Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am SO very impressed that there are SO many epidemiologists, biostatisticians, pulmonary MD’s, and other medical researchers posting on this, and seemingly every other, internet forum these days. I guess the anonymity is to be expected given the rage of the plebeian classes. But still, what a wealth of analysis hour after hour, day in and day out for the politicians to have access to in their decision making processes.
Just amazing we are still struggling to solve the crisis.
If only the leaders would listen to the anonymous chorus ...
And what does your latest research say, Dr. Google, about lifting Hawaii's restrictions?
And what does your latest research say, Dr. Google, about lifting Hawaii's restrictions?
I'll chime in here.
What this pandemic has shown me is that the so called experts, at least here in Hawaii, lack basic organizational and communication skills. Whether it is the doctors or local government so called leaders, the inability to plan, communicate, and organize has simply led to all this speculation whether that be on this forum, facebook, the media, or whatever.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, 6 months into this lockdown. Why they've had no test on arrival option, at least for residents, is a blown opportunity. Nearly 6 months of data they could've had and actually formulated a plan from those results. Maybe the data would have said - woah, so many people flying back with Covid, no way to reopen. And at least we could've caught the asymptomatic people. Or, maybe would show - people can fly in - in some sort of phased manner - perhaps starting with occupancy restrictions, etc.
Not going to lie, I'm not taking a vaccine initially, given the choice. The vaccine is EXTREMELY rushed. The vaccine should be given to high risk individuals and front line health care workers because the potential reward outweighs the vaccine risk of complications and side effects. Non-at risk individuals and children should be given the vaccine last because the risk of the vaccine outweigh the risk of death or disability if contracting the virus. just my 0.02.
Scientists are finding that 40-60% of the population has resistance/immunity to the virus already, which explains why you dont see huge portions of the population contracting the virus, even in hot spots. The US has a lot of numbskulls resistant to any sort of distancing measures, and we're nowhere near to mass contraction levels you'd expect if there weren't pre-existing immunity. It's VERY different from diseases like smallpox with the indians or black death with 50%+ contraction and mortality rates. Sweden, with no lockdown has a confirmed infection rate of less than 1%. New York, epicenter of the virus in the US has an official rate of 2%. Truth be told, if the research is correct, herd immunity was largely already in place before the virus even started spreading.
If the military (almost certainly) wouldn't mandate the vaccine at first issuance, I'd hold off myself. And, trust me, I'm far from an anti-vaxxer. In fact, I believe that people should be forcibly tied and and vaccinated against their will for the good of the public for common vaccines But I am hesitant about anything rushed.
What this pandemic has shown me is that the so called experts, at least here in Hawaii, lack basic organizational and communication skills. Whether it is the doctors or local government so called leaders, the inability to plan, communicate, and organize has simply led to all this speculation whether that be on this forum, facebook, the media, or whatever.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, 6 months into this lockdown. Why they've had no test on arrival option, at least for residents, is a blown opportunity. Nearly 6 months of data they could've had and actually formulated a plan from those results. Maybe the data would have said - woah, so many people flying back with Covid, no way to reopen. And at least we could've caught the asymptomatic people. Or, maybe would show - people can fly in - in some sort of phased manner - perhaps starting with occupancy restrictions, etc.
Interesting.
What it has shown me is that a global pandemic requires higher level coordination, resources and planning.
Leaving a complete vacuum of leadership and expecting each individual state, county, local sherrif to craft their own response is a recipe for exactly what we are seeing.
Leaving a complete vacuum of leadership and expecting each individual state, county, local sherrif to craft their own response is a recipe for exactly what we are seeing.
That's what you get when you have a purposely weakened Executive branch in the Constitution that relies heavily on States rights.
...I've said it before and I'll say it again, 6 months into this lockdown. Why they've had no test on arrival option, at least for residents, is a blown opportunity.
It doesn't seem like it would have been so difficult to offer testing to residents only, or every tenth (pick your sample size) resident/tourist. As you say, it could have provided some data and experience with testing at airport.
That's what you get when you have a purposely weakened Executive branch in the Constitution that relies heavily on States rights.
Let me get this straight, you think the completely inept federal response to this pandemic is due to this administration believing (or worrying about) the Executive branch not having the authority to do things?!?
That would be laughable, if so many people were not dying.
Let me get this straight, you think the completely inept federal response to this pandemic is due to this administration believing (or worrying about) the Executive branch not having the authority to do things?!?
That would be laughable, if so many people were not dying.
So what exactly do you suppose would have been a competent federal response?
And keep in mind that the federal government CANNOT force the states to do anything, precisely due to the nature of our constitutional system of federalism. You can claim something is laughable, but unless you can coherently explain what power the federal government had to do certain things, that is just hot air.
I keep hearing so many say that the federal government should have instituted a national mask mandate and stay at home order. The only problem is that the federal government is powerless to do so; the federal government does not have general police powers . . . that's a power held by the states. Even if the federal government could institute the above in theory, such an order would be powerless and useless as there aren't enough federal law enforcement agents to enforce such a mandate . . . and, again, the federal government cannot force states to implement federal law, a point that the Supreme Court has held over and over again under the 10th Amendment. And given that the left rants and raves against the National Guard and federal civilian police force being used to guard federal property from the violent mob, how in the world does anyone think a more aggressive federal response in trying to enforce a national mask wear/stay at home policy would have worked?
Much (if not most) of the country's cases can be traced to the NY area in some way, shape or form. Yet, NY officials were slow to institute an area lockdown, and politicians like de Blasio and Biden were busy slamming the president's travel ban with China as "xenophobic" When Trump toyed with the idea of banning travel from NY (which he can't do), the NY governor loudly proclaimed that any such action would have been challenged in federal court.
So what exactly do you suppose would have been a competent federal response?
And keep in mind that the federal government CANNOT force the states to do anything, precisely due to the nature of our constitutional system of federalism. You can claim something is laughable, but unless you can coherently explain what power the federal government had to do certain things, that is just hot air.
I keep hearing so many say that the federal government should have instituted a national mask mandate and stay at home order. The only problem is that the federal government is powerless to do so; the federal government does not have general police powers . . . that's a power held by the states. Even if the federal government could institute the above in theory, such an order would be powerless and useless as there aren't enough federal law enforcement agents to enforce such a mandate . . . and, again, the federal government cannot force states to implement federal law, a point that the Supreme Court has held over and over again under the 10th Amendment. And given that the left rants and raves against the National Guard and federal civilian police force being used to guard federal property from the violent mob, how in the world does anyone think a more aggressive federal response in trying to enforce a national mask wear/stay at home policy would have worked?
Much (if not most) of the country's cases can be traced to the NY area in some way, shape or form. Yet, NY officials were slow to institute an area lockdown, and politicians like de Blasio and Biden were busy slamming the president's travel ban with China as "xenophobic" When Trump toyed with the idea of banning travel from NY (which he can't do), the NY governor loudly proclaimed that any such action would have been challenged in federal court.
I am not sure what your background is, but when i have been in senior leadership positions in different companies, I found that i could influence how things got done in two different ways, one was to lay down the law based on specific authority i had in the organization, but i often found that a more effective approach was to convince people with reasoning and data-driven analysis.
Likewise, the Executive branch has certain things it can do, and also has the bully pulpit to persuade the country in certain direction.
The things it could have done under authority:
Mobilized federal labs and many private companies (under DPA) to develop rapid test capability
Mobilized national effort to do contact tracing and follow-up testing and isolation.
Manhattan project like effort to develop vaccines and/or treatment protocols.
Things it could have done to promote better response at all levels:
Taken the threat seriously (not: "it is a hoax", "it will just disappear on its own", etc.)
Provided logistics and coordination in procuring and distributing medical supplies (states not fighting each other for supplies)
Encourage the citizens of the country to come together and work with each other to get through this instead of continuing to foment grievances - plenty of blame to go around in this count, but leadership comes from the top.
Those are just off the top of my head, but i am sure there are many more missed opportunities.
Several people here keep lamenting why the state does not have testing for inbound passenger in place. The main reason is that the rapid testing capability is simply not available. It is completely inefficient, and unrealistic to think each state would be better off developing their own test capability. This should have been a coordinated effort at the national level. The fact that we still don't have wide scale rapid test capability 6 months into the pandemic is bordering on criminal neglect on the part of the federal government.
I am not sure what your background is, but when i have been in senior leadership positions in different companies, I found that i could influence how things got done in two different ways, one was to lay down the law based on specific authority i had in the organization, but i often found that a more effective approach was to convince people with reasoning and data-driven analysis.
Likewise, the Executive branch has certain things it can do, and also has the bully pulpit to persuade the country in certain direction.
The things it could have done under authority:
Mobilized federal labs and many private companies (under DPA) to develop rapid test capability
Mobilized national effort to do contact tracing and follow-up testing and isolation.
Manhattan project like effort to develop vaccines and/or treatment protocols.
Things it could have done to promote better response at all levels:
Taken the threat seriously (not: "it is a hoax", "it will just disappear on its own", etc.)
Provided logistics and coordination in procuring and distributing medical supplies (states not fighting each other for supplies)
Encourage the citizens of the country to come together and work with each other to get through this instead of continuing to foment grievances - plenty of blame to go around in this count, but leadership comes from the top.
Those are just off the top of my head, but i am sure there are many more missed opportunities.
Several people here keep lamenting why the state does not have testing for inbound passenger in place. The main reason is that the rapid testing capability is simply not available. It is completely inefficient, and unrealistic to think each state would be better off developing their own test capability. This should have been a coordinated effort at the national level. The fact that we still don't have wide scale rapid test capability 6 months into the pandemic is bordering on criminal neglect on the part of the federal government.
1) Who in the world called the virus a "hoax?" Certainly not President Trump. He clearly stated that the Democrats' politicization of the virus was a hoax. That is a big difference. I don't get why some continue to push this falsehood, but it erodes credibility going forward. If the media and partisans reported honestly instead of trying to score political points on this issue, there would be no issue to be had.
2) The threat was taken seriously. Air travel to China was canceled back in January (something that Biden and other leftists attacked as xenophobic, which tells me that they would not have done so and the death toll would have been even higher), the Coronavirus Task Force was stood up in January to begin procuring supplies for distribution to the states and pushing out centralized guidelines for states and the public to follow, etc. Mask-wear and social distancing were emphasized from day one.
3) In a time of international shortage over PPE, the federal government took center stage in bidding for items for subsequent distribution to the states. Some states took issue with this as they were getting outbid by the federal government. But, given that the federal government had a bigger checkbook than the states, if the federal government wasn't outbidding the states, some other foreign country would have been. Hundreds of millions of PPE have been distributed and millions continue to be distributed to states. Still, I note that when states asked the federal government to release bids, this happened. You're acting like there was an endless supply of PPE. We were bidding against other countries and international bodies trying to take care of their own people for scarce supplies.
With all of the above (even if I gave you the above for the sake of argument), I'd like to hear how that would have led to fewer deaths. The bulk of the deaths are caused by inadequate social distancing/isolation/mask wear. Given that mask wear and social distancing were recommended strongly by the federal government from day one--and given that the federal government cannot enforce or implement a nationwide mask wear or stay at home policy--I am failing to see what the federal government could have reasonably done to have cut down on the death toll in this regard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But I am hesitant about anything rushed.
