'No surprise' we're seeing coronavirus surge in Republican areas

Discussion in 'Coronavirus Pandemic Discussions' started by CenterField, Oct 17, 2020.

PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening. We urge you to seek reliable alternate sources to verify information you read in this forum.

  1. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are talking about totals so far, not current surge. Do you know the difference? See post #90 for the actual surges. Mostly in Red states.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
    MiaBleu likes this.
  2. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Probably each single one of them, a true Covid-19 death, but as a lay person, you don't understand how to write a death certificate.

    You know what? Like I said in my Death Certificates post, your degree of misinformation and your idea that you can pontificate about medical matters is irritating and I have not time to waste with someone like you. Welcome to my Ignore list.
     
    MiaBleu and Derideo_Te like this.
  3. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I understand why you keep avoiding accidents, self harm, and Alzheimers co-morbidities as "covid related" too.

    That's also pretty irritating.

    Typical leftist, attack you then block you.

    So very scientific of you.

    Thanks for the block though. Now I can pick apart your arguments and you won't even know.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
  4. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know why you're talking about "surges" instead of deaths too.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  5. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh, I somehow hadn't noticed (last time I read the complete thing was a while ago) that they had included asymptomatic patients! So it's even worse.
    I don't know why I was under the impression that they were all symptomatic. The cardiac involvement seems so dramatic that one would think that they were cases at least with mild symptoms.
    I remember posting that we didn't know what would be the status of the asymptomatic patients.
    If asymptomatic patients are also getting the cardiac lesions, then we're truly screwed.
    I said to my son's fiancee, who is a medical student, "if this is confirmed, you should go into Cardiology." She'll have a lot of business.
    Now, think about it. How many people with asymptomatic flu get cardiac lesions? Hard to know because I don't think that a person with no symptoms of the flu whatsoever would try to get a flu test. But if in regular seasonal flu (outside of the special pandemics) like in the article I linked to earlier today (or was it yesterday?), the incidence of these lesions is 0% to 0.4%, not many, right? Now, Covid-19, even asymptomatic patients are getting it? Jesus!
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
  6. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Numbers based on unreliable tests are meaningless.
     
  7. James California

    James California Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2019
    Messages:
    11,335
    Likes Received:
    11,469
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    ~ Eventually someone will write a book : " COVID Con Job " [​IMG]
     
    vman12 likes this.
  8. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pretty convenient that all the Covid deaths list the 10 most common yearly causes of death as comorbidities eh?

    Suddenly heart attacks, cancer, obesity and diabetes are "covid related", unlike the huge percentage of 8 million deaths per year every previous year.
     
    James California likes this.
  9. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That’s exactly my point. We don’t know how many silent myocardial infarctions are caused by influenza. If it follows the same pattern as C19, and my links (that nobody can offer any contradictory evidence to) show it does, it could be in the hundreds of thousands per year. We know detected myocardial infarctions initiated by influenza are not rare. Why pretend they are? Do we need to misconstrue or ignore evidence to minimize influenza? I propose we should not.

    Of course C19 is a nasty beast. But influenza is as well, and it’s being minimized by one side as much as C19 is by the other.

    I’ll add, most evidence points to influenza destabilizing plaques as the root cause of most influenza triggered cardiovascular events. So it’s unlikely influenza is going to present huge numbers of cardiac lesions. It is a different virus. :)

    Just a bit of trivia on H1N1 and heart attacks. In the years previous to H1N1 the death rate from heart attacks was decreasing substantially each year. Look at the 2009/2010 decrease. Much smaller decrease than previous years and much smaller decrease than the period immediately after. Pretty good evidence there was a substantial increase in cardiovascular events from H1N1. This is just heart diseases, no stroke or arterial tear data included as far as I can tell.
    Link:
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/184515/deaths-by-heart-diseases-in-the-us-since-1950/

    From the link:

    upload_2020-10-19_16-20-42.png

    As far as trying to think positively in light of young blood physicians and new solutions to this problem, I’ve been trying to find out the current status of this technology but am coming up empty. It could be a huge game changer. Do you have any firsthand knowledge on this?

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190603203111.htm
     
  10. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Very interesting and I think you made your case. Look at this paper:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3347827/#CIT0013

    Observe that they reference another study that found 9% of myocarditis in influenza A.

    They also reference another study, consistent with what you were mentioning, talking about increased AMI and IHD (the other mechanism, the plaque one) during flu epidemics (so your hypothesis for the year 2009-10 may very well be sound) but here is where it gets weird. They say that the authors of the study they referenced mentioned of up to 92,000 deaths per year from AMI triggered by the flu.

    This is that study:

    https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/01.CIR.0000102380.47012.92

    Haha, it seems like they are learning from the lay press and journalists, because while I read it fast (I'm trying to watch the KC at Buffalo game on TV, too), I didn't see that statement at all... (maybe I just missed it; if yes, let me know). It's a paper primarily about how the flu shot reduces cardiovascular mortality in those flu-triggered events, by 67%... and they get to some wild guesses about how many lives could be saved by the flu shot and at one point mention 91,000. The same paper puts mortality by the flu at grossly 20,000 per year.

    That's not the kind of evidence you and I would really find conclusive, right? I'd like to rather see hard data on the causal link, not VERY indirect estimates like this one.

    And also, we don't know about other intervening factors. Observe that after the effect you mentioned, subsequent years show a much lower decrease year to year, down to a trickle for the last several years. Say, some sort of better optimization of guidelines for statins had an impact... or more access to care with the gains made after... Obamacare, haha! (just kidding, the timeline doesnt' even match). Maybe the low-hanging fruit was collected before and then there aren't too many new gains to make in subsequent years. Anyway, who knows? Your hypothesis is attractive but you know that often there are overlooked intervening factors. You are talking about a correlation. What is actually causing it, is unknown.

    What do I take from all of this?

    That we don't really know the incidence of cardiovascular complications of influenza. Maybe they go as high as the 90,000s... but maybe not.

    Now, let's suppose that yes, while the flu kills 20,000 per year, maybe (and it's a big maybe) up to 90,000 more would die of cardiovascular events triggered by the flu.

    OK, so, even if we were to accept this, we'd get to 110,000 deaths... half of what we've had so far, from Covid-19 alone, not counting possible later cardiac issues since the kind caused by Covid-19 is not as immediate, given that it weakens the cardiac muscle rather (raising the spectrum of future heart failure) rather than causing a sudden AMI.

    So, how many more we'll have to add for the Covid-19 when it's all said and done, and when the full impact of Covid-19 in FUTURE heart failures comes knocking?

    I mean, even NOT adding that, Covid-19 already beat by twice as many, the direct deaths from the flu PLUS these wild ESTIMATE of an add-on of 90,000 more.

    With the 78% number which I sincerely hope is not confirmed, and I also sincerely hope that not all of those end up in heart failure, once Covid-19 gets to the numbers of infected individuals that we see with the flu, where will it lead us? Let's say that, to be absolutely generous, instead of 78% we go with 10%. So think of the CDC estimates of 49 million people infected with the flu... of these, MAYBE 90,000 end up with AMI... But see, given how infectious the Covid-19 is (more than the flu) it wouldn't be too far-fetched to think that at least Covid-19 will infect the same number of people than a flu season, right? I mean, why expect any fewer from a virus that is more infectious??? It will likely be more, given it being more infectious, but again, to be generous, let's say that it will just match the number of flu cases.

    OK, let's say, then, 10% of 49 million people... That's 4.9 million people. Now that number of 90,000 people with AMI triggered by the flu (possibly) is suddenly looking small again, right?

    So, I continue to say, Covid-19 is a much more dangerous virus. I think that there is ABUNDANT EVIDENCE supporting this view. Infectiousness, average R0 number, bigger. Check. Case-fatality rate, bigger. Check. Infection-fatality rate, most likely bigger. Check. Peak daily death toll, MUCH bigger. Check. Longer convalescence. Check. Higher percentage of severe cases. Check. Higher percentage of utilization of ICU. Check. Higher percentage of need for ventilation. Check. For those who go to ICUs, longer stay. Check. For those who need ventilation, longer use of the machine. Check.

    I mean, what is NOT indicative of Covid-19 being more dangerous than the flu??? EVERYTHING points in this direction.

    Anyway, you do have a point that this is not a competition. The reason I insist so much that yes, Covid-19 is more dangerous, is because the deniers always try to say that it is not, it's just like the flu, therefore we shouldn't take precautions. You know that this is the public health aspect that drives me crazy.

    I keep saying, but we have the flu shot. Did you see that 67% reduction of cardiac risk there? Also, earlier today I showed to another poster, another study showing 84% reduction in ICU use for severe flu patients, if they had been vaccinated.

    So, we DO have an efficient tool... the flu shot!!! One of the studies above also say that Tamiflu and other anti-influenza antivirals reduce the cardiovascular events for the flu, too. So, not only we have a vaccine, but also specific treatment.

    Which is why, like I'm saying, it's much more justified to try harder to contain Covid-19 than the flu, since we lack both, so far, for Covid-19. I've said to another poster, once we DO get these other tools (a good and safe Covid-19 vaccines, maybe if we get really lucky, an efficient specific medication) then I'll abandon the precautions, and will behave towards Covid-19 like we behave towards the flu (will advise patients to get the Covid-19 shot, get tested early if they develop symptoms, get on the specific medication early) and life will go about back to normal. But we aren't there yet.

    But yes, there is no need to minimize the flu. People should take the flu shot (have you? I worry about you, my friend, you say you don't go see doctors; get one from a pharmacy, then). People should promptly get tested and get on Tamiflu if they catch it. The funny thing is that I've spent years telling my patients how dangerous the flu is, to see if I motivate them to take the flu shot... and here I'm arguing the opposite view, LOL.

    But one VERY ESSENTIAL thing that most people forget, is that Covid-19 is not INSTEAD of the flu. It's IN ADDITION to the flu. It's similar to the "two wrongs don't make a right" thing.

    The flu being dangerous (although, I sustain, less than Covid-19) doesn't mean that Covid-19 is not dangerous (actually, it is more dangerous).

    So, actually this should be an argument for MORE precautions... We should think "we already have a dangerous virus, the influenza virus, so let's not get into the "twindemic" and allow another even more dangerous virus be added to this... we should be even MORE careful!!!

    See the contradiction in the usual conservative view? "Oh, the flu is dangerous, so we're over-reacting to Covid, we shouldn't take precautions against Covid). WTF? What sense does THAT make???

    And I fully know it's not YOUR position, but I'm just showing how insane this discussion can get.

    The bottom line: the flu is dangerous. Let's protect ourselves from it by taking the flu shot and promptly seeking Tamiflu if we catch it. Covid-19 is even more dangerous. Let's wear good masks with a good seal, protect the eyes too if possible, social distance, and practice hand hygiene, while we wait for a vaccine and hopefully some specific treatment.

    There. Simple, no? Why is it that it needs to be a political hot potato, instead of such a sensible and reasonable conclusion?

    -----------

    Heart patches: yes, fascinating. They were announced at the Experimental Biology meeting in Orlando, in 2019:

    https://science.sciencemag.org/content/364/6438/321.summary

    Video:

     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
  11. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What confuses me is why is this “my hypothesis”? A decade after H1N1 some farmer puts two and two together? That’s hard for me to swallow. Your above link states this phenomenon was still ignored in cardiology textbooks in 2010, six years after the study I linked originally showing the correlation and solid leads on causation of influenza triggering cardiovascular events. Why is there no interest in this?
    Yes, it looks like the 91 or 92 thousand number comes from extrapolating the flu vaccine reduction in mortality to the entire population.
    Two of my links in my original post were studies in the last two years that confirm this earlier work from 2004-2010. What would you consider conclusive?
    I guess if flu vaccination is decreasing cardiovascular events it’s pretty hard for me to dismiss everything with the old “correlation isn’t causation” trope. Again, I see no evidence the relationship isn’t causal.
    I think there have only been two years where flu deaths estimated by CDC have been under 20,000 annually. I don’t know the average but it’s well over 20,000. Doesn’t really matter but I think that’s minimizing reality again.
    Like I said, the above discussion does not include SMI’s at all. I think we have to consider them to make valid comparisons about the future
    I don’t think we are dealing with wild estimates. If we were there would be some kind of evidence of contradictory conclusions. I’ve not seen any. Also, a huge mistake made by even epidemiologists is assuming next year or 2022, etc. are going to have the same infection rates of Covid as this year. That assumption, even without a vaccine, is at this point not logical. If we are going to make such comparisons (worst year of Covid vs. average year of influenza) we could just as easily say H1N1 in 1918 proves influenza is “worse” than C19.
    As I’ve said on PF before, yes, today C19 certainly looks more dangerous than the flu. Especially as the vast majority of people have no idea of the consequences of flu I’ve presented. And especially if we pick the (probably) worst year of C19 to compare to average influenza years and ignore the fact at one time the flu viruses were as novel as SARS-CoV-2.
    I understand your position and don’t fault you for it. My original point was that it’s frustrating for many to be told they can’t compare flu to C19 when the experts don’t even know the realities of influenza to compare C19 to. It’s frustrating to me to see criticism of downplaying C19 by those who downplay influenza or don’t even know the cardiovascular risks associated with the flu.
    Yes, much of the data I’ve presented revolves around what has been learned from observing vaccinated vs. unvaccinated in relation to cardiac events. The above baffles me. You say the influenza/AMI relationship is possibly just correlation, yet accept the cardiac risk reduction in flu vaccinated individuals. What am I missing?
    I’m not opposed to containing C19.
    To a doc every infectious disease is a mortal enemy. I feel the same with my critters. No, I’ve never had a flu shot. My wife’s cousin’s wife is a nurse and she gave me my last tetanus “vaccination” at her house. Should probably look that up and see how long ago that was....

    My way to deal with flu season is social distancing and a good immune system. During flu season I might get within 10 ft of someone besides my wife once every 2-3 weeks and that’s outside usually. I’ve had symptomatic flu once in the last 24 years.
    Yes, especially for the most vulnerable, flu season really amps up their risk of serious illness or death this year more than ever.
    The insanity on both sides knows no bounds at this point. I had to take a break from even reading much here for a couple days. I’m saddened that it’s come to this. Hatred over a pandemic. I’m perplexed by denial that C19 is serious and I’m perplexed by the unwillingness of those most at risk and most in fear of C19 to do anything meaningful to protect themselves beyond wearing a mask in public. I’m perplexed that NOBODY seems to have any interest in truth. It’s all spin and weaponization of science.
    Good segue into something I wanted to share with you about Tamiflu. I have a neighbor who’s a retired pharmacist and works for the other neighbor I share harvesting equipment and labor with. He was telling me the other day how misused Tamiflu prescriptions were. He said people would wait to go to the doc until almost too late for the product to do any good. Then wait till closing time to fill the prescription to avoid waiting in line. Then they would not finish the course because they were already starting to recover and decided they didn’t need the stuff after all. I see you advocate for early use, but it sounds like at least in my area the message wasn’t sinking in about prompt usage. The waste of everyone’s time and (mostly) tax money really bothered him.
    -----------
    Once the news came out the stem cell patch was ready for trials everything went silent. Hopefully they are in trial and ready to deal with C19 heart damage soon. The stem patch ability to “beat” on its own and ability to learn to synchronize with the heart it’s applied to fascinates me.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
  12. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, obviously, because you are much more intelligent than most people and much better informed, which is why I like exchanging ideas with you, so much. Don't say "some farmer" - what you do for a living does not in any way diminish your intellectual powers, and especially, in a noble profession that is essential to any nation, and a complex one to boot, managing the biological health of several species of farm animals. Why no more interest? It's a mystery, why this seems to fly under the radar. Sure, it's known that the flu in the most severe cases can damage the heart but I doubt that many non-specialists are aware of the actual size of the problem.
    No, I berated the study I quoted for imprecise conclusions based on an estimate, not the studies you quoted.
    Why no evidence that the relationship isn't causal is not the same as evidence that the relationship is casual, I opened my post saying that you made your case. I do believe you are onto something.
    Not necessarily. You are probably aware that the number of flu deaths is an estimate, much much much much removed from confirmation than C19 deaths. The CDC and providers test/confirm a tiny minority of flu deaths and extrapolate the data to estimate the total. There are large margins of error. Many believe that the CDC has always been in the business of frightening people about the flu in order to achieve more acceptance of the flu shot, and yes, some researchers do believe that in most years taken as an average the real flu deaths are not many more than 20,000 per year. Anyway, likely much worse given the correlation you've mentioned (which does sound compelling and does seem like it can perfectly be causal).
    True.
    I was only talking about the study I linked to.
    A point I've made too, repeatedly. I said that certain H1N1 years have had a modality of flu just as bad as, or worse than C19. I'm just saying, the run of the mill influenza A or B generally in most seasons is way less dangerous than C19. You have a point about this probably being the worst C19 year, but my point is, if we are seeing such a dangerous C19 year we need to stop minimizing it and get serious about prevention. Even with the vaccine it is likely to become endemic and to return, like the flu, so, also consider that just like the flu mutates and new aggressive strains come from time to time, we may have mutated C19 that is more aggressive and get even worse seasons. Remember the H1N1 in 1918-19? It came in 3 waves, the second and third being much more devastating than the first one. Like I say over and over to those who minimize C19, it's not over yet.

    But then, I've been talking about the cardiac consequences of THIS wave of C19, and if this initial study is replicated and the concerned statements by leading cardiologists materialize, we'll be seeing a surge in heart failure down the road linked to THIS Covid-19 year; if we keep getting other aggressive years in the future than that damage will be ADDED to it. I mean, maybe we're ALREADY in a situation of widespread damage that is flying under the radar (before the German study nobody was paying attention to it, and the lesions are silent; the problem is, what they will evolve to in a few years).
    Oops, this should have been quoted before my last paragraph as it applied to it as well.
    Look, as you said, this didn't even make the textbooks and has been flying under the radar (for some weird reasons I can't comprehend either) and Cardiology is not my specialty. I did know of influenza-related damage to the heart but had assumed it as rare and occurring only in the most severe cases. Most of my colleagues still feel this way. If not in textbooks when I was studying general internal medicine and cardiology, it's harder to acquire the more precise knowledge afterwards. While I try to be up-to-date, Medicine is VAST. Really, really VAST. It is hard to keep up with knowledge produced by specialists in other specialties given that I don't routinely explore Cardiology journals (I actually do, from time to time, but obviously much less often and less thoroughly than I explore my specialty's journals. It's even hard to keep up with new knowledge in one's own specialty, let alone other specialties. I feel no guilt whatsoever for underestimating the importance of the cardiovascular impact from the flu. I'm quite sure that those specialists who do have this knowledge, lack awareness of a huge number of new facts and new updates in MY specialty. Nobody can know everything, especially in the vast field of the medical sciences.
    What you are missing is that I did accept your premise (as in "you made your case") but still think that the method you used in comparing data from those years may have had intervening factors. I accept your premise but I'm not entirely sure of the dimension of the problem. While it must have contributed to the data fluctuation you've pointed to, I'm not sure to what degree, and I'm not sure if other intervening factors didn't also play a role to amplify the effect. Like I said, I accept the reality that the flu does have a larger cardiovascular impact than my outdated notions acknowledged, but I think we still don't know to what degree. Triggered by you, I've looked at other papers too, a handful of them, yesterday. I didn't quote them all, I just quoted one that seemed compelling and that quoted two others. But I saw other papers saying precisely that, that we don't know what the size of this impact is; and concluding that it is highly variable and can go from zero percent to up to 10%, quoting the possibility that certain flu strains are more aggressive to the cardiovascular system than others.
    I know you are not. You are very far from being the target of my frustration. You're one of the good ones.
    Again, I worry about you. I genuinely like you, and while I respect your healthy lifestyle and the measures you do take to protect yourself, there are other killers that may get you for lack of routine preventative care you might easily ward off, allowing you to live longer and be productive for longer years. Just think of colon cancer, for example. It's really stupid and neglectful to die of colon cancer since it is so preventable, if only people did their colonoscopies or at least the new ColonGuard screening.
    True. Maybe I'm guilty of some spinning too, with a good intent (not to inflict damage to a political party or candidate, but to promote public health).
    Indeed. And yes, Tamiflu works when started right at symptom onset. This is why I keep a stock of it at home as an added precaution on top of taking the flu shot every year. If I catch the flu you can be assured that I'll have a rapid test ASAP and in minutes will swallow my first dose of Tamiflu. About not finishing the course: It's surprising how few ever finish an antibiotic course. And not only that. It's estimated that non-compliance with medications are up to 50% and patients lie to doctors since they are embarrassed. "Mr. Jones, your blood pressure is up, are you sure you're taking that Losartan I gave you, every day?" "Yes Doctor, I sure am." BS. Mr. Jones is not taking it. He skips doses, forgets, goes days until he picks up a new refill from the pharmacy when he is out, etc. No wonder his BP is up. That's a huge problem and I teach my students never to assume that patients are actually following the prescriptions, but to do their best to encourage the use of pill boxes, a spouse checking on them to see if they are indeed taking all the pills, frequent reminders of the risks involved in this on-and-off treatment, etc.
    -----------
    Have you looked at clinicaltrials.gov? I did find one study there, recruiting. There are probably others. This is a complex technique, not so easy to recruit and run a study, they will probably need several years to collect enough data. I don't think they'll be ready to deal with it "soon" but I do hope that studies such as the German one will result in more funding and effort going into repair research.[/quote][/quote]
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2020
    557 likes this.
  13. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wisdom Ignored.

    Who mocks now?

    @CenterField

    The Coronavirus / COVID

    is here to stay.




    Every time lock down restrictions have been eased
    a susceptible population get exposed and a surge
    of diagnosis, hospitalization, death occurs.


    Blaming them, those or Trump =
    blaming an imbalance of humors, or witches among us type science.


    Considering a Flu shot has less than 50% effectiveness
    how much faith can we have in a corona virus vaccine.



    Moi, M.D. ret.
    ---------------------------------------------------

    Anyone notice "liberated" areas going back to
    lock down like within a week.
    Most recently Riverside County, California.

    Every time lock down restrictions have been eased
    a susceptible population get exposed and a surge
    of diagnosis, hospitalization, death occurs.


    Wisdom ignored.

    Moi
    :oldman:





    STOP :flagcanada:
     
  14. MiaBleu

    MiaBleu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Messages:
    8,043
    Likes Received:
    6,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female

    The virus is not left or right. Why is it so difficult for some .......particularly the TRumpians....... to listen to medical, fact based advice and opinions?? Has Trump poisoned you Trumpkins against experts , facts, science so effectively now that your thinking is based in binary terms of left /right only??

    Just heard a true story on BBC about a chap who got on a flight and REFUSED to put on a mask. The flight was delayed for three hrs as security people were brought in to deal with this juvenile resistive rule breaker. Was he making a statement?/ absolutely. and was what a jerk he was. This mask issue has become s o politicised that the objective is being lost . It is a health care issue. Not politics, Not rights Not right or left. If one breaks a leg and needs a cst. Is that cast political?? Things have become so messed up that major fissures in the US society/ culture are emerging and no one is prepared to give one ichc........ Compromise is out the window..........and all thanks to POTUS Donald. The interesting thing is that Trummp is demonstrating psychological issues. and these are becoming more pronounced as the election nears. Where is his plan to mitigate the virus?? He has none. all he wants to do is open up the country........and get the economy going. He is not factoring in the true deadly effect of a pandemic. That is not normal or effective leadership behavior. Trashing others..... particularly experts in their filed. is NOT normal leadership behavior. Itis actually quite sick., emotionally disturbed. (and very inappropriate)
     
  15. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sigh... no time to waste with this. Welcome to my ever-growing Ignore list. If I keep going like this, soon I'll be able to finally just interact with intelligent and well-informed posters. What a relief!
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  16. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Exactly. And the sad thing is that I predict that he will lose, challenge the free and fair result of the election in court claiming bogus fraud, and his new buddy Justice Barrett will deliver him his second term, and democracy be damned.

    It's very telling that in the Pennsylvania case, Chief Justice Roberts joined the 3 liberals to stop the attempt to invalidate ballots received 3 days after the election, in a Republican challenge to the Pennsylvannia Supreme Court's decision... but all 4 conservative justices went the other way, blatantly robbing of Pennsylvania the right to rule on their own matters. Now, soon Barrett will join the other four, and EVERY. SINGLE. ELECTORAL. CHALLENGE. will be decided in Trump's favor, who will then steal the election. Mark my words.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/scotus-mail-voting-ruling-raises-161525205.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2020
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  17. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    16,924
    Likes Received:
    13,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Actually, I believe a Trump presidency is a result of the partisanship that has been getting worse and worse for decades. Each team ups the ante on partisanship when they get in office. Example: Republicans in the senate refuse to acknowledge Obama's judicial picks, so Harry Reid changes the rules. Then, republicans change the rules even worse. I'm not blaming a specific party; they are both 100% complicit in this childish nonsense. It doesn't matter who started whichever nonsense that is now out of control. Neither party is willing to play adult to fix it.

    I hope I'm alive when the country wakes up and realizes that it's time for DC to stop acting like a grammar school. This "I'm not touching you! Mom, he started it!," nonsense is just getting to be too much for me.

    I can only hope that once we remove the clown from office, be it in 14 days, or 4 years, that the country says, "Hey, maybe we can do better." Probably not, but one can dream.

    I'm getting older. I am tired of 3rd graders running (and ruining,) my country.
     
  18. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's been ruined already. I don't think we'll recover.
     
    MiaBleu likes this.
  19. MiaBleu

    MiaBleu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Messages:
    8,043
    Likes Received:
    6,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Are you sure you want a true exchange of ideas or do you want to dominate with your right wing ideas , while not listening toanyone else .

    True and reasonable dialogue requires that both parties listen. the art of objective listening is no easy feat.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  20. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    16,924
    Likes Received:
    13,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Even though the glass is filled with pee this year, it's still half full in my mind. :)

    We survived the Gilded Age. I this this is version 2, and we'll figure it out. (Eventually, at some point, lest we go the way of Rome.)
     
  21. MiaBleu

    MiaBleu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Messages:
    8,043
    Likes Received:
    6,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female

    Interesting points. If Trump is the result............that does not bode well .Some correction is necessary before he destroys the nation even further. The republican party is no more. They are sycophants of Trump. They are beholding to TRump as if he has total control over them. That has the red flashing sign of an authoritarian system. When loyalty is more critical than to the constitution and the population that elected them....... there is a problem. the way this pandemic has been minimized, ignored, minimized is abhorrent. Nations with a lot less have handled it better. and the don't go crazy berating the chief epidemiologist (behavior that is beyond deplorable .)
     
  22. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure. It's Trump's fault that Democrats didn't get what they wanted so they decide to loot, burn and riot.

    It's his fault you can't wear a MAGA hat without fear of getting attacked by a looney toon.

    "It doesn't matter which party started it", while posting a thread again blaming Republicans.

    If the open borders crowd had their way, there'd be a hell of a lot more dead.

    While Trump was closing the ****ing border, Democrats were trying to impeach him, inviting people to come to Chinese New Year events in CA and NY, and calling people racists for not eating in Asian restaurants.

    Give. Me. A . Break
     
  23. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd love to hear what metric you're using for "destroyed".

    Go ahead.

    I love when leftists call Trump authoritarian while they cheer total government takeover of all aspects of our lives. Funny.
     
  24. MiaBleu

    MiaBleu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Messages:
    8,043
    Likes Received:
    6,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    That is exactly how I see it too. You just phrased it better ;-)

    and we can pretty much predict how the next four years will go .(barring the unforeseen of course)

    His mental state is very concerning. Starting with his projecting onto Biden a faulty mental state. ( that is yet to be seen) His is obvious now.

    How the GOP ....that had validity as party....... succumbed to Trump's over bearing control is concerning. They seem to have made their choices and loyalty to Trump is more important than the population they serve. (or the constitution) Maybe they foresee a one party system in the near future with authoritarian features and want to be there when it happens. All about power. Not peple . They would keep Donald at the helm only as long as it was conveninect or served their purpose. This justice favoring the republicans will serve their efforts. OK...a hypothetical.........but a real possibility.There is a momentun ......
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  25. MiaBleu

    MiaBleu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Messages:
    8,043
    Likes Received:
    6,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female

    Besides closing the borders , what has trump done in order to get the pandemic under control??

    Why are the numbers surging?? if his "plan" is so effective??

    What exactly IS his plan.......besides trashing everyone he is jealous of or hates?? Howis that productive and effective?? He claims the pandemic will go away......but does not say HOW. He won't listen to the experts who know how to deal with a pandemic. How is that effective?? His smack talk pretty much takes over anything that might be a strategy. Howis that presidential?? Narcissists do not make effective , quality leaders .
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.

Share This Page