Corona Virus

[heyelander]

How is the next question not: You have never been shy about calling attention to other threats you see for the US, immigrants, civil unrest, universal healthcare, Kenyan presidents, how is the Corona Virus different?

[GwynnInTheHall]

What cannot be ignored is the probability that he (and others coming out with stories) wanted to affect the election in some small/big way.

[Teenwolf]

How is the next question not: You have never been shy about calling attention to other threats you see for the US, immigrants, civil unrest, universal healthcare, Kenyan presidents, how is the Corona Virus different?

When he said "I don't want to see people panic", its clear he wasn't talking about normal citizens, he was talking about Wall Street. He didn't want Wall Street to panic. Large scale panic from the populace doesn't make sense. What are they going to do, trample each other running for exits? In the context of Wall Street, however, it lines up perfectly with his other rhetoric and actions.

[In the Corn]

All of this contempt for Woodward, you all are making the case for Trump. I can hear Donny already, "Bobby knew about this back in the spring, yet waits until the election to get out there. I'm not the problem. He's the gotcha reporter that's the problem." Total deflection from Trump and his people will eat it up. Stop justifying for Donald.

Woodward has a job to do, and telling the story is the job. Whether it takes until September to get the words out right, the important thing is he told people. Everyone knew this was bad, and Donny just kept saying it will disappear. Woodward's late book doesn't dispel that, it only confirms Trump knew and did nothing, NOTHING!!! Woodward coming forward in the spring would have changed nothing, NOTHING! Let's not make Woodward the bad guy.

My point of view, Woodward gave this story time to breath (like a good wine), and now was the time to make sure this bouquet came out for people to understand and see.

[DMT]

All of this contempt for Woodward, you all are making the case for Trump. I can hear Donny already, "Bobby knew about this back in the spring, yet waits until the election to get out there. I'm not the problem. He's the gotcha reporter that's the problem." Total deflection from Trump and his people will eat it up. Stop justifying for Donald.

Woodward has a job to do, and telling the story is the job. Whether it takes until September to get the words out right, the important thing is he told people. Everyone knew this was bad, and Donny just kept saying it will disappear. Woodward's late book doesn't dispel that, it only confirms Trump knew and did nothing, NOTHING!!! Woodward coming forward in the spring would have changed nothing, NOTHING! Let's not make Woodward the bad guy.

My point of view, Woodward gave this story time to breath (like a good wine), and now was the time to make sure this bouquet came out for people to understand and see.

Well said.

[chancellor]

What cannot be ignored is the probability that he (and others coming out with stories) wanted to affect the election in some small/big way.

This is true. It's also OK, though many of my political ilk will whine about it incessantly. However, if an author wants to generate interest in their books, they have every right to issue the books whenever they want. That's any publishers rights under the First Amendment, and I fully support that.

That said, I agree with Sour Masher on Woodward's explanation. A person of his status and reach could have verified whether he had accurate information in - at most - a few days.

[TranaGreg]

This is true. It's also OK, though many of my political ilk will whine about it incessantly. However, if an author wants to generate interest in their books, they have every right to issue the books whenever they want. That's any publishers rights under the First Amendment, and I fully support that.
...

even if there's a real possibility (probability) that people will die as a result of delaying?
of course he has the right to release it whenever he wants ... but morally this doesn't sit well with me.

[GwynnInTheHall]

even if there's a real possibility (probability) that people will die as a result of delaying?
of course he has the right to release it whenever he wants ... but morally this doesn't sit well with me.

What I'm reading now (and no that doesn't mean I'm buying it) is that he has/had a non disclosure agreement in place with the publisher to not say anything until the book was completed, but again--who really knows nowadays.

[The Feral Slasher]

What I'm reading now (and no that doesn't mean I'm buying it) is that he has/had a non disclosure agreement in place with the publisher to not say anything until the book was completed, but again--who really knows nowadays.

It may or may not have made much difference, but it seems to me he should have made the info available to the public sooner, regardless of any NDA. Maybe it sells more books now, which is apparently what is important. Honestly it probably won't matter even now, there are enough people who will dismiss and ignore reality

[chancellor]

even if there's a real possibility (probability) that people will die as a result of delaying?
of course he has the right to release it whenever he wants ... but morally this doesn't sit well with me.

The assumption is that by releasing early that action would have followed. I think that assumption is faulty.

[DMT]

The assumption is that by releasing early that action would have followed. I think that assumption is faulty.

Agreed.

[rhd]

Oxford/AstraZeneca trials resume:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifmt-NZRicE&ab_channel=NBCNews

[rhd]

Take this for what you will. This is an article about a study from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington projecting 410,000 deaths in the US by Jan 1, 2021 under what it says is the most likely scenario:

https://www.ibtimes.com/us-coronavirus-deaths-may-exceed-410000-under-current-restrictions-ihme-model-3043826

It says the cases and deaths will go way up in the fall and winter, starting in October, because more people will be inside where CV-19 is more easily spread. This is the first I've heard anyone say this and it makes absolutely no sense to me. Yes, it spreads more easily inside where the air cant circulate but only if there are infected people in proximity to non-infected people. The main place where people are inside is their home and the people living in the same home in the winter will will be same as those living there now so there should be little if any difference in the spread there in the winter compared to now. The other places where people will be together inside are at work, schools and in public establishments such as stores, restaurants, clubs, arenas, etc. Whether more people are in closer proximity at those places in the winter is less dependent on the weather than on public restrictions and guidelines and people's adherence to them. If those dont change, I dont see how colder weather will increase the spread of the virus. The fact that students are returning to school in many places is the only thing I see that could drive an increased spread of the virus. If the premise of this study was true, we should have seen the spread continue to decrease during the summer, yet we instead saw the opposite.

Re: the 410,000 deaths figure, this doesnt seem impossible but does seem unlikely to me. Back in April, I thought the deaths would reach between 0.5-1.0 million based on how rapidly it was spreading then. But the rate of increase, notwithstanding the surge from the 2nd wave, has come down considerably since then and continues to go down. DEaths will reach 200,000 either by tomorrow or the next day but it has taken about 4 1/2 months to reach this total from 100,000. I think that 300,000 is possible by Jan 1 but I dont see 410,000 at all because I dont see this big increase that they're talking about.

The study also projects the deaths for the world to reach 2.8 mil by year-end. Currently, the death total is 926,000. Seems even more unrealistic.

The article also states CV-19 will be more prevalent in cold climates. The evidence wouldnt seem to indicate this at all. In the US, the states w the highest case rates per capita are mostly southern states. The top 8 are all southern states. There are many northern states that have among the lowest case rates per capita. In fact the only southern state in the bottom 10 is Hawaii. Similar situation w the world. 9 of the top 10 highest case rates per capita are warm-weather countries, w the USA being the only exception at #10.

[Sour Masher]

I don't know how much impact it will have, but in cold areas, people do congregate inside more in the cold. As you say, it comes down to what is allowed, but in my area, restrictions have been lifted. Gyms and restaurants are open. As it gets colder, people will be walking and jogging less and going inside to the gym more. They will eat inside more. Some will bring their kids to indoor play spaces more. Again, all of this is dependent on what is allowed, but in many places a lot will be allowed by the winter ramp up. Places are always eager to open back up as soon as cases go down...sometimes they do it way too early. But I agree, 400k seems a high projection by Jan 1. 300k seems more likely.

[umjewman]

It may also presume “Covid fatigue” and people just being more lax with mask wearing and whatnot. Americans have short attention spans - I regularly see people in my town close together with no masks. Plus the possible (probable?) protests following the election no matter who wins and I could certainly see a surge.