The assumption in the model is that staying at home and other social distancing measures really slows the spread. It’s starting to happen. The model suggests it will accelerate. I hope it does. If we open things back up to fast without testing, tracing and isolation, it won’t.
It gets worse. They also handed out a massive no-bid contract at an inflated rate to a GOP donor to build portions of fencing on the Southern Border. The US Army just gave a contractor with a history of GOP donations $569 million to build parts of Trump's border wall
Why did you post a link to an article with a headline you knew was factually inaccurate after you read the article?
They are here in California. Mandatory masks, one-way aisles, limits to numbers in stores, 2-cart distances, even dedicated senior shopping hours. There are staff wiping down carts and hand sanitizer available, too, and plexiglass barriers are going up to protect cashiers.
LOL, how can you disagree with my post? I asked you how a bankrupt company with no employees can fulfill this contract. You didn’t address that.
My quote: "Inaccurate, inconsistent or just focused on separate parts of the contracting process? Who knows. My guess is that it was awarded but not yet paid' Your response: "Why did you post a link to an article with a headline you knew was factually inaccurate"? While you continually dodge the real question as to why it should not have been awarded in he first place because it makes your boy's administration look as sophomoric as we all know they are. And you have the absolute gall to question my sincerity while hiding behind a cloak of disingenuousness. This exchange has concluded.
Nowhere in the article was it reported the trump administration paid the at issue business for any service or product. To imply or assert it did so in the headline was grossly misleading.
There is a Harvard doctor that made claims about the death rate being much less than expected back in early March (Dr. Jeremy Faust). He hasn't backed off of that claim, and here's a tweet he posted just a few days ago: Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
If anybody has trouble with the tweet: https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMc2009316?articleTools=true Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
since there seems to be a thought that we are undertesting, maybe the process is to blame.unless i am wrong, you need a doctors referal to get tested, and i know that just anyone who coughs should not waste ,it apears to be, a valuable test, but should there not be some middle ground to get more people tested?
I think that’s always been the suspicion. We don’t know the denominator because so many show no or light symptoms.
We should be testing everyone. If that is too expensive, then we should be doing randomized testing with as a large a sample size as we can gather.
Another study about the spread. Wonder if we'll ever know the real truth here. Stanford study suggests coronavirus is more widespread than realized | Spectator USA
Looking at the worldometer numbers, among the countries testing more than 20,000 per million, the fatality rate is 2.5%. Italy skews that, if we take out Italy, the fatality rate drops to 2%.
Good question. I think it's in the potentiality of what those early projections meant. The 1-2m, while seem remote now, is not a zero probability. IOW, the potential is still there for this virus to spread uncontrolled, e.g. after removing/loosening social distancing measures. Why? Because past epidemics/pandemics inform us. On the flip, lowered projections can fool people into thinking this is far less serious than it really is. Make no mistake, it remains as serious now as before the curve started to bend because that potential for it to explode remains (again since it's a non-zero probability). So in a sense we can say great, we've bent the curve but the lower numbers do not negate 1) the early projections and 2) the potential for this to have subsequent waves and to explode after loosening/removing social distancing.
