• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

NON_POLITICAL China Coronavirus THREAD

Page 287 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,338
11,804
136
Two deaths seems higher than the fatality rate for people who didn't receive the treatment - if I understand it correctly.
There was no control arm, which is part of the issue with trying to draw conclusions from limited data. Anecdotally it appears helpful. I'm actually more interested to see data from the moderate symptom trial if it can shorten days in hospital and stop progression to keep people out of ICU and off vents (and out of graves).
 

manly

Diamond Member
Jan 25, 2000
9,094
605
126
So you think the travel bans from China and Europe were completely useless? We couldv'e had millions of people moving into and out of the country. We couldn't had extras entering the country to flee the pandemic, bringing the disease with them as asymptomatic carriers. And I'll repeat: that was the ONLY legal tool in the President's shed. He did it too late for my tastes, and he still got slammed for it anyway (at least when banning travel from China; nobody seemed to mind much when he banned travel from Europe).
Late and ineffectual, by most reports. What I wrote was extremely clear; if you felt a travel ban was worthwhile, you needed to implement it very early and across the board. Allowing a large exception for American nationals when you had no monitoring program pretty much defeated the purpose.

Hence why it's more effective to implement local controls at the airports than to limit travel from a specific country or region. Also passes the legality test, which you keep referring to.

This isn't the first time you've said that the restrictions effectively only blocked Chinese nationals, which simply isn't true. Read it yourself:

Stop saying the travel restrictions only applied to Chinese nationals. They applied to ALL foreign nationals who had recently traveled in the region. The travel ban that only considers nationality is China's own, where they stopped allowing all non-Chinese ("foreigners"). Get it straight.
You're right, it applied to all foreign nationals. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people flew into the U.S. between Jan. 1 and mid-March.

Stop saying the travel restrictions "accomplished nothing" when scientists and doctors agree that it demonstrably delayed the spread. In no uncertain terms Dr. Fauci said this in front of the entire world. It's astoundingly ignorant to go on claiming that it "did nothing."
Overall I think Dr. Fauci has done a good job as a public face, but he's one guy and hardly the sole authority. He's also the guy who was interviewed by Fox News in late January and said the novel coronavirus was not a major problem? So hardly the best expert you want to be referring to IMO. You claim there's a consensus among "scientists and doctors" with no source. Most of the general news articles I've read stated otherwise. Here's a short and a long article on the subject:
https://apnews.com/0dc271ad7f7917374a5a0cfb49273783
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/

Feel free to provide rebuttal credible sources, I'm glad to read them.

What bearing does a 2006 NIH conclusion regarding the efficacy of travel restrictions for a completely different virus have? Even if they were talking about the same virus, it doesn't conclude what you assume it concludes. It concludes that one thing is better than another thing when they aren't mutually-exclusive.


Just what do you think happened to Americans at the international airports that began early screening months ago? If they had symptoms they were tested and asked to self-quarantine. If they tested positive then they were asked to isolate. Same as anyone testing positive today except there also would have been a stronger effort made to do contact tracing in the early days. You're the one putting way too much faith in the ability of screeners to stop a virus that clearly has asymptompatic spreaders. Heck, even the flu has asymptomatic super-spreaders, which is why that NIH study is so short-sighted.


How did travel restrictions help when the virus was already here? By restricting travel where the outbreaks were known/large, you slow the influx of new outbreaks in your own country. Obviously. It's a lot easier to deal with the ones that are already here when you don't start new outbreaks all over by being stupid. "Herp derp: The virus is already here so why stop travel?" is about as stupid as "The virus is already here so why bother social distancing?"
You and your brother stand up the same straw man argument. Nobody said do nothing. You're missing the forest for the trees. We can debate on and on about the WHO, and whether CCP lied (they did). What's clear is that our federal government wasted weeks of time doing almost nothing, and that was the far greater contributor to the spread of Covid-19 in the U.S. To be fair, many other governments made similar errors, to varying degrees.

As for the designated U.S. international airports, if I'm not mistaken, we did little like the major East Asian international airports (who had screeners in full PPE, for example). IF you even spot symptoms, asking somebody to voluntarily self-isolate is very different from quarantining them on-site, esp. when you have zero enforcement controls.

SARS-CoV-2 was already spreading in WA state in January (and probably CA as well). And in NYC metro in February. You're touting these limited travel restrictions that by most accounts accomplished very little.


...sooooo "apolitical."

This entire conversation is happening because:
...they are clearly NOT the apolitical international health authority they claim to be
...they are not the apolitical international health authority everyone assumed/believed they were
...they are not the apolitical international health authority the media led us to believe
As you can see, the sentiment in the NYT article is what we are disagreeing with. It's what WHO is supposed to be, not what it is proving to be. I wouldn't link to a statement where the WHO claims to be apolitical in order to counter the argument that they are political despite their claims. That's what's in dispute here. The NYT article is in the same boat.


You claim to be accepting the word of 'health experts" regarding 'travel bans" except you aren't taking the word of public health experts who have asserted that the travel restrictions were effective at slowing the spread.
This isn't a call-out, but are you Taiwanese-American? It's fair game to criticize the WHO, which you guys have consistently been doing for weeks. Obviously I won't be changing your mind on this. What Trump is doing is entirely different, he's scapegoating them to deflect from his own failures. The NYT article was a news report, not an Op-Ed. It includes third-party quotes that support the assertion that Trump is scapegoating to shift blame, plain and simple. Your accusation is baseless, I referred to no direct claim from the WHO. NYT != WHO

On the political topic, the WHO is a UN agency so again it works for its member nations. The Republic of China lost the Chinese Civil War, so ultimately they were booted out of the UN. Now that doesn't preclude the WHO from accepting assistance from Taiwan but you're being silly if you think China should willingly make any concession to the One China Policy. For the record, I'm ethnic Chinese but I have zero roots to Greater China so I have no horse in this race. I have no affinity to the CCP, but I understand and respect the One China Policy. WHO senior officials aren't going to publicly say anything that would appear to question the One China Policy any more than they would say anything to criticize the Trump administration. That's what I mean by apolitical. Was the WHO too deferential to China and not strident enough in its public warnings? Yeah, very likely.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,338
11,804
136
lol TX is funny... Looking like trying to reopen retail stores everywhere in a week? Are they nuts?

I don't know if that includes restaurants or what....


View attachment 19764
As long as there is hospital capacity and the ability to covid test in house then resuming surgeries should be ok. Hospitals need the cash from other procedures to survive long term.

From what I've seen retailers would only be allowed to do curbside delivery of items. So buy it online and go to the store and they drop it in your trunk. I picked up groceries from HEB yesterday in the same way.

Restaurants would still not be allowed to open their dining rooms.

It's a couple pretty small steps which should not cause a rash of new infections.
 

local

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2011
1,813
473
136
Yeah I saw that now... and people wonder why the news media are considered worthless feckless fucking morons.
Yes, I don't want to jump on the fake news bandwagon but they keep doing this shit where they are easily proven to be wrong or misleading. I basically have zero faith in the news anymore, right up there with politicians imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Printed Circuit Bro

manly

Diamond Member
Jan 25, 2000
9,094
605
126
Yeah we're done. If you really think it was ineffectual then I don't know what else to say.
Don't take my word for it. The following report preceded the Europe travel ban by a week. By early March, coronavirus was already spreading widely within our borders. You assert the travel bans were useful without any proof.

A modeling study published in Science magazine on March 6, “The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak,” concluded that, “In areas affected by the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), travel restrictions will only modestly impact the spread of the outbreak,” according to a press release for the study.

“Based on the study’s results, the authors say the greatest benefit to mitigating the epidemic will come from public health interventions and behavioral changes that achieve a considerable reduction in the disease transmissibility – factors like early detection, isolation, and handwashing,” according to the press release.

The authors concluded that travel restrictions introduced by the Chinese government in Wuhan in Jan. 23 and the halting of airline flights to and from China starting in early February at first slowed the spread of the disease to the rest of the world. Even still, a large number of individuals exposed to the virus had been traveling internationally without being detected and, the authors note, the number of imported cases around the world went up in a matter of weeks.

“Moving forward we expect that travel restrictions to COVID-19 affected areas will have modest effects, and that transmission-reduction interventions will provide the greatest benefit to mitigate the epidemic,” the authors wrote.
 

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,019
216
106
Two deaths seems higher than the fatality rate for people who didn't receive the treatment - if I understand it correctly.
they could have easily cherry picked patients who they knew had a good chance of survival. and still lost 2 patients....
 

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
26,805
650
126
Indeed. Before lawns were a thing pretty much every American with land had a garden. The entire point of a lawn was to flout your wealth by demonstrating that you didn't need your land to be productive.

Ill admit, until I watched this video I didn't know anything about Dandy-Lions, or that they looked like this:

81MteT13V7L._AC_SL1500_.jpg

I also did not know they looked like this as well:

c-374-dandelion.jpg

^I just thought those were puffy seed plants that you picked up and blew.

Thanks for posting this enlightening video. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: CZroe

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
852
126
Your own article claims that the travel ban would have a positive impact. What the hell.

@FelixDeCat

Technically it's an invasive plant species. They're so common it's impossible to get rid of them, though. And yeah you can eat them.
That depends on where you live and what kind of dandelion you are talking about. They are natively far more diverse and widespread than I previously thought.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
17,682
6,673
136
That depends on where you live and what kind of dandelion you are talking about. They are natively far more diverse and widespread than I previously thought.
Speaking strictly about North America. Taraxacum officinale is a non-native species.
 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,523
277
126
Ill admit, until I watched this video I didn't know anything about Dandy-Lions, or that they looked like this:

View attachment 19768

I also did not know they looked like this as well:

View attachment 19769

^I just thought those were puffy seed plants that you picked up and blew.

Thanks for posting this enlightening video. :)
My neighbors are god damn dandelion farmers. I keep that shit under control in my yard. I am however having my yard destroyed by some sort of fescue.

My wifes birthday is in a few days and she wanted some nice steaks for dinner so I went across town to a good butcher shop. Nice place , all trendy and shit. Lotta people in there. One or 2 wearing masks one or 2 wearing gloves and no one staying away from each other. I bathed in hand sanitizer and lysol after I got out of there.
 

manly

Diamond Member
Jan 25, 2000
9,094
605
126
Your own article claims that the travel ban would have a positive impact. What the hell.
We're done, so no worries.

Here's an excellent piece on what the WHO did wrong, and how not to break it even further:

So kudos to CZroe for consistently calling foul for weeks!
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,230
136
Out of 113 severe cases? Sounds pretty good to me.
2 deaths in 125

1.6% death rate

Seems bad.

I would assume the previously calculated death rates had a similar mix of severe + mild cases -- weighing heavily toward the severe cases because people who show severe symptoms are the most likely to be tested + confirmed.
 
Last edited:

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
60,602
8,975
126
www.uovalor.com
Ill admit, until I watched this video I didn't know anything about Dandy-Lions, or that they looked like this:

View attachment 19768

I also did not know they looked like this as well:

View attachment 19769

^I just thought those were puffy seed plants that you picked up and blew.

Thanks for posting this enlightening video. :)
Really? These come out every year and are super common I'm surprised not everyone knew this.

I usually don't bother pulling them out anymore they are actually good for the bees. I do mow them when it's time to mow the lawn though but the bees get their chance at them before that time comes. Well, whatever bees are left. I don't really see bees much anymore these days.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,230
136
Really? These come out every year and are super common I'm surprised not everyone knew this.

I usually don't bother pulling them out anymore they are actually good for the bees. I do mow them when it's time to mow the lawn though but the bees get their chance at them before that time comes. Well, whatever bees are left. I don't really see bees much anymore these days.
It's complicated.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS