Coronavirus

[Liberty]

Trump believes that shelter-in-place is a media plot to undermine his presidency:

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242905328209080331?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

 

This tells us that he is resisting it in order to save his presidency.

 

Based on his way of operation so far (everything good is because of him, everything bad is someone else's fault who he then hardly even knew), here's what I think his plan is:

 

He says he wants to reopen. When he can't because governors and cities and companies stay shut, he blames them for the bad economy, says it's not his fault, says they just do it to hurt him, so it shouldn't be held against him in election. Runs election as underdog who's being attacked by all, and all his great plans for the country would happen if not for all the obstruction.

 

If the measures taken work and we beat this thing, he says "see, I was right, it wasn't a big deal, we went through this for nothing, if you had listened to me, everything would've been fine." (like those saying Y2K was no big deal without realizing it was exactly because of all the mitigation efforts... it's anti-vaxxer logic -- "who needs vaccines, there are so few infectious diseases these days?").

 

If we're lucky (heavy seasonality? great therapeutics?) and can actually reopen quickly after a peak, he also takes credit for having known it (even though it was a pure gamble with the lives of others).

 

If things get really bad, he says he always knew it and it's all the fault of governors/mayors/deep state/democrats/etc who are incompetent/evil, as he's already been doing ("I always knew it was going to be a pandemic" "Cuomo could've bought more ventilators years ago" (everybody could've bought more of everything, that's not even wrong.. but he's not exactly bragging about his administration shutting down epidemic units, right, if he had so much foresight..?)).

 

He sets things up so that the has something to say whatever happens, even if he's actually not trying to figure out what's best to do to beat this thing as quickly and painlessly as possible, because that may be inconvenient to his election and businesses and he doesn't have the intellectual tools to understand complex problems -- his skills as a salesman/BS artist don't help with pandemics.

[RichardGibbons]

I guess better then your opinion that I was adding zero value by assuming there were way more infections then thought? I believe I said hundreds of thousands/millions fuck me for not zeroing it in with all of my up to the minute tests. How about your 3000 people tested 100 infections in Ontario or whatever that was you posted. I was right in theory, but you my friend were completely wrong with your opinion. Still bothers you huh? ;D

 

Come on, you weren't at all right, and the evidence has proven it beyond a doubt already. The main interesting thing now is that "character development" story, whether or not you'll recognize that and concede that you were completely off base.

 

(That said, you were adding value, just different value than what you thought you were adding. It's useful to understand the perspectives of people in the front line.)

[cobafdek]

The mean age of the patient subsample was 79.5 years (standard deviation [sD], 8.1), of whom,

only 601 (30.0%) were women.

Of all patients who died, 117 (30%) had ischemic heart disease,

126 (35.5%) had diabetes,

72 (20.3%) had cancer,

87(24.5%) had atrial fibrillation,

24 (6.8%) had dementia, and

34 (9.6%) had had a stroke.

 

The mean number of comorbidities was 2.7 (standard deviation, 1.6).

Only 3 patients (0.8%) had no underlying diseases,

89 (25.1%) had one, 91 (25.6%) had two, and 172 (48.5%) had three or more.

 

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/03/italian-doctors-note-high-covid-19-death-rate-urge-action

 

The patients were sicker than I thought before. 

They had 2.7 comorbidities on average including comorbidities like cancer and stroke.

Only 0.8% with no underlying disease.

 

The underlying scientific article says following:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763667

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

Best post on this thread so far.

 

Thanks

 

Sorry guys:

 

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is incorrect.

 

If only the known comorbidities were present, the Italian hospital/ICU/ERs would be in normal shape.  They are clearly not in normal shape.  You cannot look at the situation independent of Covid-19.

 

Covid-19 MUST be included in the cause of death.

 

 

[Castanza]

If we stay the course, things will look good and skeptics will think they are right and people will jump back in to spending because of pent up demand. If we say we should just move on, things will get pretty rough, people will stop going out, and we'll overrun the HC system/have a more severe recession

 

I agree with this, and then of course the inevitable political bickering that will result from it.

 

"Skeptics will think they are right." This is the type of thinking that allows for overreactions an emotions to bleed into inefficient and negligible policy. The idea that the most "hedged" response is always best response because it's the only guarantee against a worst case scenario is ridiculous.

 

Healthcare capacity is built for averages. I said this in the beginning and it's still amazing that individuals on here are surprised that it's becoming overwhelmed in certain areas. So if we apply your extreme hedge mentality above to healthcare capacity what should the future look like? Should the government stockpile millions of various medical devices for every potential type of outbreak and thousands of pop up hospitals for the potential one in a hundred year pandemic? If we ran a cost benefit analysis of such a program are you confident that this stance would be correct?

 

When does a hedge become counter intuitive? The current extreme hedge response of shutting down the US is adding 17k of debt per citizen, or 68k per family of 4. That is the average yearly income.

[Castanza]

The mean age of the patient subsample was 79.5 years (standard deviation [sD], 8.1), of whom,

only 601 (30.0%) were women.

Of all patients who died, 117 (30%) had ischemic heart disease,

126 (35.5%) had diabetes,

72 (20.3%) had cancer,

87(24.5%) had atrial fibrillation,

24 (6.8%) had dementia, and

34 (9.6%) had had a stroke.

 

The mean number of comorbidities was 2.7 (standard deviation, 1.6).

Only 3 patients (0.8%) had no underlying diseases,

89 (25.1%) had one, 91 (25.6%) had two, and 172 (48.5%) had three or more.

 

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/03/italian-doctors-note-high-covid-19-death-rate-urge-action

 

The patients were sicker than I thought before. 

They had 2.7 comorbidities on average including comorbidities like cancer and stroke.

Only 0.8% with no underlying disease.

 

The underlying scientific article says following:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763667

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

Best post on this thread so far.

 

Thanks

 

Sorry guys:

 

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is incorrect.

 

 

Are you suggesting that people with preexisting conditions are not at a higher risk of dying?

 

[cobafdek]

The mean age of the patient subsample was 79.5 years (standard deviation [sD], 8.1), of whom,

only 601 (30.0%) were women.

Of all patients who died, 117 (30%) had ischemic heart disease,

126 (35.5%) had diabetes,

72 (20.3%) had cancer,

87(24.5%) had atrial fibrillation,

24 (6.8%) had dementia, and

34 (9.6%) had had a stroke.

 

The mean number of comorbidities was 2.7 (standard deviation, 1.6).

Only 3 patients (0.8%) had no underlying diseases,

89 (25.1%) had one, 91 (25.6%) had two, and 172 (48.5%) had three or more.

 

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/03/italian-doctors-note-high-covid-19-death-rate-urge-action

 

The patients were sicker than I thought before. 

They had 2.7 comorbidities on average including comorbidities like cancer and stroke.

Only 0.8% with no underlying disease.

 

The underlying scientific article says following:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763667

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

Best post on this thread so far.

 

Thanks

 

Sorry guys:

 

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is incorrect.

 

 

Are you suggesting that people with preexisting conditions are not at a higher risk of dying?

 

Not at all.  They are definitely at a higher risk of dying. 

 

Without Covid-19, they would die at an expected rate.  Right now in Italy, there is one exit door in a crowded theater that has suddenly caught on fire.

[krazeenyc]

Heart Breaking...this is in New York City. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/video/nyregion/100000007052136/coronavirus-elmhurst-hospital-queens.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR17nh2pwePfc9hEWBwvb8PIvPnv4vsLPJkIak29itO2R-PnVqvd1Jx8IRo

 

It seems that a huge part of the reason the death rate is so high in the elderly in Italy is that so many people (young and old) are sick and the health care system is so overwhelmed that they need to prioritize patients.. So people who would otherwise have lived, are dying. Yes, young people are not dying at a high rate, but they ARE getting sick and they are taking up resources and stretching them very thin. 

 

Yes, shut it down, so our doctors, nurses, and hospitals have a chance.  So people who get sick of something else have a chance.

[Castanza]

The mean age of the patient subsample was 79.5 years (standard deviation [sD], 8.1), of whom,

only 601 (30.0%) were women.

Of all patients who died, 117 (30%) had ischemic heart disease,

126 (35.5%) had diabetes,

72 (20.3%) had cancer,

87(24.5%) had atrial fibrillation,

24 (6.8%) had dementia, and

34 (9.6%) had had a stroke.

 

The mean number of comorbidities was 2.7 (standard deviation, 1.6).

Only 3 patients (0.8%) had no underlying diseases,

89 (25.1%) had one, 91 (25.6%) had two, and 172 (48.5%) had three or more.

 

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/03/italian-doctors-note-high-covid-19-death-rate-urge-action

 

The patients were sicker than I thought before. 

They had 2.7 comorbidities on average including comorbidities like cancer and stroke.

Only 0.8% with no underlying disease.

 

The underlying scientific article says following:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763667

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

Best post on this thread so far.

 

Thanks

 

Sorry guys:

 

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is incorrect.

 

 

Are you suggesting that people with preexisting conditions are not at a higher risk of dying?

 

Not at all.  They are definitely at a higher risk of dying. 

 

Without Covid-19, they would die at an expected rate.  Right now in Italy, there is one exit door in a crowded theater that has suddenly caught on fire.

 

So what was your point?

[RichardGibbons]

When does a hedge become counter intuitive?

 

This is an extremely good question (though I think you really mean "counter productive"), and is totally right.  It's a hard one to answer.

 

I'd certainly say that stocking up on PPE makes sense, as PPE is relatively inexpensive, and there could be large stores of PPE that get cycled through before expiry. Devices, not so much, but I think going forward, 3D printers could actually solve "just in time" device problem for most countries.

 

I think it's pretty clear that the AOC crowd who seem to be saying "no price is too high for a life" doesn't make any sense.  And it's clear that the "don't do anything" crowd has also been wrong, since USA could look like South Korea or Taiwan, but by not doing anything has ended up in a situation where the economy has crashed.

[Guest Schwab711]

The hedged response isn't always best. There's actually economic research that shows short-term efforts to avoid worse-case health outcomes lead to better long-term economic results. I actually want the best for the US (just like everyone else)!

 

Further, it's not clear that adding to US debt actually matters. First, most of the stimulus is on the Fed balance sheet, not US government. Second, we have near-0% rates and no inflation. Why does government spending matter? I don't disagree on fiscal discipline, but every other country is doing it and FX is relative. We don't necessarily need a stronger dollar than we have so why does spending matter?

 

 

Cities that had stronger preventative efforts have better LT economic results:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3561560

 

A lot of post-Spanish Flu growth was due to young folks dying:

http://www.birdflubook.org/resources/brainerd1.pdf

 

 

 

Other links:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/files/pdfs/community-development/research-reports/pandemic_flu_report.pdf

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/afp/2006/eng/022806.pdf

 

 

And to take a break from serious posting to troll. In 2017, Fauci said this was likely to occur at some point:

https://www.healio.com/infectious-disease/emerging-diseases/news/online/%7B85a3f9c0-ed0a-4be8-9ca2-8854b2be7d13%7D/fauci-no-doubt-trump-will-face-surprise-infectious-disease-outbreak

[cobafdek]

So what was your point?

 

My point: 

 

Covid-19 MUST be included in the cause of death.

 

It's my response to

 

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

[Castanza]

When does a hedge become counter intuitive?

 

This is an extremely good question (though I think you really mean "counter productive"), and is totally right.  It's a hard one to answer.

 

I'd certainly say that stocking up on PPE makes sense, as PPE is relatively inexpensive, and there could be large stores of PPE that get cycled through before expiry. Devices, not so much, but I think going forward, 3D printers could actually solve "just in time" device problem for most countries.

 

I think it's pretty clear that the AOC crowd who seem to be saying "no price is too high for a life" doesn't make any sense.  And it's clear that the "don't do anything" crowd has also been wrong, since USA could look like South Korea or Taiwan, but by not doing anything has ended up in a situation where the economy has crashed.

 

3D printing is interesting

 

I don't think this question "And it's clear that the "don't do anything" crowd has also been wrong, since USA could look like South Korea or Taiwan, but by not doing anything has ended up in a situation where the economy has crashed." can be answered yet. The likely answer will be what it always is.....somewhere in the middle.

[Liberty]

For those who think only those who die are a problem, here's what this kind of hospitalization can be like even for those who survive:

 

 

I’m not a doctor but here’s what happened to me when I was put on a ventilator for 2 weeks years ago:

 

- couldn’t walk bc of muscle loss, needed months of PT + OT

- scratched vocal chords = speech therapy

- holes in tonsils = throat infections

- got last rites, family traumatized

 

The worst part is that despite all the morphine, I vividly remember the ICU. I cried when the medical team explained they were putting me in a coma, I was terrified. My poor parents held my hand and sang me a lullaby like I was a baby.

 

People with COVID-19 are going to be alone.

 

Also: Fauci: "you've got to understand that you don't make the timeline, the virus makes the timeline. So you've got to respond, in what you see happen. And if you keep seeing this acceleration, it doesn't matter what you say. One week, two weeks, three weeks -- you've got to go with what the situation on the ground is."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/25/politics/anthony-fauci-coronavirus-timeline-cnntv/index.html

 

 

[Castanza]

My point: 

 

Covid-19 MUST be included in the cause of death.

 

It's my response to

 

Nobody was disagreeing with that.

[Liberty]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/the-patchwork-of-state-and-local-quarantines-will-prolong-us-coronavirus-outbreak-former-obama-advisor-says.html

 

State and local officials have implemented a variety of “shelter-in-place” orders, shuttering nonessential businesses, bars and restaurants to contain the spread of the coronavirus. Without a national lockdown, the states that have issued shelter-in-place type orders are shouldering a brunt of the economic damage, Emanuel said. Worst yet, those efforts are being undermined by other regions that aren’t doing the same.

 

“If we don’t have a full national lockdown ... You are going to have these rollercoasters. You contain it in some area. Then we try to ease it up, then it just blossoms again and we are never going to get it under control in the whole country

 

That's why you need federal leadership and coordination.

[cobafdek]

My point: 

 

Covid-19 MUST be included in the cause of death.

 

It's my response to

 

Nobody was disagreeing with that.

 

Let me clarify:

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is what I should have highlighted as being misleading.

[Spekulatius]

Some comments regarding the relatively low death rate for Covid-19 in Germany (article is in German)

https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/corona-krise-virologe-liefert-erste-erklaerungen-zu-niedrigen-todeszahlen-in-deutschland-a-c8fef5d1-9c8e-4e9d-b8cc-3f85c6b00282

 

Short summary:

1) lots is testing (~0.5M Tests at this point) increases the denominator and leads to lower morbidity rate

2) Health care system is holding up (even supporting the French in Alsasse in proximity)

3) Initial cases seems to have a higher percentage of young people. The initial outbreak was traced partly to folks traveling back from Ischgl (a skiing town in Austria, known for partying) which were predominantly younger people.

 

As the disease spreads into other groups, the fatality  rate could well increase. So far the trends seem to have stemmed the rise in exponential growth for infections so I think the health care system in Germany will hold up.

[Investor20]

My point: 

 

Covid-19 MUST be included in the cause of death.

 

It's my response to

 

Nobody was disagreeing with that.

 

Let me clarify:

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is what I should have highlighted as being misleading.

Couldnt they have used XRay or atleast breathing problems as a criteria?

 

A 80 year old heart attack patient with clear lungs needs to be counted as Covid 19 death because of a positive PCR test?

[Viking]

Heart Breaking...this is in New York City. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/video/nyregion/100000007052136/coronavirus-elmhurst-hospital-queens.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR17nh2pwePfc9hEWBwvb8PIvPnv4vsLPJkIak29itO2R-PnVqvd1Jx8IRo

 

It seems that a huge part of the reason the death rate is so high in the elderly in Italy is that so many people (young and old) are sick and the health care system is so overwhelmed that they need to prioritize patients.. So people who would otherwise have lived, are dying. Yes, young people are not dying at a high rate, but they ARE getting sick and they are taking up resources and stretching them very thin. 

 

Yes, shut it down, so our doctors, nurses, and hospitals have a chance.  So people who get sick of something else have a chance.

 

This is my favourite post of the last couple of days. I find it is always instructive to understand what is actually happening in the real world.

 

I am trying to understand what is going on today at the hospitals in New York and Washington State. In New York it looks like they are at the edge of the apocalypse. It absolutely amazes me the incredible personal sacrifices health care workers in the hot zones (US and around the world) are making right now. They are putting their lives at risk (not to mention the long term emotional and psychological damage that is being done).

 

Can you imagine what this hospital would look like in another week or two if social distancing measures were not put into place when they were? Holy shit. It looks like it will get much worse in New York before it gets better.

 

Who wants to be a health care worker right now? They are kind of like soldiers being sent off to war except they are about to run out of ammo... And the generals are not aligned on strategy. And little is known about the enemy. They are the heroes in this battle. They need our support (and this includes the policy response).

[patience_and_focus]

Some comments regarding the relatively low death rate for Covid-19 in Germany (article is in German)

https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/corona-krise-virologe-liefert-erste-erklaerungen-zu-niedrigen-todeszahlen-in-deutschland-a-c8fef5d1-9c8e-4e9d-b8cc-3f85c6b00282

 

Short summary:

1) lots is testing (~0.5M Tests at this point) increases the denominator and leads to lower morbidity rate

2) Health care system is holding up (even supporting the French in Alsasse in proximity)

3) Initial cases seems to have a higher percentage of young people. The initial outbreak was traced partly to folks traveling back from Ischgl (a skiing town in Austria, known for partying) which were predominantly younger people.

 

As the disease spreads into other groups, the fatality  rate could well increase. So far the trends seem to have stemmed the rise in exponential growth for infections so I think the health care system in Germany will hold up.

 

This. Also, see this on bloomberg -

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-24/coronavirus-less-deadly-in-germany-because-of-youthful-patients

 

"More than 20% of Italians between the ages of 30 and 49 live with their parents, according to Bonn University economists Christian Bayer and Moritz Kuhn. That’s more than double the rate for Germans in that age bracket. Bayer and Moritz have found a correlation between generations living under one roof and case fatality for coronavirus."

[ERICOPOLY]

Trump believes that shelter-in-place is a media plot to undermine his presidency:

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242905328209080331?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

 

This tells us that he is resisting it in order to save his presidency.

 

Based on his way of operation so far (everything good is because of him, everything bad is someone else's fault who he then hardly even knew), here's what I think his plan is:

 

He says he wants to reopen. When he can't because governors and cities and companies stay shut, he blames them for the bad economy, says it's not his fault, says they just do it to hurt him, so it shouldn't be held against him in election. Runs election as underdog who's being attacked by all, and all his great plans for the country would happen if not for all the obstruction.

 

If the measures taken work and we beat this thing, he says "see, I was right, it wasn't a big deal, we went through this for nothing, if you had listened to me, everything would've been fine." (like those saying Y2K was no big deal without realizing it was exactly because of all the mitigation efforts... it's anti-vaxxer logic -- "who needs vaccines, there are so few infectious diseases these days?").

 

If we're lucky (heavy seasonality? great therapeutics?) and can actually reopen quickly after a peak, he also takes credit for having known it (even though it was a pure gamble with the lives of others).

 

If things get really bad, he says he always knew it and it's all the fault of governors/mayors/deep state/democrats/etc who are incompetent/evil, as he's already been doing ("I always knew it was going to be a pandemic" "Cuomo could've bought more ventilators years ago" (everybody could've bought more of everything, that's not even wrong)).

 

He sets things up so that the has something to say whatever happens, even if he's actually not trying to figure out what's best to do to beat this thing as quickly and painlessly as possible, because that may be inconvenient to his election and businesses and he doesn't have the intellectual tools to understand complex problems -- his skills as a salesman/BS artist don't help with pandemics.

 

I think you are right.  He can cherry pick later which of his past contradictory actions to bombard his supporters with.  For example, he now chooses to bombard them with his support of the airlines' decision to restrict flights out of China, when he could have instead chosen to remind us that he later claimed the virus was a hoax.  Further, the major US airlines had actually beaten him to it.  (similar to his taking credit for California working with Google on a website)

[Dalal.Holdings]

Trump believes that shelter-in-place is a media plot to undermine his presidency:

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242905328209080331?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

 

This tells us that he is resisting it in order to save his presidency.

 

Based on his way of operation so far (everything good is because of him, everything bad is someone else's fault who he then hardly even knew), here's what I think his plan is:

 

He says he wants to reopen. When he can't because governors and cities and companies stay shut, he blames them for the bad economy, says it's not his fault, says they just do it to hurt him, so it shouldn't be held against him in election. Runs election as underdog who's being attacked by all, and all his great plans for the country would happen if not for all the obstruction.

 

If the measures taken work and we beat this thing, he says "see, I was right, it wasn't a big deal, we went through this for nothing, if you had listened to me, everything would've been fine." (like those saying Y2K was no big deal without realizing it was exactly because of all the mitigation efforts... it's anti-vaxxer logic -- "who needs vaccines, there are so few infectious diseases these days?").

 

If we're lucky (heavy seasonality? great therapeutics?) and can actually reopen quickly after a peak, he also takes credit for having known it (even though it was a pure gamble with the lives of others).

 

If things get really bad, he says he always knew it and it's all the fault of governors/mayors/deep state/democrats/etc who are incompetent/evil, as he's already been doing ("I always knew it was going to be a pandemic" "Cuomo could've bought more ventilators years ago" (everybody could've bought more of everything, that's not even wrong)).

 

He sets things up so that the has something to say whatever happens, even if he's actually not trying to figure out what's best to do to beat this thing as quickly and painlessly as possible, because that may be inconvenient to his election and businesses and he doesn't have the intellectual tools to understand complex problems -- his skills as a salesman/BS artist don't help with pandemics.

 

+1,000,000

 

"The art of the dodge", a.k.a. the buck always stops somewheres else

[Viking]

The war analogy that Trump used when describing the virus looks very fitting. The health care workers are the soldiers. The leadership group is not aligned on strategy. We know little about the enemy. As in any war there is lots of collateral damage. Weekly initial unemployment claims increased to 3.3 million in the last week. This number will be going much higher in the coming weeks. And it will stay elevated for ? weeks afterwards. This war is now getting real for the American public. We are entering a new stage.

 

- https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2020/03/weekly-initial-unemployment-claims_26.html

 

“At the worst of the Great Recession, continued claims peaked at 6.635 million, but then steadily declined.

 

Over the next few weeks, continued claims will increase rapidly to a new record high, and then will likely stay at that high level until the crisis abates.”

[Castanza]

The war analogy that Trump used when describing the virus looks very fitting. The health care workers are the soldiers. The leadership group is not aligned on strategy. We know little about the enemy. As in any war there is lots of collateral damage. Weekly initial unemployment claims increased to 3.3 million in the last week. This war is now getting real for the American public. We are entering a new stage.

 

- https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2020/03/weekly-initial-unemployment-claims_26.html

 

“At the worst of the Great Recession, continued claims peaked at 6.635 million, but then steadily declined.

 

Over the next few weeks, continued claims will increase rapidly to a new record high, and then will likely stay at that high level until the crisis abates.”

 

The causation of unemployment is very different in this situation when compared to the GFC. One was mandated by government, the other was not. The underlying factors as to why unemployment is spiking is important.

[cobafdek]

 

Definition of COVID-19–Related Deaths

A second possible explanation for the high Italian case-fatality rate may be how COVID-19–related deaths are identified in Italy.

Case-fatality statistics in Italy are based on defining COVID-19–related deaths as those occurring in patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, independently from preexisting diseases that may have caused death. This method was selected because clear criteria for the definition of COVID-19–related deaths is not available.

.......

Electing to define death from COVID-19 in this way may have resulted in an overestimation of the case-fatality rate.

.........

The presence of these comorbidities might have increased the risk of mortality independent of COVID-19 infection.

 

This is what I should have highlighted as being misleading.

Couldnt they have used XRay or atleast breathing problems as a criteria?

 

A 80 year old heart attack patient with clear lungs needs to be counted as Covid 19 death because of a positive PCR test?

 

It's a great question.  The spectrum of Covid-19 illnesses has yet to be defined.  For all we know now, Covid-19 could have caused that heart attack.  Until the time that standardized disease definitions are decided upon, and at this early stage of our knowledge, a positive test is all we can use to report CFR of Covid-19.

 

A positive influenza test in an 80 year old heart attack patient with clear lungs who dies is an influenza death, with the other comorbidies listed as contributory.