Deang Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 1 minute ago, tigerwoodKhorns said: Yes, they are all good predictors. Hubei shows what happens when you have a delayed, but strict response. Italy shows what happens when you have a late and mediocre response. The USA is handling this just like Italy. It depends on what state you're in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 6 minutes ago, tigerwoodKhorns said: Yes, they are all good predictors. Hubei shows what happens when you have a delayed, but strict response. Italy shows what happens when you have a late and mediocre response. The USA is handling this just like Italy. Taiwan shows what happens when you prepare in advance and when it occurs, you go through your carefully prepared protocols that are already in place. I'm not up on Taiwan, but good point as to strict vs. light measures. Do you think the US needs to take people from their homes and weld their doors shut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerwoodKhorns Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 1 minute ago, Deang said: It depends on what state you're in. To a degree, but not really. We need a coordinated effort. There are only so many masks, gloves, ventilators, etc. If one state has everyone on lock down and the next state has no restrictions, each will be effected. If you live in an apartment and keep it spotless, and your neighbor never cleans, you cannot get rid of roaches on your own. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 5 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: Do you think the US needs to take people from their homes and weld their doors shut? I thought they welded them in? Sounds like a plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 Just now, Deang said: I thought they welded them in? Sounds like a plan. Yeah. They did both. Took some away; welded others in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 This thing is a lung eater. It is now starting to go after younger people. With each mutation, you get a new thing. Isn't it exciting! I work with dumb shits who keep calling it "the flu". When I told one guy it was SARS, he told me to stop spreading fake news. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 23, 2020 Moderators Share Posted March 23, 2020 17 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: I can't say I disagree. It's quite an interesting issue concerning, among other issues, what "separation of church and state" entails. As far as children, it is very muddled. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), involved the child of a woman and held the government had broad powers to regulate the treatment of children. The text that gets quoted a lot from that case is: The family itself is not beyond regulation in the public interest, as against a claim of religious liberty. And neither the rights of religion nor the rights of parenthood are beyond limitation…. The right to practice religion freely does not include the right to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill-health or death.... Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children before they have reached the age of full and legal discretion when they can make that choice for themselves. Massachusetts has determined that an absolute prohibition, though one limited to streets and public places and to the incidental uses proscribed, is necessary to accomplish its legitimate objectives. Its power to attain them is broad enough to reach these peripheral instances in which the parent's supervision may reduce but cannot eliminate entirely the ill effects of the prohibited conduct. We think that with reference to the public proclaiming of religion, upon the streets and in other similar public places, the power of the state to control the conduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults, as is true in the case of other freedoms, and the rightful boundary of its power has not been crossed in this case. Since then, some churchs have lobbied state and federal legislatures to provide exemption from prosecution and benefits for some practices. Federal insurance programs like Medicaid cover the cost of Christian Science treatments, and in 1974, the federal government granted that church a religious exemption from child neglect and abuse laws, to prevent parents and practitioners from being charged with child neglect for failure to seek medical treatment. Within 10 years, all 50 states had passed similar religious exemptions.However, after many high-profile manslaughter cases in the 1980s and 1990s, several states decided to remove these exemptions. Still, as of 2016, 34 states continue to exempt Christian Science parents from liability for refusing to provide medical assistance to their children.And while treatments are covered by Medicaid, in 2010 that church failed in its effort to insert coverage for treatments into the Affordable Care Act. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Z Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 From ABC News So far, 16,000 people have died and 280,000 people have been hospitalized during the 2019-2020 flu season, according to preliminary estimates from the CDC. Which is going to be worse this year, the flu or Covid-19? Scary times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 5 minutes ago, dwilawyer said: As far as children, it is very muddled. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), involved the child of a woman and held the government had broad powers to regulate the treatment of children. The text that gets quoted a lot from that case is: The family itself is not beyond regulation in the public interest, as against a claim of religious liberty. And neither the rights of religion nor the rights of parenthood are beyond limitation…. The right to practice religion freely does not include the right to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill-health or death.... Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children before they have reached the age of full and legal discretion when they can make that choice for themselves. Massachusetts has determined that an absolute prohibition, though one limited to streets and public places and to the incidental uses proscribed, is necessary to accomplish its legitimate objectives. Its power to attain them is broad enough to reach these peripheral instances in which the parent's supervision may reduce but cannot eliminate entirely the ill effects of the prohibited conduct. We think that with reference to the public proclaiming of religion, upon the streets and in other similar public places, the power of the state to control the conduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults, as is true in the case of other freedoms, and the rightful boundary of its power has not been crossed in this case. Since then, some churchs have lobbied state and federal legislatures to provide exemption from prosecution and benefits for some practices. Federal insurance programs like Medicaid cover the cost of Christian Science treatments, and in 1974, the federal government granted that church a religious exemption from child neglect and abuse laws, to prevent parents and practitioners from being charged with child neglect for failure to seek medical treatment. Within 10 years, all 50 states had passed similar religious exemptions.However, after many high-profile manslaughter cases in the 1980s and 1990s, several states decided to remove these exemptions. Still, as of 2016, 34 states continue to exempt Christian Science parents from liability for refusing to provide medical assistance to their children.And while treatments are covered by Medicaid, in 2010 that church failed in its effort to insert coverage for treatments into the Affordable Care Act. Good post! Should Medicare refuse coverage for snake bites incurred as a result of voluntarily holding poisonous snakes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 - 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 23, 2020 Moderators Share Posted March 23, 2020 5 hours ago, Bosco-d-gama said: Sadly the proofs to the contrary are daily evident. Take today’s chloroquine headlines for example. The ‘half’ reporting shows Trump irresponsibly recommending an unsafe drug that has ‘killed’ a Nigerian. There’s no mention of the fact that chloroquine has a well understood sensitivity in blacks and those of middle eastern descent and that it is up to the medical professional to safely prescribe the medication. In law exculpatory evidence cannot be withheld. In reporting they thrive on misquotes, half truths and at times outright lies to color the news more along the lines of propaganda. It is not healthy free speech. It is misusing a public platform to intentionally misinform regardless of which political ‘bent’ is driving the story. The public is so tired of having to fact check....... and having found so many disparities have understandably no confidence in most so-called news outlets. It's not a sensitivity to the drug, it is a side effect due to a genetic disorder. This disorder is an enzyme (G6PD) deficiency in the blood which occurs almost exclusively in males. Individuals with G6PD deficiency who take chloroquine are extremely likely to have hemolysis (destruction of red blood cells) as a side effect . In addition, if you are allergic to fava beans (favism, yes it is a real thing) you cannot take chloroquine. You must be tested for G6PD prior to taking chloroquine. The deficiency is highly prevalent where malaria is common - Africa, Southern Europe, Mediterranean region, Middle East, South-East Asia, and Oceania. People from these regions have a greater tendency to develop hemolysis to the point of becoming anemic, which can result in death. It is estimated that 1 in 10 African Americans have G6PD deficiency. Anyone can have the deficiency, anyone can have the allergy, and the only way to know is to be tested. There is a shortage of tests these tests in Africa, and I suspect (have no idea at this point) that there will soon be a shortage of tests in the US. Unfortunately, chloroquine has a know another known possible side effect (for everyone regardless of gender, race, or ethnicity) terrible rashes and itching. So bad, people literally stop taking the medication, they would rather have malaria then the rash/itching. "In law exculpatory evidence cannot be withheld." Yet is still occurs every day, in every state in the US. The only way to ensure that it isn't withheld is to be ever vigilant, and to know what to look for when things are being hidden. That is true with medicine as well, and we have all seen that with conflicting studies. When it comes to the science, medical part of it, I wouldn't trust any reporting, from any source, that didn't have an M.D./PhD after the reporter's name, and even then you have to look carefully what their bias may be. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 23, 2020 Moderators Share Posted March 23, 2020 6 hours ago, Bosco-d-gama said: It is misusing a public platform to intentionally misinform regardless of which political ‘bent’ is driving the story. The public is so tired of having to fact check....... and having found so many disparities have understandably no confidence in most so-called news outlets. The press is the US is well studied, and the polling is extensive. Most people are surprised at what a small percentage of people get their television "news" from cable sources. It is predominately the 3 networks, by a wide margin. All of it is available here: Journalism.org If you want to know what Americans think about COVID-19 media coverage (as opposed to speculating about it) PEW is already doing research: Pew: Americans-immersed-in-covid-19-news-most-think-media-are-doing-fairly-well-covering-it It's about 5 days old, but it will get you close. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete H Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 1 hour ago, Jeff Matthews said: I can't say I disagree. It's quite an interesting issue concerning, among other issues, what "separation of church and state" entails. If this was in direct violation to a state order regarding gathering ( I don't know if it was or wasn't) then there should be a real separation of church and state, and they should have all been quarantined in place for 14 days. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 23, 2020 Moderators Share Posted March 23, 2020 19 minutes ago, Randyh said: the Chinese are funny , 5 months after the outbreak they have 3270 reported deaths - I call it BS ---bet you it is closer to 32000 the USA 522 , Italy 6077- Iran 1812-Spain -2307- now that 's reality It's 530 deaths now. Has anyone done a look at number of cases per capita by State? It would seem, just guessing here, that Louisiana has a disproportionate number of cases given their population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 23, 2020 Moderators Share Posted March 23, 2020 2 hours ago, Deang said: Not true. Pandemics can be modeled just like everything else. I posted a link to a video a page or two back that shows how it is done. Yes just like hurricanes. It's not perfect, but they are can get pretty close. With each one they study they get better and better at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 23, 2020 Moderators Share Posted March 23, 2020 1 hour ago, Jeff Matthews said: Good post! Should Medicare refuse coverage for snake bites incurred as a result of voluntarily holding poisonous snakes? Don't know the answer to that, but I think we should all get free peyote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts