Yes Tooth, it is my comprehension that is a problem. FLOL.

Here again is what you now cite as an INSTANT SUCCESS proving shutdown can instantly change covid tradjectory.


Imagine the analytical skills of Tooth that he looks at the above graph and cites that as absolute proof of a successful lockdown. FLOL.

Hey Tooth, do you want me to quote examples of you saying a "lockdown in the US is basically IMPOSSIBLE due to State rights and other factors"? You know, just to show, your position today is pure BS POLITICing and not based on anything you think is practical to do?

How many examples do you want? 3, 5, 10?

Shine up your trike for more backpedaling as I will get those examples soon.

Let me help you get started

'...when Trump was in I was right to say a lockdown would NEVER WORK as Trump had no interest in them and I had to support daddy. Now Biden is I am saying of course lockdowns WILL WORK and there is no discrepancy. I was right then and I am right now and only an idiot reads those statements as contradictory'.

Your first post above is stupid beyond belief. Actual organic cognitive impairment is the only possibility for someone to be that toxically stupid.

As for the second, yes there is no such thing as the legal ability to mandate a national lockdown in the US. But as a new president elected partly on his promise to take care of covid, he could easily rally for one and get lots of key states on board.

Instead, he took the path of pure Trump policies (economy first, absolutely no lockdown) and went one step further into outright defeatism:



Which is of course the right strategy and I give him praise for that. You're trying so desperately to spin your own partisanship, but the facts are simple:

- Biden and Trump have the same covid policies
- I praise both equally for these good policies
- You and others viciously attack Trump for his policies while praising Biden for when he does those same policies.

It's obvious from the evidence I'm nonpartisan on this issue (policy over side) and you and your gaggle of politics forum idiots are highly partisan (side over policy).

Wait ...what?

Are you now backpedaling on your prior position that 'Trump handled this brilliantly and there was NOTHING he could have done different to get better outcomes including lockdowns, because a POTUS has no power to get lockdowns in the US due to State rights?'

Are you backpedaling and now admitting that Trump could have... and yet did not... use his moral authority and power to get many States to agree to lockdowns and thus got a far better outcome for the US, and as a result the US had far worse outcomes?

Or is your new position that 'Trump never wielded that type of power and thus could have nothing better' but "Biden being a much stronger leader... yes Biden, does have that power Trump never did. Biden can accomplish things Trump was simply too weak to do?'

Explain?

And spell it out why you think Biden is so much stronger than Trump as a leader and able to do what you claimed was an impossibility for ANY Potus, just prior in your posting history?

And yes I love Tooth, how you are now arguing that utilizing your data analytical skills and see that France chart YOU posted to prove STRICT Lockdowns did not help France, is now what you submit as evidence to prove lockdowns do work, 'Just look at that chart and how well they worked for France'.

FLOL.

You make not an ounce of effort to utilize the data YOU presented to refute it and instead just bloviate.

Spell it out clearly how this chart does not show you will argue both sides of any argument depending on your goal to 'support Trump' or diminish another politician

Cupee,
That's not what that graph/post says re:France and anyone not organically cogntively impaired can tell you that. What the actual **** is wrong with you? You're not even a person, just pure loser madlibs.

+many

Cancel culture run amok. Sad!

No. We ban people with mental illness who start ranting about aliens. This is the same thing. You need to be cognitively capable of participating in a discussion in a serious forum. As an example, Cuepee just spent several posts on a mad loon rant about France because he lacks the basic capacity to read and understand discussions. It actually makes me sad to watch someone so mentally ****ed up. Worthless poster who can never post anything of worth, interest or insight + highly volume + obsessed = ban. It's not hard. We're not banning opinions, we're banning people who are high volume trolls (both deliberate and from sheer stupidity) without the cognitive capacity to post anything interesting. It's just basic moderation like cleaning up spam.

Right but in that thread debate YOU were arguing that France's STRICT lockdown did not have the impact and you were proving your point by showing how much better the US did (in your view) without locking down.

Remember your posts exist

Yup that is you above showing the France STRICT lockdown was not effective.

Dear severely cognitively impaired Cuepee,

The context of the conversation you're quoting from August/September was this:

Shuffle: Those who didn't lock hard and keep locked down on the first wave to get corona low are going to have a shocking winter.

Me: The opposite is true. Those who locked down longest and hardest in the first wave will have the worst experience this winter because of lower immunity levels; they will have the double whammy of high deaths AND require lots of economy and personal freedom destroying lockdowns. Look at France. It locked down hard and got corona to very low levels and now the virus is surging back at amazing speed. They will have to lock down again. They've bought nothing for their extra long and severe lockdowns in the long run, except far more economic damage for about the same level of deaths in the end.

The little fact you're missing, trawling through past posts like a no-life loser trying to find imagined contradictions, is that France wasn't locked down at the time I made that post. The post wasn't about lockdowns not working in the short term to reduce death, it was about the long term outcome of harsh prolonged lockdowns in the first wave (as opposed to quick ones to avoid overwhelming) and whether that produced better outcomes over the whole life of the pandemic.

You've done this so many times, thinking you've got gotcha contradictions when you actually have the reading comprehension of a special needs child and you can't keep up with the discussion. It's just pathetic and sad.

You're just too worthless to have a discussion with. You're actually cognitively incapable of following a discussion and tracking what's being said; I suspect some kind of brain damage at some point or alcoholism because this isn't normal; even very stupid people do better than you on this. It makes me sad to see someone so cognitively ****ed up as you so I can't talk to you any more.

Yet you continuously choose to have a discussion with him.

That is a lot of nice spin, backpedaling, caveating there Tooth but the fact remains and it is a fact, that what you argued, in part was that 'look France took the approach of the severe lockdown and here is the data afterwards. They had a far worse result than the US did in not locking down'.

That is undeniable in your post, and I understood the greater context but it has no impact on your point of 'look France locked down in an extreme way ...and here is the result... see graph'


You made the point the lockdown did not have the desired impact.

------

So to be clear, and to let you start anew, are you now arguing France did show success either short term or long term as a result of that lockdown?

2 questions

1. Now that we have seen what has transpired over the past year, what should the US have done in response to C19 at the time when NYC got hammered? I'm asking, relative to what was done, what do you think should have been done as an optimal response?

2. I stopped looking at worldometers months ago and checked recently. Holy **** 4k people dying a day? wtf...I haven't really followed too closely, but I would have thought many places would have their local hospitals overwhelmed and that doesn't seem to be the case? Not sure. Anyway, question is, now that there's a vaccine, when are the deaths and infection rate going to start declining, and will it be rapid?

Not any more. The dude is just straight up brain dead, it's actually sad.

1. Hard lockdown early followed by a lot more opening than they did. In the long run it's a big negative maintaining restrictions in summer.

2. Hospitals aren't overwhelming because covid is broadly spread in the US rather than localized heavily in a few spots, and 4K deaths is a little more than 0.001% of the population (i.e. miniscule). It's one person in 90,000 dying per day from covid. The size of the US makes these numbers seem big, but they're really not.

3. The vaccines will start to matter at the same time that spring does. The two will coincide beautifully. Spring + current inoculation rates are bigger than vaccines however in the short run.

Some food for thought though: 75% immunity rate Manaus in Brazil (right in the Amazon) is having a hospital-overwhelming second wave right now (which shouldn't be possible). New Scientist holds forth:

‘A complete massacre, a horror film’: inside Brazil's Covid disaster

Covid-19 outbreak in Manaus suggests herd immunity may not be possible

I'll have stab a the bolded.

The problem will decline massively once spring arrives. By next winter the vaccine will have it under managable control. Even most mutations scenarios will be coped with because of partial protection, the vaccines can be tweaked, the production capactity is ramping up and we're geared up to vaccinate teh population quickly.

I would be careful about extrapolating any data from an isolated city in the middle of a rainforest with a largely indigenous population and a media that is incredibly hostile to the current president of the country.

The one problem with foreign media reporting in places like Manaus is that they show in the middle of a pandemic, see complete chaos, and then report that things are a disaster, when the public health system in a place like that is always a disaster.

It's kind of like all the "Japan is handling this incredibly well because they are brilliant" stories that aged incredibly badly because, as it turns out, for some strange reason this virus doesn't seem to be much of a problem anywhere in Asia, which has nothing to do with how they responded to it.

Hey, I'm all on board with the notion that the experts that bring us the news are scum/totally unreliable. But the waves through Manaus aren't fiction, neither are their 76% antibody rates.

The facts in this CNN report aren't simply made up. Something is actually happening here in a place that should be fully herd immune after that level of burn through.

So what's your theory? Some natural immunity in "Asia" which China doesn't have (as evidenced by the fact that it got overwhelmed with horror death rates and only brought to zero through a harsh eradication program) and Korea doesn't have (where it soared and killed about 1% just like the West before they brought it under control).

You take doesn't make any sense to me. Two major Asian countries seem fully susceptible and two of them handled it so well that it went to zero. Are those not facts from the data we have?

So out of a group of countries that also includes Vietnam, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the Philippines, Nepal, Malaysia and Thailand, all of them were able to take steps that successfully kept the number of deaths low, and it had nothing to do with the fact that maybe the virus doesn't have the same effect on people living in those countries as it does on people living in a remote area of the Amazon?

AFAIK we still don't know how immunity from previous Covid infection compares to immunity from vaccines.

There seems to be a lot of anecdotal evidence at least, that reinfections are quite possible (situation in Brazil for instance). One possibility is that a milder case produces a lower antibody response, making the person more susceptible to being reinfected. Another is that new mutant strains can more easily reinfect. A third is that we are now almost a year in, and the immunity from infection wanes.

For example cases have been very high in NYC/NJ area, even though they were already incredibly hard hit during the first wave last spring. You would think that would have built up some level of immunity in the population, that would reduce numbers of infected during the 2nd wave. I suspect many infected now, are people who were asymptomatic or mildly ill in March and never got tested back then.

Vaccines will hopefully provide a stronger and more durable response than infection, which will lead to true herd immunity.

I believe that I saw evidence that immunity from vaccines are better than from catching the virus. I would have to look again to find it but I am pretty certain.

What are hospitals suppose to do? Just shut down when the nurses want more money? If someone is dying it seems like people would want "nurse scabs" and not just a massive walk out. Seems like a completely different scenario then a "person who makes x unimportant widget and is a scab." imo

Also you guys seem to be missing my point. It's about the media going "ZOMG IT'S SO BAD" when it wasn't "bad" in her particular area.

That was my point. Not that "x nurse says it's not bad so it's not bad anywhere."

2+2 has really gone down hill. I guess with the money drying up in poker a large % of the intelligent moved on and what's left is the degens and a few smart guys.

Yeah I don't find the argument compelling. I think it's far more likely to be weather + youth (average age in Bangladesh is 25 for example, and almost zero old old). I mean, imagine if Europe didn't have weather changes...I assume it would look like summer forever:



The European summer looks just like all those warm countries you list. That's certainly the case for the flu (it completely disappears in summer in the Northern Hemisphere) and it looks like it's the case for corona too.

Now imagine European average age was 25 instead of 41 and very very few 75+. I think Europe would look like these other countries with current susceptibility.

The role of weather in corona is really complex. Heat and humidity helps a lot, but if varies by rainy season. It definitely reduces R quite a bit BUT it doesn't get it below 1 by itself. So where you have disorganized people with touchy feely cultures (Latin America) R stays above 1 and eventually goes through everyone. In Asia with more competence and less touchy-feeling culture they get it below 1. Overall it's a lot easier with mild restrictions and solid contact tracing to get it below 1 or to a Europe-like summer trickle. We literally saw that in Europe.

It's really quite counter-intuitive, similar weather countries having vastly different rates, but that's the effect of exponential growth. R = 1.1 it rips through your population eventually, R = 0.9 it dies out (in fact, doesn't get even get a foothold). Tiny difference in R but vastly different outcome.

A lot of Asian countries did a really good job with corona. Vietnam that you list nailed it for example - they took a very very harsh/fearful approach early (January) with monitoring and contact tracing, then later full quarantine for incoming, and it worked. A lot of Asia did a stellar job on contact tracing and isolation, helped in part by highly compliant populaces and dictatorial governments and an intelligent/capable bureaucracy (compare with the cucks in the public health services in the US for example, who botched the tests for 6+ weeks).

So I really don't buy the Asian immunity thesis. I think there are better explanations. Some very young countries + the weather being ideal for hampering corona + lack of old old + great early and ongoing responses unhindered by an incompetent health bureaucracy + a culture of greater interpersonal space and greater social responsibility explain it all for me.

We can also look at other data to test your thesis. For example, here is how Asian Americans do in the US vs the general population:

Black = rest of population, Blue = Asian corona deaths.



There's just no signal there. Combined with China + Korea I don't see any good evidence to suggest your thesis is true.

Says the guy who is now arguing this chart after a harsh France lockdown is proof that their lockdown worked and stopped the spread.