COVID-19

[JohnRoberts]

I am sympathetic to any local government thrust into that kind of public health crisis, by federal government malfeasance.

I doubt that they are intentionally trying to manipulate data, but for the record I did not cite actual data, I just said thousands instead of their claimed 7 thousand since February and some 800 or so yesterday.

I don't trust most (any?) government data, it is what it is... They are always trying to paint a picture.

JR

 

[hodad]

“They’re not posing more of a danger than myself, I’ve been in seven COVID units today,” Ivan Melendez, the Hidalgo County health authority, said at a press conference Thursday, stressing that the COVID-19 positivity rate among recent immigrants was roughly the same as among Texans overall.

Melendez added: “Is this the pandemic of the migrants? No, it’s a pandemic of the unvaccinated.”

(TRIGGER WARNING: I AM LINKING TO A LIBERAL-LEANING NEWS SITE: LIBRUHLS!!!!!! )

 

[scott2000]

Some demographic stuff. And attached is some FL demographic data

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics

 

[hodad]

Some demographic stuff. And attached is some FL demographic data

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics

"Other" is 120% vaccinated? Am I missing something, or is the CDC?

 

[scott2000]

"Other" is 120% vaccinated? Am I missing something, or is the CDC?

Yeah weird. Can only guess.

The FL data is from FL dept of health...attaching the new one..

The CDC data link has some weird looking things too. But I haven't spent too much time trying to understand them.

 

[hodad]

I am sympathetic to any local government thrust into that kind of public health crisis,

The migrants are dropped off by CBP at a testing location in McAllen. Those who test negative are transferred to the respite center, where volunteers and staff help coordinate travel. Any who test positive, though, are then provided with a hotel room where they quarantine until they test negative. Often, entire families stay together even if only one has tested positive. They are provided with meals and any necessary medication.

Migrants are in many ways the most tested group in the country. No other group of people in the entire country is being tested at a near-100 percent rate,” he said by phone. “So when we talk about infection rates of migrants, what we actually know is that a lot of people who are testing positive are asymptomatic; who, if they were in the United States, would have just never been tested.”

Long article in the (horrors!) mainstream media.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...urge-coronavirus-cases-isnt-fault-immigrants/

 

[JohnRoberts]

That sounds like the administration PR.

It is sporting these days to discredit references, WAPO was purchased by Jeff Bezos (one time democratic candidate for president) no doubt to win influence with government regulators and the swamp.
===
This still feels like a fair whattabout. I don't expect the migrant population to be safely vaccinated and social distanced in makeshift holding areas.

It is entirely possible that COVID scare porn is being weaponized for political gain by both teams. I don't choose to die on this hill (infected migrants). The gross number being allowed in without legal justification is bad enough, while valid asylum seekers from Cuba are turned back at sea, and interpreters from Afghanistan are expected to wait years for paperwork. As if they would live that long after the Taliban take over.

JR

 

[hodad]

That sounds like the administration PR.

It is sporting these days to discredit references, WAPO was purchased by Jeff Bezos

The quote within the article quote was someone who works on the ground daily with migrants--not an administration flack.

Maybe you didn't notice, but your beloved WSJ was purchased by Rupert Murdoch, who has his own ulterior motives. And yet the paper still manages to put out some solid reportage from time to time.

I view the WaPo and WSJ, and pretty much any news source, with a certain level of skepticism. But I try not to let myself dismiss a story from a reputable if biased source out of hand just because I might not like the political bent of the source.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Sorry didn't read the article... recently I suspended my WSJ, not because I don't like Rupert Murdoch (isn't he supposed to be conservative, even older than me?) but because the post office daily delivery is so hit and miss... The problem before was that the news was already old by the time it hits my POB if on time, because they probably print it at midnight the day before. With flaky delivery routinely days late some news was so old to be hardly recognizable.

I shut it down a few weeks ago and last week I got a newspaper dated mid July... at least two weeks late... WTF.

The good news is I am catching up on reading books, in fact I need to order another one because I blew through the last one in about a week. (I'm cheap so waiting for a few titles to go paperback).

JR

 

[hodad]

WSJ, not because I don't like Rupert Murdoch (isn't he supposed to be conservative, even older than me?)

JR

Yes. Perhaps you missed my point. I was offering the WSJ as a counter to the WaPo (though in the end they both are owned by very wealthy men, regardless of political leaning.)

I have yet to discover an unbiased media outlet--right, left, or center. I personally try not to dismiss sources out of hand simply because they may have a bias I don't necessarily share--in fact, that difference in bias can be quite instructive. But if not reading "liberal" media sources makes you more secure in your worldview, then by all means avoid them.

 

[JohnRoberts]

It is human nature to dismiss sources that do not appear consistent with our personal experience and world view. If one article rings false how can we trust the rest?

I had my epiphany back in the 60s attending anti-war rallies in Boston, then seeing the news coverages of events where I was actually in attendance. If the reportage (TV and newspaper) could get those events so wrong, how could I trust anything?

This is an old personal anecdote but back in the 1970s I took three daily newspapers for one year and read all three. The gray lady NYT, the Wall Street Journal, and one of the Washington DC based papers, I literally don't remember which (Post, Examiner, etc?). My recollection from almost half a century ago is that the NYT was too liberal for my taste, the WSJ was just right (maybe a little right of me, but I had been reading the WSJ for years at this point), and the Washington newspaper had much deeper coverage of international news than either the NYT or WSJ. After that I dropped the other two and applied windage to the WSJ. In the decades since I perceive a shift in both of us, me more conservative and the WSJ more liberal (reportage not editorial).

After all these decades I finally stopped the WSJ out of frustration with the post office's inability to deliver a daily newspaper close to the publication date. A little worse than usual I read a front page story from the mid july paper that arrived weeks after I suspended it. This story was a blatant class warfare attack on wealthy. The claim was that wealthy were avoiding taxes by borrowing against their stock holdings. Repeating some college professors phrase "Buy, Borrow, Die" as a clever tax avoidance scam. I read the article twice to try to find some substance. Ridiculously they even suggested that borrowed proceeds should be taxed like income***. The only thing I can imagine is that the real editor was on summer vacation, and didn't read his own front page.
=======
I am an old man with plenty of my own opinions so I am not thirsty for the modern screed du jour.

I do need to order another book to read, I've finished my pile except for a thick economics book that I will never finish.

JR

**** that would impose a tax burden on all that college borrowing. Coincidentally, forgiven loan debt is actually considered taxable income so all those college loans being ripped up should incur tax bills.

 

[hodad]

It is human nature to dismiss sources that do not appear consistent with our personal experience and world view.

Confirmation bias. Sure.

You narrow down your newspaper choices to the one that fits your viewpoint best, you resist reading things that might contradict (or simply counter) something you believe--sounds a lot like confirmation bias.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Right now I am not reading any daily newspaper, and television business news is totally corrupted by political blather.

Some days I just listen to music instead... This morning (business news) is all about Gov Cuomo, and Gov Desantis... not Covid, or business.
===
BTW I still consider myself the expert about me, so decline to argue with you about me...

JR

 

[hodad]

BTW I still consider myself the expert about me, so decline to argue with you about me...

JR

All I have to go on is what you offer up here. I try (though perhaps not always successfully) to confine myself to the evidence you present.

 

[scott2000]

Cool data...

https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Impact-and-Hospital-Capa/g62h-syeh

 

[Script]

An article providing some background on Invermectin studies.

It points to an early study that might have biased the entire discussion, the article claims. How I don't know and it would require heavy studying, I guess.

Actually, the link should better be in the Covid politics thread, as that seems to be what this is about at this point.

Also be cautioned that The Guardian is considered left-leaning, IIRC.

https://www.theguardian.com/science...vid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns
---
Anyway, it is all a bit reminiscent of the hydroxychloroquine hype. But I guess it's good that they are looking into things.

Also, personally, I would not fancy having to pop a pill every other day for the rest of my life -- especially when there is something around that has proven to be more effective.

 

[hodad]

https://www.theguardian.com/science...vid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns
effective.

That's a pretty brutal takedown of the preprint. Plagiarism and worse.

And to Scott: much of the information about legit uses of Ivermectin in that link looked perfectly fine--pretty mundane. My concern was with the pushing of ivermectin as a COVID treatment that peppered the article. And the fact that it was doing this on the website of a company that just happened to have developed an injectable form of ivermectin--that's where it gets really hinky. And if you look up the author's consulting firm, the website is under construction and the firm's address is a house (albeit a nice one) somewhere in France. These details may not outright discredit his work, but they certainly raise red flags.

 

[scott2000]

An article providing some background on Invermectin studies.

It points to an early study that might have biased the entire discussion, the article claims. How I don't know and it would require heavy studying, I guess.

Yeah I've seen that before. Haven't looked into it much. If there's shady stuff it should be removed for sure. Not sure about all of the other studies going on at this point. Seems there's debate on what this Guardian piece means..

https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-...LCCC-BIRD-Guardian-Elgazzar-Study-FINAL-1.pdf

Actually, the link should better be in the Covid politics thread, as that seems to be what this is about at this point.

Ok . I'll remove this from here. Probably just as easy to name this thread Cov Politics part 1...lol

---
Anyway, it is all a bit reminiscent of the hydroxychloroquine hype. But I guess it's good that they are looking into things.

The Principle study will be interesting to see. Or not...

https://www.principletrial.org/news...t-for-covid-19-in-oxford2019s-principle-trial

Also, personally, I would not fancy having to pop a pill every other day for the rest of my life -- especially when there is something around that has proven to be more effective.

Yeah.. I'm not either. Wearing a mask every day for the rest of my life or getting a shot every 6 months doesn't sound like fun personally. Besides, people take vitamins , medication for various things and will even smear stuff all over their thinning heads of hair multiple times a day so, who knows. Maybe not out of the ordinary for some, if given a choice.

That's a pretty brutal takedown of the preprint. Plagiarism and worse.

And to Scott: much of the information about legit uses of Ivermectin in that link looked perfectly fine--pretty mundane. My concern was with the pushing of ivermectin as a COVID treatment that peppered the article. And the fact that it was doing this on the website of a company that just happened to have developed an injectable form of ivermectin--that's where it gets really hinky. And if you look up the author's consulting firm, the website is under construction and the firm's address is a house (albeit a nice one) somewhere in France. These details may not outright discredit his work, but they certainly raise red flags.

I got that. Kinda like when my Dad had cancer he had to choose between surgery and radiation based on different views because each field came with their own bias.

 

[Script]

Ok . I'll remove this from here.

Oh, I was actually referring to the link I posted above.

 

[scott2000]

Out of the 183,677 Covid deaths in those 85 years and older, 105,262 were females.. 78,415 were males.

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Age-in-Years-/3apk-4u4f