Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Akkula

He defunded the WHO in the middle of a Pandemic!?!

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Akkula said:

CHINA AND COMMUNISM GOOD!!! AMERICA AND CAPITALISM EVIL!!!! IT’S REALLY THAT SIMPLE!!!! 

FwXcrc-jlBnbO2-oZc4eU8jc20kx2C-WgwilDOWe

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheSanDiegan said:

Oh, of course case count is a function of testing. And I even think our per capita testing is, while not optimal by any stretch, nominally acceptable (and getting better each day):

percap.jpg

But what I might suggest to both you and @BSUTOP25 is to ask yourselves, what is the expected value for the number of positive cases we have?

To do this, we begin with our current fatality count of 31,590. On average, fatalities occur somewhere between days 24-30. If we use the lower end of that range, we can assume that the last of those fatalities were infected about 24 days ago. 

Now, using our own realized CFR, we can assume that the number of positive confirmed cases (approx. 641,000) was the actual number from 3 1/2 weeks ago.

Lastly, using estimated case doubling rates, we can estimate an expected value for the number of positive cases in the US. We have to estimate this for the same reason you two cite above - that the number of confirmed cases is in no small part a function of testing. So, if we were to assume our case doubling rate is once a week, then we can estimate there are, at present, approx. 5 million people infected with the virus at present.

Now, if we were to apply this on a global level, we can similarly (roughly) estimate there were approx. 2.1 million positive cases 24 days ago, and that given the same doubling rate, that would mean there are (roughly) approx. 20 million positive cases worldwide as of today.

Thus, extrapolating as a function of the number of deaths - which is not a function of testing - shows us we still account for approx. 25% of the infections worldwide.

Another method of validating an estimated expected value for case count is to look at the ratio of overall tests to + tests. It is believed a ratio of 10:1 - given adequate gross numbers of tests - indicates the testing within a given population is representative of the number of expected cases. As seen below, our ration is only 5.3:1, which indicates we are not testing adequately nor do we have adequate visibility into the spread of the pathogen, thus indicating we have far more cases than we have identified:

ratio.jpg

 

 

Roasted the office GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CV147 said:

Okay.  Just following the link you posted.  
 

Nothing indicates the Doctors weChat messages reached the WHO before the January 20 announcement.  And if you know anything about WeChat it’s almost certain it did not.   WeChat is the China version of WhatsApp except it is heavily monitored by Chinese authorities.   At this point, you have to assume China is heavily censoring information.  
 

The WHO timeline is what I have said.  Their first boots on the ground was January 20-21.  WHO issues a statement on human to human transmission on January 22nd.   
 

Regarding the Travel Advisory, I posted the background on this already.   It followed accepted Global Health Policy established in 2005....  pushed by the US......  that restricting travel was bad policy because states would hide pandemic information to avoid the economic backlash of a travel blockade.  In retrospect it seems like a stupid policy but it was our stupid policy.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TheSanDiegan said:

1. China is not responsible for safeguarding our national security; orange man is.

2. Orange man ignored his own intelligence apparatus dating back to November.

3. Orange man disbanded the NSC's working group responsible for planning for pandemics.

4. Orange man is responsible for the wholly inadequate, half-assed, and delayed roll out of a coordinated federal response, inclusive of the delay in ramping up testing, thus allowing the pathogen to spread and root across the country.

5. Ergo, while China is responsible for unleashing the virus, orange man is responsible for the fact that while we only have 5% of the global population, we have more deaths than any other country on the planet and more than 30% of all confirmed cases.

 

Partisanship does not produce this conclusion; an objective and cursory inspection of the facts does.

In my opinion it’s worse than the bolded part.  
 

The WHO did not have boots on the ground until Jan 20-21.   Undoubtedly, the US had intelligence assets on the ground that likely had a first hand experience.   Why the US didn’t provide credible Intelligence to the WHO to help access the risk is an open and important question.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2020 at 4:37 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Agree with pretty much everything already said here.  The WHO lied to the world, ignored doctors and medical experts, suppressed evidence, because China told them to.  

We have the best and brightest humanity has to offer working day and night on this.  The WHO is not needed at this point.  It should be dissolved and a new body, founded by the USA and our European partners, launched.  

NATOHO?

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Headbutt said:

Let me type slowly here.  We didn't do anything to their checkbook.  We made a future line item in a budget questionable.  It's temporary, the WHO hasn't lost a nickel.  Yet.

So here is a link that might interest you and @sean327

"Depending on how this funding freeze gets implemented, it could have a fairly immediate budgetary effect on the WHO," he said.

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-16/coronavirus-who-explainer-what-does-trump-funding-decision-mean/12151080?pfmredir=sm

Takeaways:   
1) no one thinks defunding the WHO is a good idea

2) The WHO is far from perfect and changes may well make sense but I don’t see anyone claiming they lied.

3) impacts of this are not clear at the moment but it could have an immediate impact affecting safety.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Los_Aztecas said:

Pretty sure this argument got started because @sactowndog is a WHO apologist. We can argue whether or not it's the right time to defund them, I would lean on not. But wholescale changes need to be made in the organization sooner rather than later, to include budget review and leadership change.

If you are going to speak for me let’s get it right.  
 

1) the WHO has plenty of issues and a change of management may well be in order.  

2) whether the WHO had proof of Human to Human transmission prior to Jan 20th is a stretch.  Saying WHO lied is political grandstanding. 

3) defunding the WHO in the middle of a pandemic is a bad idea even critics in places like Australia don’t support.   

4) not supporting travel bans is an existing policy advocated by the US.  It clearly should be changed.  

5) lastly focusing on WHO distracts us from those who should be held accountable like the CCP.   I would much rather see recognition of Taiwan as a response.  
 

Fair? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

If you are going to speak for me let’s get it right.  
 

1) the WHO has plenty of issues and a change of management may well be in order.  

2) whether the WHO had proof of Human to Human transmission prior to Jan 20th is a stretch.  Saying WHO lied is political grandstanding. 

3) defunding the WHO in the middle of a pandemic is a bad idea even critics in places like Australia don’t support.   

4) not supporting travel bans is an existing policy advocated by the US.  It clearly should be changed.  

5) lastly focusing on WHO distracts us from those who should be held accountable like the CCP.   I would much rather see recognition of Taiwan as a response.  
 

Fair? 

In addition to your point 5, I would add absolving all US public and private debt owed to China. Tell them to go +++++ themselves. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

In addition to your point 5, I would add absolving all US public and private debt owed to China. Tell them to go +++++ themselves. 

That would be pretty significant.  I could see absolving public debt to offset the costs incurred in the stimulus.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

That would be pretty significant.  I could see absolving public debt to offset the costs incurred in the stimulus.

 

 

I would argue the damage they’ve caused us is pretty significant. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheSanDiegan said:

You are correct. I would however make the case for the additional deaths in China moving the needle negligibly at best.

Given China's Full-stop authoritarian lockdown, and given the measured impact of curve-bending realized by social distancing measures, it may be safely assumed that Wuhan accounted for an overwhelming number of the cases in China.

So what is an accurate death count to estimate for Wuhan?

@mugtang posted a link (on Twitter?) sometime back that referenced an article in which the number of cremations in Wuhan was used to estimate the true death count, and that during the time of the lockdown, there were an estimated 42K-47K cremations that had taken place. When adjusting for the normal mortality rate in China, this reduced to aprox. 15,000 additional cremations over that time frame.

That would increase the number of fatalities from 140K to 155K, and reduce the percentage that have died in the US to approx. 20% - still statistically disproportionate on a per capita basis.

FWIW, in line with your point, we really have no clue what the actual death count is in Iran either (or a host of other closed-door regimes, tho IMO China and Iran are the only to have a fatality count to move the needle).

 

When adjusted for normal mortality rate It was twice that, but whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TheSanDiegan said:

See my explanation above.

By the same method explained in that post (which I typed slowly so you could follow along :P), India has approx. 100000 cases - barely a fraction of the number in the US.

Because math.

You see, India did a far better job than we did early on in isolating infected populations to break transmission chains.

Your methodology of assuming the same CFR for for every country is flawed.  It also appears that the virus struck India far later than the USA, check back in with your mortality figures in a month to get a better Idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

If you are going to speak for me let’s get it right.  
 

1) the WHO has plenty of issues and a change of management may well be in order.  

2) whether the WHO had proof of Human to Human transmission prior to Jan 20th is a stretch.  Saying WHO lied is political grandstanding. 

3) defunding the WHO in the middle of a pandemic is a bad idea even critics in places like Australia don’t support.   

4) not supporting travel bans is an existing policy advocated by the US.  It clearly should be changed.  

5) lastly focusing on WHO distracts us from those who should be held accountable like the CCP.   I would much rather see recognition of Taiwan as a response.  
 

Fair? 

I wasn't "speaking" for you, I was distilling your rants into a concise easy to read post for someone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TheSanDiegan said:

1. China is not responsible for safeguarding our national security; orange man is.

2. Orange man ignored his own intelligence apparatus dating back to November.

3. Orange man disbanded the NSC's working group responsible for planning for pandemics.

4. Orange man is responsible for the wholly inadequate, half-assed, and delayed roll out of a coordinated federal response, inclusive of the delay in ramping up testing, thus allowing the pathogen to spread and root across the country.

5. Ergo, while China is responsible for unleashing the virus, orange man is responsible for the fact that while we only have 5% of the global population, we have more deaths than any other country on the planet and more than 30% of all confirmed cases.

 

Partisanship does not produce this conclusion; an objective and cursory inspection of the facts does.

 

Please link these intelligence briefings from November.

He did not disband the NSC working group responsible for planning for pandemics, he did not hire for a a position one dude quite and re structured duties.

Agreed Orange man is responsible for a delayed federal response.  However I am going to side with Fauci over yourself on the effects of what could have been done.  He is a big brain expert.  You are a big brain not at all in any way shape or form expert.  Expert opinion>>>>>>>>>>>>>>yours.

Egro no, Orange man is not responsible for a virus doing virus things in a nation with more airports than any 10 countries combined.  The USA has god damn 20,000 airports, all of China only has 200.  We are different.  We were always ripe for a disaster like this.  The rate at which Americans travel vast distances in their own country is unique in the world.  There is nothing else like it, anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Your methodology of assuming the same CFR for for every country is flawed.  It also appears that the virus struck India far later than the USA, check back in with your mortality figures in a month to get a better Idea.

Who's assuming the same CFR for every country? I'm using the location-adjusted numbers. 

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

When adjusted for normal mortality rate It was twice that, but whatever.

Do you have a source that specifically references the mortality rate for Wuhan? I applied what is published for China adjusted for the population of Wuhan.

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheSanDiegan said:

Do you have a source that specifically references the mortality rate for Wuhan? I applied what is published for China adjusted for the population of Wuhan.

Aside from @Akkula, do any of us believe we will ever get a factual mortality rate from China? I sure as +++++ don’t trust their figures. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TheSanDiegan said:

Do you have a source that specifically references the mortality rate for Wuhan? I applied what is published for China adjusted for the population of Wuhan.

 

Scientists in Europe believe the number of confirmed cases in Wuhan could be as low as 15 times higher and as high as 40 times higher.  "According to the Mail on Sunday, the British government is furious with China, accusing it of underreporting its number of cases. The newspaper, which cited unnamed sources, said scientists told UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson that China could have downplayed its number of confirmed coronavirus cases "by a factor of 15 to 40 times."

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-residents-say-chinese-government-coronavirus-death-toll-is-low-2020-3

 

The reported deaths were were a little over 2.5k.  This means on the very lowest end we are looking at 30k deaths.  More likely it is far higher than that.  Again, you are one smart guy, but we have guys a lot smarter than you providing us information.  I wish I had access to the sources behind the info they are providing but we do not, and probably for good reason.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...