quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

But then the Chinese Army would not be needed until much later.
You can get the enemy to do to itself what you have a lot of problems to do to them.

This is exactly what I previously alluded to about Delphic utterances.

In the UK we used to have a TV show called Catchphrase. The catchphrase of Catchphrase was 'say what you see'.

Do you think that China deliberately spread this virus (by omission if not by commission) in order to pursue their own imperialistic aims, by military force if necessary?

If so - then 'say what you see'.

Trying to keep the words, from locking the thread. It is a scenario, even w/o their military force.

Fair enough. FWIW I don't discount it as a possibility. I'd be surprised if saying it 'out loud' would get the thread locked but then I guess that is a matter for the mods and not me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

There has been no evidence that the poor have been denied healthcare, at least to any statistically relevant extent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Before I get caught up on the 6 pages I've missed since checking in yesterday (I'm taking the opportunity to get stuff done around the property since I don't have to commute anymore), here's a really cool link.

Note that it assumes our current measures of extreme social distancing will remain in place through all of May. Its projection (which should be a median projection) is for 93,765 deaths in the US from COVID-19 by August 4 (the error bar covers 41K to 177K, so not too different from Fauci's comments on Sunday).

https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections

Hey Chickenboy - got thoughts?

Yeah. I got thoughts: "F*** that's depressing." But, yeah, I could see it in that range.

CDC revised 2018's flu numbers to 80,000 deaths in the US. This 'feels' worse than that, but that's because this is being squeezed into a month or so of meaningful mortality instead of 5 months. I think the presence of a vaccine, even one of partial / incomplete efficacy also gave people a greater sense of personal control in 2018. Unknowns are always worse than bad news. I think for those reasons, this feels more soul-sucking than the covert epidemic from 2018 that was more spread out.

If there is a silver lining, the model indicates that we should probably stay under the capitated limit for ICU beds and have sufficient ventilators nationally (between new production and that in the National mobile reserve). But this will be a region-by-region trial by fire. Excess ICU bed/ ventilator capacity in Dubuque is meaningless for a local crisis in New Orleans.

Lastly-full disclosure-assignation of resident hospital care and surge capacity is not my forte. I'll demure to actual physicians on this. I got no chops here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

American intelligence agencies report to the President that China......wait for it...LIED about the numbers...thus hampering public health decisions worldwide and making containment impossible.

I'm shocked I tell you...SHOCKED!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-01/china-concealed-extent-of-virus-outbreak-u-s-intelligence-says

If US Intelligence agencies had been on the ball they would have estimated the true extent of the problem by tracking the purchase of toilet paper in that region. Empty spaces on the TP shelves are a sure sign of an epidemic!

quote:

ORIGINAL: DD696

Regarding the California Herd, it is my personal opinion that this virus is seeking some form of intelligent life, and is finding a huge lack of that in California.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

From the Victor David Hansen article in National Review.

quote:

Moreover, researchers in Italy believe that the Chinese were not telling the truth about the origins or birth dates of the virus; they argue that COVID-19 was first loose worldwide in the middle of Autumn 2019 rather than in Winter 2020. Reuters recently reported:

Adriano Decarli, an epidemiologist and medical statistics professor at the University of Milan, said there had been a “significant” increase in the number of people hospitalized for pneumonia and flu in the areas of Milan and Lodi between October and December last year. . . . He told Reuters he could not give exact figures but “hundreds” more people than usual had been taken to hospital in the last three months of 2019 in those areas — two of Lombardy’s worst hit cities — with pneumonia and flu-like symptoms, and some of those had died. . . . Decarli is reviewing the hospital records and other clinical details of those cases, including people who later died at home, to try to understand whether the new coronavirus epidemic had already spread to Italy back then. . . . “We want to know if the virus was already here in Italy at the end of 2019, and — if yes — why it remained undetected for a relatively long period so that we could have a clearer picture in case we have to face a second wave of the epidemic,” he said.

If this is true it should be possible to find some viral nucleic acid in a frozen specimen from one of these patients

quote:

ORIGINAL: DD696

Regarding the California Herd, it is my personal opinion that this virus is seeking some form of intelligent life, and is finding a huge lack of that in California.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Any discussion of US healthcare systems will almost inevitably be "political" because it is a major schism between the Right and the Left.

You would have more luck with an apolitical discussion of abortion.[:)]

I think the difference is cultural as well as political. Universal free healthcare is something that (at least publicly) will be defended by politicians across the political spectrum in the UK.

The gun control debate is similar - it isn't so much a difference of right v left as a difference in cultural outlooks on the place on guns in society.

Not saying that anyone is right or wrong on either of those topics - just pointing out that they are two topics I now try and avoid avoid when talking with people from the US because I know that it is incredibly difficult (on both sides) to break out of your own 'cultural straitjacket' and see things from the other perspective.

This is a great point. In the current climate it's hard for Americans to engage in open dialogue about different systems across many areas of society without seeing politics as the basis for them.

No one here knows how anyone votes, what politics they believe in or how that relates to issues they're discussing. I think that's good and we should keep the assumption that statements are political out of the dialogue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Any discussion of US healthcare systems will almost inevitably be "political" because it is a major schism between the Right and the Left.

You would have more luck with an apolitical discussion of abortion.[:)]

I think the difference is cultural as well as political. Universal free healthcare is something that (at least publicly) will be defended by politicians across the political spectrum in the UK.

The gun control debate is similar - it isn't so much a difference of right v left as a difference in cultural outlooks on the place on guns in society.

Not saying that anyone is right or wrong on either of those topics - just pointing out that they are two topics I now try and avoid avoid when talking with people from the US because I know that it is incredibly difficult (on both sides) to break out of your own 'cultural straitjacket' and see things from the other perspective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Lokasenna, you altered this beyond the scope of the original discussion. Poor Americans in general may delay healthcare choices (as you point out) but the discussion was that they would have access to healthcare no matter their economic state. There may be some with Covid-19 who delay healthcare due to economic conditions. Most won't. They'll go the doctor or emergency room or call 911 and they'll be cared for. That was the original assertion. I haven't seen any reports contrary to that to this point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I'm well aware of cultural relativism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Here's the joke.

A guy walks into a place and orders an R.C. and a Moonpie. The guy behind the counter says, "You must be from Alabama."

"That's offensive," the patron says. "Would you have asked me if I was Boston had I ordered baked beans?"

"No."

"Would you have asked if I was from Lou-siana had I ordered jambalaya?"

"No."

"Then why did you ask if I was from Alabama when I ordered an R.C. and a Moonpie?"

"'Cause this is a hardware store."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

I think the problem is that it is very difficult to prove either way.

If you follow mind_messings viewpoint then potentially many of the most impoverished Americans will die of COV-19 at home having never accessed healthcare in the first place and potentially never being tested post-mortem. That supposition is impossible to prove either way at this point although I guess in the fullness of time looking at 'excess mortality' statistics might give an insight.

As before I'm not taking sides - just pointing out that the two of you will get nowhere with arguing about that point in particular and most likely with your dispute in general.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

I think the problem is that it is very difficult to prove either way.

If you follow mind_messings viewpoint then potentially many of the most impoverished Americans will die of COV-19 at home having never accessed healthcare in the first place and potentially never being tested post-mortem. That supposition is impossible to prove either way at this point although I guess in the fullness of time looking at 'excess mortality' statistics might give an insight.

As before I'm not taking sides - just pointing out that the two of you will get nowhere with arguing about that point in particular and most likely with your dispute in general.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Hey, Sammy, I understand the point he's making but it's wrong. Any American who shows up at an emergency room will be treated. Basically every American knows that (there are minimal exceptions). While some people may be reluctant to see care for some reasons, including economic, the fear from this pandemic is almost sure to overcome that. There will be very few Americans who aren't treated for Covid-19.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

I think the problem is that it is very difficult to prove either way.

If you follow mind_messings viewpoint then potentially many of the most impoverished Americans will die of COV-19 at home having never accessed healthcare in the first place and potentially never being tested post-mortem. That supposition is impossible to prove either way at this point although I guess in the fullness of time looking at 'excess mortality' statistics might give an insight.

As before I'm not taking sides - just pointing out that the two of you will get nowhere with arguing about that point in particular and most likely with your dispute in general.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Hey, Sammy, I understand the point he's making but it's wrong. Any American who shows up at an emergency room will be treated. Basically every American knows that (there are minimal exceptions). While some people may be reluctant to see care for some reasons, including economic, the fear from this pandemic is almost sure to overcome that. There will be very few Americans who aren't treated for Covid-19.

quote:

If somebody spends 14 days in hospital (with say 4 days in critical care) in the US, how much is their bill likely to be at the end of it if they don't have health insurance?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

I think the problem is that it is very difficult to prove either way.

If you follow mind_messings viewpoint then potentially many of the most impoverished Americans will die of COV-19 at home having never accessed healthcare in the first place and potentially never being tested post-mortem. That supposition is impossible to prove either way at this point although I guess in the fullness of time looking at 'excess mortality' statistics might give an insight.

As before I'm not taking sides - just pointing out that the two of you will get nowhere with arguing about that point in particular and most likely with your dispute in general.

Within the context of COVID, you're probably right.

However, it's not a large leap to make that supposition:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2775760/

Essentially, not being insured is linked with mortality. Granted, correlation is not causation and there's likely a LOT of factors involved.

When considering the demographics of the uninsured, as posted previously:

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/09/who-are-the-uninsured.html

"So who were the uninsured? They tended to be 19 to 64 years old, male, have less than a high school education and/or have lower incomes."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Hey, Sammy, I understand the point he's making but it's wrong. Any American who shows up at an emergency room will be treated. Basically every American knows that (there are minimal exceptions). While some people may be reluctant to see care for some reasons, including economic, the fear from this pandemic is almost sure to overcome that. There will be very few Americans who aren't treated for Covid-19.

This is unequivocally a true statement. They show up in the ED with fever and cough they go to the sick "tent". They don't even go to intake. They need to be admitted, they get admitted. The hospitalist doctor takes over and almost never even pays attention to insurance until the time of discharge. They need the ICU they get the ICU. They need a vent, they get a vent. They need ECMO...which they pretty much can't get in most of the world...they get it. Illegal aliens...don't matter..they just have to show up and be sick enough

"American exceptionalism" is used here as an intentional insult. We can all see right through it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What you wanna bet that there won't be 25% of Americans not receiving treatment for Covid-19? I bet 98% will. The other 2% (or whatever it happens to be) will likely be those who expire before they realized the severity or otherwise didn't seek medical attention. Everybody else, rich or poor, black and white and brown and red and yellow, conservative and progressive, athiest or religious, will receive medical care.

I think the problem is that it is very difficult to prove either way.

If you follow mind_messings viewpoint then potentially many of the most impoverished Americans will die of COV-19 at home having never accessed healthcare in the first place and potentially never being tested post-mortem. That supposition is impossible to prove either way at this point although I guess in the fullness of time looking at 'excess mortality' statistics might give an insight.

As before I'm not taking sides - just pointing out that the two of you will get nowhere with arguing about that point in particular and most likely with your dispute in general.

Within the context of COVID, you're probably right.

However, it's not a large leap to make that supposition:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2775760/

Essentially, not being insured is linked with mortality. Granted, correlation is not causation and there's likely a LOT of factors involved.

When considering the demographics of the uninsured, as posted previously:

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/09/who-are-the-uninsured.html

"So who were the uninsured? They tended to be 19 to 64 years old, male, have less than a high school education and/or have lower incomes."

I'm not convinced by that first article to be honest. If we go off their headline figure of 45k deaths being a result of lack of health insurance in 2005 then that would say that out of the 2.4m deaths in the US in 2005 2% were due to lack of health insurance. Put the other way 98% would have died whether they were insured or not.

I've said before - I'm not a scientist by training and may well be misunderstanding the statistics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

quote:

If somebody spends 14 days in hospital (with say 4 days in critical care) in the US, how much is their bill likely to be at the end of it if they don't have health insurance?

A lot. So do LA Clipper court side seats and Lamborghinis, neither of which are taxpayer funded