Covfefe-19 The 12th Part: The Only Thing Worse Than This New Board Is TrumpVirus2020

[Jimjamesak]

OK guy without a pension.

Oh I’ll have a pension...

 

[rufus]

And maybe in the future we can do that with this disease as well. Right now we cant because we don't know as much about it as we do the flu. Every time we pretend we do know something we find out something that completely contradicts what we thought we knew. Remember when the summer was supposed to be slower? That is why shutting down (which we never really did anyways) is the right decision. That is why the nations that did that have a much better grasp on the disease than we do. I mean you can't deny that at this point can you? Why are we so different from them? (outside of our off the charts selfishness and greed) We have seen a road map to how to manage this but we just ignore it because we think we are better. Well many of them have it licked and we havent even ended our first wave yet.

You keep conflating things that seem to be the same but ignoring the differences. I dont think you are doing it out of dishonesty but it is still there. It is the same game the deniers were playing early on where the compared the end results of other diseases to the beginning results of COVID. We arent in a position yet to have a more laissez faire attitude with this disease.

He's " just asking the questions"

 

[Jimjamesak]

On another note, Anchorage started a “four-week reset” on Monday, including bans on public gatherings and restaurants having inside dining (they can have outdoor dining).

A few restaurants have decided to defy the orders and just remain open.

 

[St. Clown]

I spent last week in NW Wisconsin. That area is not only skipping masks and social distancing, they appear to be actively courting COVID-19.

 

[rufus]

I needs me this t-shirt.

 

[burd]

I spent last week in NW Wisconsin. That area is not only skipping masks and social distancing, they appear to be actively courting COVID-19.

The closer you get to Minnesota the more they get like that.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

I spent last week in NW Wisconsin. That area is not only skipping masks and social distancing, they appear to be actively courting COVID-19.

I have Wisconsin members who are refusing to wear masks at work, risking getting terminated and others who have allegedly quit over this. People are doubling down on their refusals. All the mandates in the world are not going to change any minds, and I doubt they will get many to comply who would not otherwise be wearing a mask to begin with. I expect to see numerous members of mine lose their jobs over the next couple of weeks because I already have one employer that overreacts to anything. My legal quagmire will start when the mask mandate gets overturned in WI and people will be wanting me to get their jobs back for being terminated for refusing to follow a mandate the WI legislature will probably say was unlawful. This issue has become as politically charged than abortion or guns in the short space of 3 months.

 

[Kepler]

Oh I’ll have a pension...

As a future casualty, I still endorse this.

 

[leswp1]

Oh I’ll have a pension...

Isn't it time for the pony?

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

60,000 deaths are a lot of people, just standing alone, right? Aren't those deaths tragic in their own right? Don't those deaths disproportionately hit at risk categories, like the aged.

You have already been taken to task by others but just to correct you, yet again, you picked 60K which is a very bad year for influenza. Most people, you included, probably do not know that these are estimated numbers, they are not confirmed by testing. Covid deaths (despite what idiots say) have much more scrutiny to be counted (at least a positive test) and if we used influenza metrics to count Covid deaths, the Covid numbers for both deaths and hospitalizations would be much higher.

 

[leswp1]

You have already been taken to task by others but just to correct you, yet again, you picked 60K which is a very bad year for influenza. Most people, you included, probably do not know that these are estimated numbers, they are not confirmed by testing. Covid deaths (despite what idiots say) have much more scrutiny to be counted (at least a positive test) and if we used influenza metrics to count Covid deaths, the Covid numbers for both deaths and hospitalizations would be much higher.

Can you post more often? Just reading you respond gives me a bit of a happy face.

Talked with someone yesterday who has a relative down in Florid(e)a(th). Despite the number of deaths that are all around them they still believe that the deaths are being mislabeled as C19 so they can get money from the Feds. The people who are spreading false information have done their job. Then my kid comes home and the pothead dumpers at his work believe the Dump is being bribed to say wear a mask "they must have something big on him to make him slip like that". It doesn't occur to them to think that if someone has something that bad on him then maybe they should wonder what is so bad or why they think that without being bothered.

The well is poisoned. The aquifer is poisoned.

 

[SJHovey]

You have already been taken to task by others but just to correct you, yet again, you picked 60K which is a very bad year for influenza. Most people, you included, probably do not know that these are estimated numbers, they are not confirmed by testing. Covid deaths (despite what idiots say) have much more scrutiny to be counted (at least a positive test) and if we used influenza metrics to count Covid deaths, the Covid numbers for both deaths and hospitalizations would be much higher.

The exact number wasn't the point. I think 60,000 was a number I've seen thrown about around here. Whatever the number is, it's a disease that, a) kills people, particularly vulnerable adults who are older, b) is transmitted from person to person as a respiratory disease, and c) it's not an insignificant number of people who die from it each year. Do I have that correct?

Assuming so, the point I was trying to make is that year after year some number of people (I'll let you pick) are killed by this disease when we apparently could stop or limit its effect by having everyone stay home and wear masks. Do I have that correct as well?

 

[Jimjamesak]

Isn't it time for the pony?

Ok...

 

[St. Clown]

I have Wisconsin members who are refusing to wear masks at work, risking getting terminated and others who have allegedly quit over this. People are doubling down on their refusals. All the mandates in the world are not going to change any minds, and I doubt they will get many to comply who would not otherwise be wearing a mask to begin with. I expect to see numerous members of mine lose their jobs over the next couple of weeks because I already have one employer that overreacts to anything. My legal quagmire will start when the mask mandate gets overturned in WI and people will be wanting me to get their jobs back for being terminated for refusing to follow a mandate the WI legislature will probably say was unlawful. This issue has become as politically charged than abortion or guns in the short space of 3 months.

The only people I saw wearing masks where I was (Hayward area) were A) required to do so to enter Walmart, or the local grocery store, or one or two other random shops, B) required by their emloyers, C) old people, or D) tourists from out of town. Even the FIBs were wearing masks!

It was shocking, really. My wife's family had a cabin rented about 15 miles outside of town, and so we were only exposed to this stuff a few times. It's just so unexpected to me, coming from the Twin Cities, and feeling like I was in 2019 all over again. Also, it just struck me as incredibly selfish of them, or perhaps ignorant. Probably both.

 

[rufus]

The exact number wasn't the point. I think 60,000 was a number I've seen thrown about around here. Whatever the number is, it's a disease that, a) kills people, particularly vulnerable adults who are older, b) is transmitted from person to person as a respiratory disease, and c) it's not an insignificant number of people who die from it each year. Do I have that correct?

Assuming so, the point I was trying to make is that year after year some number of people (I'll let you pick) are killed by this disease when we apparently could stop or limit its effect by having everyone stay home and wear masks. Do I have that correct as well?

You are an utter, fucking, tool.

 

[First Time Long Time]

The exact number wasn't the point. I think 60,000 was a number I've seen thrown about around here. Whatever the number is, it's a disease that, a) kills people, particularly vulnerable adults who are older, b) is transmitted from person to person as a respiratory disease, and c) it's not an insignificant number of people who die from it each year. Do I have that correct?

Assuming so, the point I was trying to make is that year after year some number of people (I'll let you pick) are killed by this disease when we apparently could stop or limit its effect by having everyone stay home and wear masks. Do I have that correct as well?

You know what else can limit the effects? It's something the flu has...and Covid doesn't.
Shouldn't be hard for you to figure out.

 

[Jeb2020]

You know what else can limit the effects? It's something the flu has...and Covid doesn't.
Shouldn't be hard for you to figure out.

So what? People still die even with a flu vaccine? Can you attempt to answer his question?

Should we shutdown, lockdown, some sort of strategy during high traffic flu months and other contagious ailments?

Or is an old person dying of the flu just chalking it up to, your body giving out, as one of your compadres so eloquently put it.

 

[burd]

The only people I saw wearing masks where I was (Hayward area) were A) required to do so to enter Walmart, or the local grocery store, or one or two other random shops, B) required by their emloyers, C) old people, or D) tourists from out of town. Even the FIBs were wearing masks!

It was shocking, really. My wife's family had a cabin rented about 15 miles outside of town, and so we were only exposed to this stuff a few times. It's just so unexpected to me, coming from the Twin Cities, and feeling like I was in 2019 all over again. Also, it just struck me as incredibly selfish of them, or perhaps ignorant. Probably both.

I don't know what rural Minnesota is like but rural WI is that way. A week ago, I spent three days hiding out in my daughter's apt in Chicago, going out only to walk the dog around the block, maybe 6 times a day. Once to the local grocery store. Everybody masked if there was any chance of getting close to another person. This was a decent neighborhood, but certainly not upper class.

Coming back to small town south central WI was a wake-up call. It's better now with the Governor's state-wide masking mandate, but before that probably 40% of the people in stores didn't mask. You're right. Incredibly selfish in addition to ignorant.

 

[Jeb2020]

You have already been taken to task by others but just to correct you, yet again, you picked 60K which is a very bad year for influenza. Most people, you included, probably do not know that these are estimated numbers, they are not confirmed by testing. Covid deaths (despite what idiots say) have much more scrutiny to be counted (at least a positive test) and if we used influenza metrics to count Covid deaths, the Covid numbers for both deaths and hospitalizations would be much higher.

Where in the world are you getting your Covid data collection info from? What a pile of crap your post is.

Why Did the CDC Decide to Create Unique Reporting Rules for COVID-19 When Successful Reporting Rules Already Existed?


A double standard exists for how COVID-19 data is collected and reported versus all other infectious diseases and causes of death. Let’s examine three essential data categories; Fatalities, Cases & Hospitalizations for all infectious diseases because there are significant flaws in what constitutes a COVID-19 case, hospitalization and fatality.

On March 24[SUP]th[/SUP], the CDC decided to ignore universal data collection and reporting guidelines for fatalities in favor of adopting new guidelines unique to COVID-19. The guidelines the CDC decided against using have been used successfully since 2003.

After all, based upon the July 11[SUP]th[/SUP]data from the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age & State webpage, if COVID-19 is an epidemic (122,374 Fatalities), then shouldn’t pneumonia (131,372 Fatalities) also be an epidemic?[SUP]1[/SUP]

Fatality Data

It is important to note that COVID-19 data is collected and reported by a much different standard than all other infectious diseases and causes of death data. This unique standard for COVID-19 was used, despite the existence of guidelines that have been successfully used since 2003 for data collection across all infective, comorbid, and injurious situations.

… the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.

This begs the question, if the CDC already has well established guidelines for reporting fatalities then why make up new guidelines for COVID-19?

COVID-19 data is collected and reported based upon the March 24[SUP]th[/SUP] National Vital Statistics Systems (NVSS) Guidelines and the April 14[SUP]th[/SUP] CDC adoption of a position paper authored by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE).[SUP] 8,9[/SUP]

However, the data for all other causes of death is based upon the 2003 CDC’s Medical Examiners’ & Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and the CDC’s Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death.[SUP] 10,11[/SUP]

On March 24[SUP]th[/SUP], the NVSS, under the direction of the CDC and National Institute of Health (NIH), instructed physicians, medical examiners, and coroners that COVID-19 would:

• be recorded as the underlying cause of death “more often than not;”
• be recorded as the cause of death listed in Part I of the death certificate even in assumed cases;
• be recorded as the primary cause of death even if the decedent had other chronic comorbidities. All comorbidities for COVID-19 would be listed now in Part II, rather than in Part I as they had been since 2003 for all other causes of death.

March 24[SUP]th[/SUP], 2020 – NVSS COVID-19 Alert No. 2

“Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause? The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”

“Should “COVID-19” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test? COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death. Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II. (See attached Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths)”

It’s worth noting that Part I of a death certificate is the immediate cause of death listed in sequential order from the official cause on line item (a) to the underlying causes that contributed to death in descending order of importance on line item (d), while Part II is/are the significant conditions NOT relating to the underlying cause(s) in Part I.

As we will demonstrate shortly, comorbid conditions are always listed on Part I of death certificates as causes of death per the 2003 CDC Handbook, so that accurate reporting can be developed. Comorbidities are seldom placed in Part II, as this is typically the place where coroners and medical examiners can list recent infections as underlying factors.

Prior to the March 24[SUP]th[/SUP] and April 14[SUP]th[/SUP] decisions, any comorbidities would have been listed in Part I rather than Part II and initiating factors, like recent infections, would have been listed on the last line in Part I or in Part II.

Why does this matter?

This matters because the Part I causes of death are statistically recorded for public health reporting, while Part II does not hold nearly the same statistical significance in reporting. This March 24[SUP]th[/SUP] NVSS guideline essentially allows COVID-19 to be the cause of death when the actual cause of death should be the comorbidity according to the industry-standard 2003 CDC Handbook. It can be a bit confusing, so we will present an example shortly for clarity.

On April 14[SUP]th[/SUP], the CDC in conjunctions with approval from the National Institute of Health (NIH), adopted the CSTE position paper that authorized the following guidelines for data collection and reporting which are completely unique for COVID-19 and had never been done before which:

• allowed for ‘Probable’ cases, hospitalizations, and fatalities [section A5];
• created a pathway for the minimum standards of evidence to be a single cough [section A1];
• created a pathway for completely bypassing laboratory testing in order to classify a COVID-19 case as positive [section A5];
• created a pathway for the minimum standard of evidence necessary for determining a COVID-19 case to be positive as being within 6 feet of a ‘Probable’ case for 10 minutes or traveling to an area with outbreaks [section A3];
• declined to create any methodology for ensuring the same COVID-19 positive person would not be counted multiple times as a new case upon being tested multiple times [section B].

April 14[SUP]th[/SUP], 2020 – CDC Adopts CSTE Interim-20-ID-01

Title: Standardized surveillance case definition and national notification for 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19)

“VII. Case Definition for Case Classification

1. Narrative: Description of criteria to determine how a case should be classified.

A1. Clinical Criteria At least two of the following symptoms:

• fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s) OR
• At least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing OR
• Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following:
  • Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia, or
  • Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). AND
  • No alternative more likely diagnosis

A2. Laboratory Criteria Laboratory evidence using a method approved or authorized by the FDA or designated authority:

Confirmatory laboratory evidence:

• Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test

Presumptive laboratory evidence:

• Detection of specific antigen in a clinical specimen
• Detection of specific antibody in serum, plasma, or whole blood indicative of a new or recent infection*

*serologic methods for diagnosis are currently being defined

A3. Epidemiologic Linkage One or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms:

• Close contact** with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19 disease;or
• Close contact** with a person with:
  • clinically compatible illness AND
  • linkage to a confirmed case of COVID-19 disease.
• Travel to or residence in an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV2.
• Member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak.

**Close contact is defined as being within 6 feet for at least a period of 10 minutes to 30 minutes or more depending upon the exposure. In healthcare settings, this may be defined as exposures of greater than a few minutes or more. Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of exposure that constitutes prolonged exposure and thus a close contact.

A4. Vital Records Criteria A death certificate that lists COVID-19 disease or SARS-CoV-2 as a cause of death or a significant condition contributing to death.

A5. Case Classifications

Confirmed:

• Meets confirmatory laboratory evidence.

Probable:

• Meets clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19.
• Meets presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence.
• Meets vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19.

1. Criteria to distinguish a new case of this disease or condition from reports or notifications which should not be enumerated as a new case for surveillance

• N/A until more virologic data are available”

Additionally, the CSTE position paper gave no definition as to what constitutes a COVID-19 recovery for all state and country health departments to follow.

While the, seemingly independent, CSTE position paper was authored by five accomplished professionals from the Idaho, Alabama, Michigan, Hawaii, and Iowa state health departments; 5 of the 7 Subject Matter Experts who contributed to the position paper were directly employed by the CDC which raises ethical concerns about conflicts of interest.

 

[dxmnkd316]

For pretty much every single way people die, there's a TON of research and prevention that goes on.

Thanks to lung cancer deaths, there are some pretty draconian tobacco laws and taxes. Thanks to car crashes, there are massive amounts of laws and regulations making cars safer. Thanks to other sicknesses, there are laws regulating air and water quality.

You pretend that deaths just happen and that we do nothing about them, when, in fact, there TONS of things going on to reduce those kinds of deaths. We have tons of work and laws around cancer, we have laws making it illegal to shoot another person... Some countries have even banned guns. We even have laws that prevent just INJURY- have you seen the OSHA rules that make your workplace safer??? We have laws that make electronics safer- and they are even rated. Not just for electrocution, but for radiation, too. How many people get electrocuted every year? Thanks to GFI outlets, that handful of people are now close to none.

The only death that we have no answer for is old age.

I can go on, but the idea that we don't care is very much not true. And that there's more than enough laws and regulations to save lives to justify some temporary ones for COVID-19. We spend trillions of dollars to keep people safe and alive.

Outlets don’t just need to be on GFI, now they need to be protected from arc flash as well.