COVID 19 Facts and Science

DeRangedFishinguy wrote:

So how’s it going to work going forward with where the line is drawn on when to quarantine yourself/family when someone shows symptoms of an illness..?

If there is no school, many families will have to have a parent quit their jobs to stay home with kids. And then the lone bread winner will be at constant risk of missing many days of work due to “possible” COVID exposure if every symptom under the sun could be COVID and you have to isolate for 2 weeks or wait on a test result.

The only way I can see this being close to functional is if the testing capacity reaches a point where there can be a 24hr turn-around-time and I doubt that will happen.

My sister in law had some crud tear through their house – both parents and the toddler got it, not the baby. Dad is remote, kids go to daycare, and mom works with both covid and non covid patients. Mom was required to be tested and was negative, and daycare subsequently treated it per the normal rules (24hr post fever return).

Yes, I would think rapid testing is the answer. We can’t function chasing symptoms, and we surely can’t function with quarantines if you “might” have been exposed.

I haven’t come across anything, but I have to wonder if there is some useful data in daycare settings. They have plugged along uninterrupted all through this pandemic with no reported catastrophes. The tiny kids dont mask, dont social distance, and havent stopped licking everything. Seems there would be some guidance there on schools – especially at the elementary level where you can easily keep kids in one room all day with a trip outside.

There’s a huge market but it costs money to develop new and better vaccines. If they put money into development, how do they make it up if it isn’t incentivized?

If you reduce the volume by making them last longer, there’s even less incentive.

Cdc will not be getting info from hospitals anymore. Seems like a bad idea

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fox6now.com/2020/07/14/trump-administration-tells-hospitals-to-bypass-cdc-with-covid-19-data-reporting/amp/

Fish To Escape wrote:

Cdc will not be getting info from hospitals anymore. Seems like a bad idea

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fox6now.com/2020/07/14/trump-administration-tells-hospitals-to-bypass-cdc-with-covid-19-data-reporting/amp/

I just read through the article and links from the feds. I did not see anywhere that read that hospitals CAN’T (or ordered NOT TO) report data to CDC. It just ordered them to send it to the Task Force. Maybe I didn’t read it thoroughly though.

Personally, I rather it go to the CDC and take Fauci and BIRX out of it completely.

The cdc is a division of hhs so they are just taking the control of the data away from the cdc, from what I understand

Fish To Escape wrote:

The cdc is a division of hhs so they are just taking the control of the data away from the cdc, from what I understand

Sounds like a different division within the HHS will handle it instead of the National Healthcare Safety Network? So, the CDC, which is part of the HHS, won’t be able to access it? If its all the same Department, what the hell’s the difference? it’s not like one is a private firm and one is the FEDs? or is it?

I’m not a conspiracy nut, but this is recipe for a cover-up.

Removing the apolitical CDC from their traditional role of publicizing public health data and placing that responsibility in the hands of cherry-picked government administration officials, who have already shown an unprecedented pattern of politicizing science, just months prior to an election that is going to be influenced heavily by the public perception of that data, doesn’t sound fishy at all.

Bass Thumb wrote:

I’m not a conspiracy nut, but this is recipe for a cover-up.

Removing the apolitical CDC from their traditional role of publicizing public health data and placing that responsibility in the hands of cherry-picked government administration officials, who have already shown an unprecedented pattern of politicizing science, just months prior to an election that is going to be influenced heavily by the public perception of that data, doesn’t sound fishy at all.

It certainly sounds like a waste of time and resources. I wasn’t aware that the task force wasn’t privy to all the info the CDC had. I don’t recall a criticism from the task force of the CDC either in regards to data collection. If not political, then certainly a big circle jerk.

I don’t think this necessarily means the cdc won’t have access to the data but the added layer certainly opens up the possibility of a cover up or at least the suspicion of one. Very, very fishy

All political…we need the military involved in this? A federal contractor?

The Trump administration is ready to ask governors to send the National Guard to collect hospitalization data, including information about patients and supply chain, thus circumnavigating the CDC’s role as the primary repository for data collection in the pandemic.

According to a Washington Post story based on leaked documents and emails, Health and Human Services officials yesterday “finalized a new data reporting protocol for hospitals, which will eliminate the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as a data recipient, leaving health-care institutions to report information about covid-19 to a federal contractor or to their state, which would coordinate the federal reporting.”

I don’t necessarily know what to think. There has been a lot of talk about how each state has been reporting data and what data is being reported. (what constitutes LTC deaths, deaths on report date vs actual date, etc etc) If we could keep the tin foil on the roll for a minute…..Is it possible that it is an attempt to streamline the data coming from all states? I am not sure why the CDC wasn’t doing this to begin with or why they couldn’t just improve it? Its possible that is isn’t just “Orange Man Bad”.

joe-winter wrote:

I don’t necessarily know what to think. There has been a lot of talk about how each state has been reporting data and what data is being reported. (what constitutes LTC deaths, deaths on report date vs actual date, etc etc) If we could keep the tin foil on the roll for a minute…..Is it possible that it is an attempt to streamline the data coming from all states? I am not sure why the CDC wasn’t doing this to begin with or why they couldn’t just improve it? Its possible that is isn’t just “Orange Man Bad”.

While i appreciate the idea of withholding judgement until you get all the information it seems like you are doing everything in your power to NOT point the finger at the orange man. He doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt in my book.

Oh and apparently masks are good now. Sounds to me somebody woke up and saw the polls and thought maybe he could gain some ground by changing his tune.

Anything is possible. I would think if this was an attempt to improve the consistency of reporting they would have stated as much. It wouldn’t be hard to come out with a statement from HHS saying “data reporting has not been consistent from state to state. We are going to streamline the process and require the following information to be reported.”

They did say they were going to try and eliminate the delays but I don’t see how this accomplished that. We have seen a few examples of downplaying and distorting data in the past few months and this sure seems like more of it. When you hear hoof beats think horses not zebras

joe-winter wrote:

I don’t necessarily know what to think. There has been a lot of talk about how each state has been reporting data and what data is being reported. (what constitutes LTC deaths, deaths on report date vs actual date, etc etc) If we could keep the tin foil on the roll for a minute…..Is it possible that it is an attempt to streamline the data coming from all states? I am not sure why the CDC wasn’t doing this to begin with or why they couldn’t just improve it? Its possible that is isn’t just “Orange Man Bad”.

Yes if this was truly to streamline data and get better information to the public that would be excellent, but just the recent history with…well we will call it a difference of opinion between the WH and the CDC…seems unlikely, but is certainly possible. Hopefully it is.

Hospitals previously reported to the CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network, described by the agency as “the nation’s most widely used healthcare-associated infection tracking system.” The CDC is one of 11 divisions under the HHS, and has historically handled this sort of data.

The Trump administration claims the goal is to streamline data and help the White House Coronavirus Task Force with distributing scarce supplies and treatment.

Some hospital leaders welcomed the change, saying it will save time and energy from having to respond to requests from multiple federal agencies, according to the New York Times. But others criticized the move.

The CDC is under HHS, if they wanted to do whatever y’all are accusing them of doing, they didn’t have to do this.

I guess people will see what they want to see.

For example, when you read “claim” in the above quote, what does it mean?

Get those damn untrustworthy scientists, doctors, and health care professionals out of the way. It’s time we get trustworthy politicians in the driver’s seat of this pandemic to fix it.

If a politician isn’t giving me my next vaccine, how can I trust it?

Look Guys, I am not nor have I ever been a Trump apologist. I agree FTE that they could have come out and said that we want streamlining of data. This piece has been clear and brought up here on IDO many times. Why didn’t the CDC do it all ready? Clearly, there seems to be conflict between the WH and CDC. But no Crappie, I won’t blame Trump nor did I Obama the moment something is announced. I didn’t vote for either one and I did vote.

downplaying or distorting data from Washington the past few months. Sorry FTE, been going on since I was born (1977) at least.

The Director of the CDC (Redfield) and the Commissioner of the FDA (Hahn) are both under HHS, which is led by the Administrator of HHS (Azar). Azar is a position that is appointed by the Trump Administration, and Azar selects the other two himself. Redfield and Hahn both report to Azar, and Azar reports to the President/VP. Azar, Redfield, and Hahn are all three on the Coronavirus Task Force.

Sending data to politicians instead of the CDC is clearly a reason to alter the data rather than to report it properly. Don’t believe what the politicians report, believe the health agencies/experts.

“The cdc has traditionally handled this sort of data.” That is my concern. This is what the cdc does and they are non-political by design. People definitely interpret things with their own bias, however. Kind of like how you used bold font for “some hospitals praised the move” while not highlighting “others criticized the move.”

gim wrote:

The Director of the CDC (Redfield) and the Commissioner of the FDA (Hahn) are both under HHS, which is led by the Administrator of HHS (Azar). Azar is a position that is appointed by the Trump Administration, and Azar selects the other two himself. Redfield and Hahn both report to Azar, and Azar reports to the President/VP. Azar, Redfield, and Hahn are all three on the Coronavirus Task Force.

Sending data to politicians instead of the CDC is clearly a reason to alter the data rather than to report it properly. Don’t believe what the politicians report, believe the health agencies/experts.

Not sure I’m reading ya… i thought you were pointing out that the CDC was still involved being its director is on the task force. Then you lost me. Aren’t those guys you mentioned the heads of health agencies? Isn’t the HHS a health department?

I have zero beef with the CDC and I agree that it should have been their job to get this done. However, If I don’t get my job done over a period of time, I better start looking for a new job.

joe-winter wrote:

Not sure I’m reading ya… i thought you were pointing out that the CDC was still involved being its director is on the task force. Then you lost me. Aren’t those guys you mentioned the heads of health agencies? Isn’t the HHS a health department?

HHS is Health and Human Services. I was merely trying to point out that the heads of these agencies are on the Task Force so even though they are supposed to be non-partisan, when they’re on the Task Force, they are no doubt influenced by the President/VP. Let’s be honest, the Task Force itself, even though it has numerous health experts on it, is limited in how they can relay information to the public for fear of backlash from the President/VP.

yep, I agree. I have those fears no matter who is in office. Also not a good time to be influenced by votes.

The bright side is that the states still have their own health departments that will display the data how they please. this is where I have been looking anyway, I don’t know about you guys?

joe-winter wrote:

The bright side is that the states still have their own health departments that will display the data how they please. this is where I have been looking anyway, I don’t know about you guys?

Yes, agreed. I watch the information relayed by the MDH regularly.

And now, the good news.

Hopeful results from phase 1 Moderna COVID vaccine trial

Three groups of 15 participants each received two intramuscular injections 28 days apart of either 25, 100, or 250 micrograms (μg) of mRNA-1273. All subjects received one injection; and 42 received a second injection.

The researchers monitored vaccine-induced antibody activity for 43 days after the second injection, finding that two vaccinations produced high levels of neutralizing antibody activity against the coronavirus above the average levels observed in serum taken from people with confirmed COVID-19 infection.

The researchers noted that they weren’t able to evaluate long-term immune response to the vaccine but that participants will be monitored through regular blood collections for 1 year after the second dose.

Somebody told me today that they read the next phase is a 30 000 person trial that they are signing people up for right now. No idea if that is accurate. Does sound like good news so far!

States that have fewer people and don’t, congregate are going to have less of it. States that with people who group in bigger crowds, it’s going to hit hard, look at the southern states now. Simplistic view yes, but it’s true.

Fish To Escape wrote:

“The cdc has traditionally handled this sort of data.” That is my concern. This is what the cdc does and they are non-political by design. People definitely interpret things with their own bias, however. Kind of like how you used bold font for “some hospitals praised the move” while not highlighting “others criticized the move.”

I was responding to those people who see it as a political move, so no reason to highlight it. I could have excluded that part completely if I didn’t want people to see it.

Baseline infection rate pre-reopening 20,000/day

Baseline infection rate post-reopening 60,000/day

Each 1% of infected who die now = 600; fatality rate is higher than 1%

Over 3,000,000 Americans now tested as infected. More than any country in the world. Assume testing has increased dramatically and accounts for a significant portion of the increase in cases. Also a fact that the rate of infection of those testes is increasing.

We are in a world of hurt.

Hopefully they are just streamlining it and this is an anomaly

Attachments:

1. 

   787A6E7D-DB98-42F3-8D6E-FD366CEB805F.png