, “Democrats Block GOP-Led Funding Boost For Small Business Aid Program.” But less than an hour later, the headline had been changed to read, “Senate at Stalemate Over More COVID-19 Aid After Republicans And Democrats Block Competing Proposals.” According to the report, the proposal Senate Democrats blocked was a clean increase in small business funding. Republicans reportedly balked when Democrats tried to designate certain amounts for “underserved communities” and attach additional funding for hospitals and state and local governments. “We need more funding and we need it fast,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell explained. “I want to add more money to the only part of our bipartisan bill that could run out of money. My colleagues must not treat working Americans like political hostages. We must not fail them.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 11:46:56 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/who-advisor-zeke-emanuel-urges-feds-to-bar-restaurant-dining-concerts-religious-services-for-at-least-18-monthsWHO Advisor Zeke Emanuel Urges Feds To Bar Restaurant Dining, Concerts, Religious Services For At Least 18 Months On Wednesday, Dr. Zeke Emanuel, who serves as a special adviser to the director general of the World Health Organization (WHO), urged the Trump administration to extend coronavirus mitigation efforts — including the barring of in-restaurant dining, religious services, and concerts — for at least another 18 months, or longer, depending on how quickly researchers can develop a vaccine or at least effective treatment. According to Emanuel, a key architect of the Affordable Care Act a.k.a Obamacare and now an advisor to presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden on the coronavirus outbreak, up to a million Americans will die from the novel coronavirus if a nationwide shutdown does not persist until there is a vaccine or effective treatment. “If we prematurely end that physical distancing and the other measures keeping it at bay, deaths could skyrocket into the hundreds of thousands if not a million,” Emanuel said on ABC News’ “Powerhouse Politics” podcast. “We cannot return to normal until there’s a vaccine.” “Conferences, concerts, sporting events, religious services, dinner in a restaurant, none of that will resume until we find a vaccine, a treatment, or a cure,” he emphasized. “The crisis is not going to go away in a few weeks or after the 30-day plan comes to an end. Although COVID-19 is affecting us in different ways, we have to be up to it and fight together.” The left-wing doctor similarly told ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl and Political Director Rick Klein: “The kind of normal where we go traveling, we go to restaurants, we go to concerts, we go to religious services, we go on cruises, until we have a vaccine that protects everyone. That’s 18 months, it’s not going to be sooner.” “Anyone who tells you we’re going to have a vaccine in three or four months, that’s just not the reality of how biology and research works,” he added. Emanuel said economic relief efforts need to be extended out at least 18 months. “I noticed that every bailout bill seems to be … we have this bailout for small businesses, keeping people on their payroll (for) eight weeks, we have an extension of unemployment (for) 13 weeks, as if somehow at the end of three months it’s going to be magically different,” he said, according to ABC News. “This is an 18-month process.” The pandemic is also cause for a universal healthcare push and voting by mail or internet, added the politico. “I think we need to plan now — you’re going to have to have a different model, either voting by internet, voting by mail, voting early, so that people have a chance to go over time,” he suggested, claiming that traditional voting would be “a perfect model for Republican suppression of voting.” “COVID-19 is a great argument for universal health care coverage that isn’t ‘hole-y’ and doesn’t allow, you know, millions of people to slip through. It is an argument for simplification of the system,” Emanuel argued. “Sen. (Bernie) Sanders is right, we definitely need to have a universal coverage system where all 100% of people in the United States are covered,” added the physician. “Certainly the Affordable Care Act was not put in place thinking about a pandemic, I can say that categorically having been involved and also having thought about pandemics.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 12:51:19 GMT -6
And, there's the race card we've been waiting for: www.dailywire.com/news/world-health-organization-criticism-of-our-coronavirus-response-is-probably-racistWorld Health Organization: Criticism Of Our Coronavirus Response Is Probably Racist The World Health Organization, unable to refute complaints about its response to the global coronavirus pandemic, built largely on its willingness to take Chinese government information at face value, is now calling its critics, particularly its Taiwanese critics, racists. Taiwan, which has struggled with gaining international recognition and was all but cut out of the World Health Organization’s coronavirus response, has been particularly critical of the WHO, claiming that it tried repeatedly to warn the global health group that China was withholding, hiding, and even actively quashing vital information about the spread of COVID-19. Taiwan also says that its response to the coronavirus was better than China’s and that its data on the disease could help other countries — but that the data must be separate from China’s in order to visualize Taiwan’s results. The WHO responded by locking Taiwan out completely, lumping its coronavirus-related data in with China’s, and, in one telling interview, WHO leadership even refused to acknowledge Taiwan’s independence — a clear sign that the WHO defers to Chinese officials. Bruce Aylward @who did an interview with HK's @rthk_news When asked about #Taiwan he pretended not to hear the question. The journalist asked again & he even hung up! Woo can't believe how corrupted @who is. pic.twitter.com/uyBytfO3LP — Studio Incendo (@studioincendo) March 28, 2020 After the United States joined in the campaign to question the WHO’s allegiance to the Chinese government, the group’s director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, resorted to claims that Taiwan is behind an international, decidedly racist campaign against the global health body and that the island nation is biased against Africans. “When as a community people start to insult us, that’s enough,” Tedros said, according to Business Insider. “We cannot tolerate that. But since I don’t have any inferiority complex when I am personally affected or attacked by racial slurs, I don’t care because I am a very proud black person.” “This attack comes from Taiwan,” he added. “The foreign ministry knows about this campaign and they didn’t disassociate themselves.” Tedros went on to blame Taiwan for inappropriately influencing the United States and President Donald Trump, who said Tuesday that he and the State Department are investigating whether China improperly influenced the WHO’s coronavirus response, and whether to rescind the approximately $400 million the United States sends to the WHO each year. Taiwan, on Thurday, called the allegations of racism preposterous and insulting. “Taiwan’s foreign ministry demanded an apology for what it called unnecessary and slanderous comments,” BI reports. “Without having checked the facts, Tedros’s unprovoked and untrue accusations not only differ from reality, they have also seriously harmed our government and our people,” Taiwan’s foreign ministry said in a statement directed at the WHO director-general. “This kind of slander is extremely irresponsible.” “Taiwan always objects discrimination in any form. We know how it feels to be discriminated against and isolated more than anyone else as we have been excluded from global organizations for years,” Taiwan’s president added in a post to Facebook. “So I’d like to invite Tedros to visit Taiwan, to see how Taiwanese commit to devote to international society despite being discriminated and isolated.” The WHO has been on the defensive for several days after Trump threatened to cut off funding, warning the United States that defending the WHO would cause further coronavirus deaths, and that “politics” should wait until after the global pandemic has resolved. The White House has not backed down.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 12:57:48 GMT -6
www.statnews.com/2020/04/08/doctors-say-ventilators-overused-for-covid-19/With ventilators running out, doctors say the machines are overused for Covid-19 Even as hospitals and governors raise the alarm about a shortage of ventilators, some critical care physicians are questioning the widespread use of the breathing machines for Covid-19 patients, saying that large numbers of patients could instead be treated with less intensive respiratory support. If the iconoclasts are right, putting coronavirus patients on ventilators could be of little benefit to many and even harmful to some. What’s driving this reassessment is a baffling observation about Covid-19: Many patients have blood oxygen levels so low they should be dead. But they’re not gasping for air, their hearts aren’t racing, and their brains show no signs of blinking off from lack of oxygen. ADVERTISEMENT SPONSOR CONTENT What you need to know about colorectal cancer, from someone who’s been there. Cancer thriver Teri Greige knows firsthand that colorectal cancer doesn’t care if you’re in your prime. Diagnosed at 48, she’s on a mission to help screen other Americans under 50. BY EXACT SCIENCES That is making critical care physicians suspect that blood levels of oxygen, which for decades have driven decisions about breathing support for patients with pneumonia and acute respiratory distress, might be misleading them about how to care for those with Covid-19. In particular, more and more are concerned about the use of intubation and mechanical ventilators. They argue that more patients could receive simpler, noninvasive respiratory support, such as the breathing masks used in sleep apnea, at least to start with and maybe for the duration of the illness. Support STAT: If you value our coronavirus coverage, please consider making a one-time contribution to support our journalism. “I think we may indeed be able to support a subset of these patients” with less invasive breathing support, said Sohan Japa, an internal medicine physician at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital. “I think we have to be more nuanced about who we intubate.” ADVERTISEMENT That would help relieve a shortage of ventilators so critical that states are scrambling to procure them and some hospitals are taking the unprecedented (and largely untested) step of using a single ventilator for more than one patient. And it would mean fewer Covid-19 patients, particularly elderly ones, would be at risk of suffering the long-term cognitive and physical effects of sedation and intubation while being on a ventilator. None of this means that ventilators are not necessary in the Covid-19 crisis, or that hospitals are wrong to fear running out. But as doctors learn more about treating Covid-19, and question old dogma about blood oxygen and the need for ventilators, they might be able to substitute simpler and more widely available devices. An oxygen saturation rate below 93% (normal is 95% to 100%) has long been taken as a sign of potential hypoxia and impending organ damage. Before Covid-19, when the oxygen level dropped below this threshold, physicians supported their patients’ breathing with noninvasive devices such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, the sleep apnea device) and bilevel positive airway pressure ventilators (BiPAP). Both work via a tube into a face mask. In severe pneumonia or acute respiratory distress unrelated to Covid-19, or if the noninvasive devices don’t boost oxygen levels enough, critical care doctors turn to mechanical ventilators that push oxygen into the lungs at a preset rate and force: A physician threads a 10-inch plastic tube down a patient’s throat and into the lungs, attaches it to the ventilator, and administers heavy and long-lasting sedation so the patient can’t fight the sensation of being unable to breathe on his own. In this video, we look at how ventilators work, and how they are used to treat patients with Covid-19. But because in some patients with Covid-19, blood-oxygen levels fall to hardly-ever-seen levels, into the 70s and even lower, physicians are intubating them sooner. “Data from China suggested that early intubation would keep Covid-19 patients’ heart, liver, and kidneys from failing due to hypoxia,” said a veteran emergency medicine physician. “This has been the whole thing driving decisions about breathing support: Knock them out and put them on a ventilator.” To be sure, many physicians are starting simple. “Most hospitals, including ours, are using simpler, noninvasive strategies first,” including the apnea devices and even nasal cannulas, said Greg Martin, a critical care physician at Emory University School of Medicine and president-elect of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. (Nasal cannulas are tubes whose two prongs, held beneath the nostrils by elastic, deliver air to the nose.) “It doesn’t require sedation and the patient [remains conscious and] can participate in his care. But if the oxygen saturation gets too low you can achieve more oxygen delivery with a mechanical ventilator.” The question is whether ICU physicians are moving patients to mechanical ventilators too quickly. “Almost the entire decision tree is driven by oxygen saturation levels,” said the emergency medicine physician, who asked not to be named so as not to appear to be criticizing colleagues. That’s not unreasonable. In patients who are on ventilators due to non-Covid-19 pneumonia or acute respiratory distress, a blood oxygen level in the 80s can mean impending death, with no room to give noninvasive breathing support more time to work. Physicians are using their experience with ventilators in those situations to guide their care for Covid-19 patients. The problem, critical care physician Cameron Kyle-Sidell told Medscape this week, is that because U.S. physicians had never seen Covid-19 before February, they are basing clinical decisions on conditions that may not be good guides. “It’s hard to switch tracks when the train is going a million miles an hour,” said Kyle-Sidell, who works at a New York City hospital. “This may be an entirely new disease,” making ventilator protocols developed for other conditions less than ideal. NEWSLETTERS Sign up for Daily Recap A roundup of STAT's top stories of the day. Enter your email Privacy Policy As doctors learn more about the disease, however, both frontline experience and a few small studies are leading him and others to question how, and how often, mechanical ventilators are used for Covid-19. The first batch of evidence relates to how often the machines fail to help. “Contrary to the impression that if extremely ill patients with Covid-19 are treated with ventilators they will live and if they are not, they will die, the reality is far different,” said geriatric and palliative care physician Muriel Gillick of Harvard Medical School. Researchers in Wuhan, for instance, reported that, of 37 critically ill Covid-19 patients who were put on mechanical ventilators, 30 died within a month. In a U.S. study of patients in Seattle, only one of the seven patients older than 70 who were put on a ventilator survived; just 36% of those younger than 70 did. And in a study published by JAMA on Monday, physicians in Italy reported that nearly 90% of 1,300 critically ill patients with Covid-19 were intubated and put on a ventilator; only 11% received noninvasive ventilation. One-quarter died in the ICU; 58% were still in the ICU, and 16% had been discharged. Older patients who do survive risk permanent cognitive and respiratory damage from being on heavy sedation for many days if not weeks and from the intubation, Gillick said. To be sure, the mere need for ventilators in Covid-19 patients suggests many in the studies were so critically ill their chances of survival were poor no matter what care they received. But one of the most severe consequences of Covid-19 suggests another reason the ventilators aren’t more beneficial. In acute respiratory distress syndrome, which results from immune cells ravaging the lungs and kills many Covid-19 patients, the air sacs of the lungs become filled with a gummy yellow fluid. “That limits oxygen transfer from the lungs to the blood even when a machine pumps in oxygen,” Gillick said. As patients go downhill, protocols developed for other respiratory conditions call for increasing the force with which a ventilator delivers oxygen, the amount of oxygen, or the rate of delivery, she explained. But if oxygen can’t cross into the blood from the lungs in the first place, those measures, especially greater force, may prove harmful. High levels of oxygen impair the lung’s air sacs, while high pressure to force in more oxygen damages the lungs. Related: A system to allocate scarce ventilators and ICU beds gains traction for not counting any group out In a letter last week in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, researchers in Germany and Italy said their Covid-19 patients were unlike any others with acute respiratory distress. Their lungs are relatively elastic (“compliant”), a sign of health “in sharp contrast to expectations for severe ARDS.” Their low blood oxygen might result from things that ventilators don’t fix. Such patients need “the lowest possible [air pressure] and gentle ventilation,” they said, arguing against increasing the pressure even if blood oxygen levels remain low. “We need to be patient.” “We need to ask, are we using ventilators in a way that makes sense for other diseases but not for this one?” Gillick said. “Instead of asking how do we ration a scarce resource, we should be asking how do we best treat this disease?” Researchers and clinicians on the front lines are trying. In a small study last week in Annals of Intensive Care, physicians who treated Covid-19 patients at two hospitals in China found that the majority of patients needed no more than a nasal cannula. Among the 41% who needed more intense breathing support, none was put on a ventilator right away. Instead, they were given noninvasive devices such as BiPAP; their blood oxygen levels “significantly improved” after an hour or two. (Eventually two of seven needed to be intubated.) The researchers concluded that the more comfortable nasal cannula is just as good as BiPAP and that a middle ground is as safe for Covid-19 patients as quicker use of a ventilator. “Anecdotal experience from Italy [also suggests] that they were able to support a number of folks using these [non-invasive] methods,” Japa said. To be “more nuanced about who we intubate,” as she suggests, starts with questioning the significance of oxygen saturation levels. Those levels often “look beyond awful,” said Scott Weingart, a critical care physician in New York and host of the “EMCrit” podcast. But many can speak in full sentences, don’t report shortness of breath, and have no signs of the heart or other organ abnormalities that hypoxia can cause. “The patients in front of me are unlike any I’ve ever seen,” Kyle-Sidell told Medscape about those he cared for in a hard-hit Brooklyn hospital. “They looked a lot more like they had altitude sickness than pneumonia.” Because U.S. data on treating Covid-19 patients are nearly nonexistent, health care workers are flying blind when it comes to caring for such confounding patients. But anecdotally, Weingart said, “we’ve had a number of people who improved and got off CPAP or high flow [nasal cannulas] who would have been tubed 100 out of 100 times in the past.” What he calls “this knee-jerk response” of putting people on ventilators if their blood oxygen levels remain low with noninvasive devices “is really bad. … I think these patients do much, much worse on the ventilator.” That could be because the ones who get intubated are the sickest, he said, “but that has not been my experience: It makes things worse as a direct result of the intubation.” High levels of force and oxygen levels, both in quest of restoring oxygen saturation levels to normal, can injure the lungs. “I would do everything in my power to avoid intubating patients,” Weingart said. One reason Covid-19 patients can have near-hypoxic levels of blood oxygen without the usual gasping and other signs of impairment is that their blood levels of carbon dioxide, which diffuses into air in the lungs and is then exhaled, remain low. That suggests the lungs are still accomplishing the critical job of removing carbon dioxide even if they’re struggling to absorb oxygen. That, too, is reminiscent of altitude sickness more than pneumonia. The noninvasive devices “can provide some amount of support for breathing and oxygenation, without needing a ventilator,” said ICU physician and pulmonologist Lakshman Swamy of Boston Medical Center. One problem, though, is that CPAP and other positive-pressure machines pose a risk to health care workers, he said. The devices push aerosolized virus particles into the air, where anyone entering the patient’s room can inhale them. The intubation required for mechanical ventilators can also aerosolize virus particles, but the machine is a contained system after that. “If we had unlimited supply of protective equipment and if we had a better understanding of what this virus actually does in terms of aerosolizing, and if we had more negative pressure rooms, then we would be able to use more” of the noninvasive breathing support devices, Swamy said.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 13:57:48 GMT -6
dailycaller.com/2020/04/09/prominent-science-journal-apologizes-associating-coronavirus-china/Prominent Science Journal ‘Nature’ Apologizes For Associating Coronavirus With China The British scientific journal Nature has apologized for associating the coronavirus with China, claiming the “stigma” could hurt diversity on college campuses and that President Donald Trump is “sticking with the outdated script.” Nature published a piece Tuesday apologizing for having associated the coronavirus with China and Wuhan, calling the continued association between a virus and the place it originated “irresponsible” and it “needs to stop.” The piece highlights the common practice of referring to a viral disease by the location where the outbreak originated, such as the Middle East respiratory syndrome, or Zika virus, which was named after a forest in Uganda. The World Health Organization introduced guidelines in 2015 to stop this practice to “reduce stigma and negative impacts such as fear or anger directed towards those regions of their people,” it says. It accuses President Donald Trump and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro of “sticking with the outdated script” when they associate the virus with China. Tedros Adhanom, Director General of the World Health Organization, (L) shakes hands with Chinese President Xi Jinping. (Photo by Naohiko Hatta - Pool/Getty Images) Tedros Adhanom, Director General of the World Health Organization, (L) shakes hands with Chinese President Xi Jinping. (Photo by Naohiko Hatta – Pool/Getty Images) “US President Donald Trump has repeatedly associated the virus with China. Brazilian lawmaker Eduardo Bolsonaro — the son of President Jair Bolsonaro — has called it “China’s fault”. Politicians elsewhere, including in the United Kingdom, are also saying that China bears responsibility.” The WHO announced in February that the disease caused by the coronavirus would be called COVID-19. The WHO has been criticized for its close ties to Beijing, and has been accused of covering for China in the early days of the outbreak, possibly exacerbating the spread of the disease. Japan’s deputy prime minister noted that some people have started referring to the World Health Organization as the “China Health Organization.” (RELATED: Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister Says The WHO Should Change Name To The China Health Organization) Due to the racist attacks caused by the associations made between China and the coronavirus, Nature argues that students from China and other Asian countries will feel unwelcome on college campuses, and cause a loss of diversity. “For decades, campuses have striven to boost diversity, and countries have enacted policies to encourage international academic mobility. Diversity is valuable for its own sake,” the piece says, adding that discrimination prevented researchers and other academics from contributing to international journals. “It would be tragic if stigma, fuelled by the coronavirus, led Asia’s young people to retreat from international campuses.”
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Apr 9, 2020 15:35:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 9, 2020 16:09:44 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/why-have-we-shut-down-the-country-ex-new-york-times-reporter-challenges-the-dire-coronavirus-modelsWhy Have We Shut Down The Country?’ Ex-New York Times Reporter Challenges The Dire Coronavirus Models The models keep changing. A coronavirus model that the White House has heavily relied upon has again dropped the number of projected deaths and hospitalizations. Last week, the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington projected 93,531 deaths. On Sunday, the IMHE lowered its estimated to 81,766 deaths. Then on Wednesday, the projection dropped the estimated total deaths to 60,415. So, what does it all mean? Alex Berenson, former New York Times reporter who worked for “the paper of record” from 1999 to 2010, has been doing his own analysis of the ever-changing models and offered some thoughts in a Fox News interview.The U.S. has the highest number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the world, with more than 435,000 cases and nearly 15,000 deaths. But projections from White House officials just a week ago – heavily covered by the mainstream media – put the death toll at 100,000 to 240,000 (a far cry from the 60,000 or so projected by the IMHE). Berenson has been questioning the numbers for some time. He first challenged the model from the Imperial College in London, which initially said 500,000 Britons would die. The authors of the model later pushed the projection all the way down to 20,000 (right now there are fewer than 8,000 deaths). “That was March 22 or 23, and ever since then I’ve been paying incredibly close attention to the modeling and trying to figure out whether it lines up with what we’re seeing in reality – and the answer is, it hasn’t lined up at all,” he said. Berenson recently focused his attention on the IMHE model.
“Aside from New York, nationally there’s been no health system crisis. In fact, to be truly correct, there has been a health system crisis, but the crisis is that the hospitals are empty,” he said on Fox. “This is true in Florida where the lockdown was late, this is true in southern California where the lockdown was early, it’s true in Oklahoma where there is no statewide lockdown. There doesn’t seem to be any correlation between the lockdown and whether or not the epidemic has spread wide and fast.”
Top experts argue that efforts to stem the spread – shutting down all non-essential businesses, enacting social distancing metrics and urging all Americans to wear face masks – are responsible for the changing models.
“We believe that our health care delivery system in the United States is quite extraordinary,” Dr. Deborah Birx said at a White House press briefing on Wednesday. “I know many of you are watching the Act Now model and the IHME model– and they have consistently decreased the number, the mortality from over almost 90,000 or 86,000, down to 81,000 and now down to 61,000. That is modeled on what America is doing. That’s what’s happening.”
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said the same day that the models show social distancing is working – and changing the data input into the models. “Because remember, what you do with data will always outstrip a model. You redo your models, depending upon your data, and our data is telling us that mitigation is working.”
But Berenson said the precipitous drop in cases has occurred before lockdowns would have had a chance to have an impact, saying it would take several weeks for social distancing measures to take effect.
And he said the mainstream media are, in part, to blame.
“Look, I get why people were so scared three or four weeks ago. I was too. But now – for the media to ignore the real demographics and scare people with outlier cases – to ignore the mostly empty hospitals all over the country – to pretend that the models weren’t wrong … and to refuse to ask really hard questions about what that means about them and the efficacy or lack thereof of the lockdowns – to refuse to ask for hard metrics we will use to reopen the country … it doesn’t feel like panic is driving this anymore. It feels like people just won’t admit what’s happening,” he wrote on Twitter.
Berenson also pointed out that COVID-19 deaths are on pace to come in even with the deaths attributed to influenza in 2017.
“Nobody says COVID-19 is not real, that it can’t tax hospitals or kill people, esp. if they are over 75 or have comorbidities. But right now the best CURRENT projection is for 61,000 US deaths. That was the 2017 flu season. Why have we shut the country?” he wrote.
|
|
|
Post by redrex on Apr 9, 2020 17:49:18 GMT -6
I wonder if the Global warming models are as accurate as the pandemic models ? Food for thought
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Apr 9, 2020 20:57:37 GMT -6
I wonder if the Global warming models are as accurate as the pandemic models ? Food for thought Maybe, much like for climate change, we need a tax. A virus tax.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Apr 10, 2020 4:11:02 GMT -6
Wonder why he won’t answer the question?
Dr. Ali Mokdad of IHME refused to explain why Japan had so few Coronavirus cases despite no lockdowns like the US every time Martha MacCallum asked him.
|
|