I feel the need to give a psa. Please Don’t bet your life on news from infowars and hannity. Man dies of COVID-19 after blasting ‘bulls**t’ lockdown
Maybe Mitt Romney hasn't been respectful, but Trump has done absolutely nothing to earn Romney's respect. In fact, Trump through his behavior has diminished the presidency to the point where he has demonstrated that he is not entitled to the respect normally according any person who occupies the office. Furthermore, Trump hasn't treated Romney with the respect to which he would be entitled but rather as the object of insult comedy routine. Romney was among the two Republican members of Congress, the other being Justin Amash, who had the political courage not to be intimidated by the Dear Leader.
He doesn't have to. He's leader of the free world. Romney disrespected him. He got disrespected back. You only hate it, because Trump had the nerve to take up for himself.
I took an online CE class on Writing For the Sciences from Stanford and this was the instructor's advice as well.
no, i believe if you think that covid 19 killed someone, and you also think many others had it and recovered, to get a true grasp of the virus all must be accounted for. is it harder to say someone had it and got over it rather than someone died from it, yes, but attempts should be made, once we start widespread anti-body counts.
I’ll ask you the same question: Who is better equipped to determine cause of death? You? Or the attending physician?
The virus takes 7-14 days to show first symptoms, AND the people who have serious complications from COVID-19 are in many cases are taking weeks intubated on a ventilator before passing. That means people dying today were likely first exposed like a month ago. So based only on this time factor and time for social distancing to fully kick in, it actually makes sense there would be a lag where deaths would continue to rise for a brief period while "new cases" would start trending down.
Why would you assume people who study this aren't fully aware and looking at this? EVERYBODY I think assume the official "infected" count is only a fraction of the true count. A couple of preliminary studies have suggested as high as something crazy, like 84x more infections in the wild. That seems flawed/unrealistic considering NYC's deaths per the TOTAL POPULATION already exceeds the implied death rate of one of those studies, so unless literally 100% of NYC was infected that study's conclusion is literally impossible. But something like 10x or 25x wouldn't be surprising and seem more plausible. But it'll take those who do this for a living a good while (and some good data!) to actually determine it. When they talk about getting those antibody tests en masse, that's what they'll need to collect the data and get a handle on it.
How come the one where Trump said we'd soon go from 15 cases down to near 0 isn't on your list? Or the one where Trump said people could go to work with coronavirus? Or the one where we wasted a month or so doing nothing about tests or ventilators?
Nobody has been criticizing this. In fact, the opposite. An insidious reason people get sick is that they have contact with asymptomatic spread. But, this idea still must be confirmed by proper studies. Criticism of the Stanford-Santa Clara study is that it was self-selected. It has some value as showing asymptomatic spread, but its ability to generalize to the population as a whole is limited by thew non-random selection process.
