Pandemic 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
You seem to be making a morality judgement according to your personal values.

That's OK, just don't expect everybody to simply agree.

I've worked in Silicon Valley. Grew up in my career there. Very competitive, not always cooperative within the company, even between team members. We had a common objective that was linked to individual performance in order for us to achieve career and financial goals We kicked the worlds ass. I've worked in corporations that valued cooperation. Much better environment. Much more stable company that consistently achieved high quality products and customers that simply loved our product. Both were good places to work but very different. Once or twice, we astounded the world but not as often. However, I've always worked for US companies. Even at the most cooperative places, I saw nothing that compared to how it was done in Japan. I can say for sure. Japanese companies never kicked my ass.
Like anything else organisations are tools for good or evil, an entrepreneurial competitive environment is a good thing as long as start ups aren't crushed or bought up by large companies. Silicon valley is one of those places where a small group of people changed the world, starting in the fifties and sixties, other groups of people added and supplemented that change, as did the academic communities they were a practical extension of.

You have BLM a loose nit organisation that is becoming more organised and better financed, this intern spawned other chapters and organisations with a similar purpose. Other people form organisations for more sinister purposes, organisations are far more dangerous than individuals, in they tend to be effective at what they do. Division of labor and technical specialisation an age of technology has made getting complex things done possible.

Hitler had a disciplined paramilitary organisation that gave him power in the streets, then in government through intimidation and violence. Other organisations followed with more sinister purposes. He also had the financial backing of the industrialists in Germany and that made it all possible.
 

topcat

Well-Known Member
Most people don't even think of the stock market and when they do, as you say they think the Dow Jones going up means better days are ahead. The market is not a predictor of economic prosperity. It does show that people with money prefer to put it into stocks than lending the money out. Low interest rates are a big part of the reason why the market hasn't dropped yet. Gold has gone up a lot too, btw. I figure a crash is coming, I predicted a crash by April, which happened and then the market recovered.

My guess is, Trump has jiggered the system to prop prices up and we'll see the crash after the election is done. They will blame Biden, of course.
My thought is, and I'm a nobody, is that there is too much money in the stock market to bail out of it. I had thought that a "correction" would have happened before Obama left office, but it didn't and hasn't since. Now, since the "economy" won't be buying stuff, the stock fucking market will crash with a big cymbal. That's just coming from an observer. Man, I love the flowering time, it makes me smile.
 

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
My thought is, and I'm a nobody, is that there is too much money in the stock market to bail out of it.
i think they have to keep it propped up or a real correction would turn the recession into a full blown depression. once all these evictions, bankruptcies, foreclosure etc start rolling in, they can't let everything fail at the same time. the overvalued market will at least soften the upcoming blow. but like you, i'm just a bottom feeder in the market
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Jesus Christ, now they are fucking with scientific data, pulling it out of their asses, these guys are the fucking government and scientists, not the popular press.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F.D.A. ‘Grossly Misrepresented’ Blood Plasma Data, Scientists Say
Many experts — including a scientist who worked on the Mayo Clinic study — were bewildered about where a key statistic came from.

At a news conference on Sunday announcing the emergency approval of blood plasma for hospitalized Covid-19 patients, President Trump and two of his top health officials cited the same statistic: that the treatment had reduced deaths by 35 percent.

Mr. Trump called it a “tremendous” number. His health and human services secretary, Alex M. Azar II, a former pharmaceutical executive, said, “I don’t want you to gloss over this number.” And Dr. Stephen M. Hahn, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, said 35 out of 100 Covid-19 patients “would have been saved because of the administration of plasma.”

But scientists were taken aback by the way the administration framed this data, which appeared to have been calculated based on a small subgroup of hospitalized Covid-19 patients in a Mayo Clinic study: those who were under 80 years old, not on ventilators and received plasma known to contain high levels of virus-fighting antibodies within three days of diagnosis.

What’s more, many experts — including a scientist who worked on the Mayo Clinic study — were bewildered about where the statistic came from. The number was not mentioned in the official authorization letter issued by the agency, nor was it in a 17-page memo written by F.D.A. scientists. It was not in an analysis conducted by the Mayo Clinic that has been frequently cited by the administration.

“For the first time ever, I feel like official people in communications and people at the F.D.A. grossly misrepresented data about a therapy,” said Dr. Walid Gellad, who leads the Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Prescribing at the University of Pittsburgh.

It is especially worrisome, he said, given concerns over how Mr. Trump has appeared to politicize the process of approving treatments and vaccines for the coronavirus. Over the next couple of months, as data emerges from vaccine clinical trials, the safety of potentially millions of people will rely on the scientific judgment of the F.D.A. “That’s a problem if they’re starting to exaggerate data,” Dr. Gellad said. “That’s the big problem.”

When asked where the 35 percent figure came from, an agency spokeswoman initially directed a reporter to a graph of survival statistics buried in the Trump administration’s application for emergency authorization. The chart, analyzing the same tiny subset of Mayo Clinic study patients, did not include numerical figures, but it appeared to indicate a 30-day survival probability of about 63 percent in patients who received plasma with a low level of antibodies, compared with about 76 percent in those who received a high level of antibodies.

On Monday, Dr. Peter Marks, the director of F.D.A.’s center for biologics, evaluation and research, said that the agency reviewed published studies of plasma and conducted its own analysis of data from the Mayo Clinic’s program of hospitalized patients who received plasma. Although the size of the benefit varied, he said in a statement, “there appears to be roughly a 35 percent relative improvement in the survival rates of patients” who received the plasma with higher versus lower levels of antibodies.

He added: “Given the safety profile observed, the totality of evidence regarding potential efficacy more than adequately met the ‘may be effective’ standard for granting an Emergency Use Authorization.”
more...
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Jesus Christ, now they are fucking with scientific data, pulling it out of their asses, these guys are the fucking government and scientists, not the popular press.
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F.D.A. ‘Grossly Misrepresented’ Blood Plasma Data, Scientists Say
Many experts — including a scientist who worked on the Mayo Clinic study — were bewildered about where a key statistic came from.

At a news conference on Sunday announcing the emergency approval of blood plasma for hospitalized Covid-19 patients, President Trump and two of his top health officials cited the same statistic: that the treatment had reduced deaths by 35 percent.

Mr. Trump called it a “tremendous” number. His health and human services secretary, Alex M. Azar II, a former pharmaceutical executive, said, “I don’t want you to gloss over this number.” And Dr. Stephen M. Hahn, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, said 35 out of 100 Covid-19 patients “would have been saved because of the administration of plasma.”

But scientists were taken aback by the way the administration framed this data, which appeared to have been calculated based on a small subgroup of hospitalized Covid-19 patients in a Mayo Clinic study: those who were under 80 years old, not on ventilators and received plasma known to contain high levels of virus-fighting antibodies within three days of diagnosis.

What’s more, many experts — including a scientist who worked on the Mayo Clinic study — were bewildered about where the statistic came from. The number was not mentioned in the official authorization letter issued by the agency, nor was it in a 17-page memo written by F.D.A. scientists. It was not in an analysis conducted by the Mayo Clinic that has been frequently cited by the administration.

“For the first time ever, I feel like official people in communications and people at the F.D.A. grossly misrepresented data about a therapy,” said Dr. Walid Gellad, who leads the Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Prescribing at the University of Pittsburgh.

It is especially worrisome, he said, given concerns over how Mr. Trump has appeared to politicize the process of approving treatments and vaccines for the coronavirus. Over the next couple of months, as data emerges from vaccine clinical trials, the safety of potentially millions of people will rely on the scientific judgment of the F.D.A. “That’s a problem if they’re starting to exaggerate data,” Dr. Gellad said. “That’s the big problem.”

When asked where the 35 percent figure came from, an agency spokeswoman initially directed a reporter to a graph of survival statistics buried in the Trump administration’s application for emergency authorization. The chart, analyzing the same tiny subset of Mayo Clinic study patients, did not include numerical figures, but it appeared to indicate a 30-day survival probability of about 63 percent in patients who received plasma with a low level of antibodies, compared with about 76 percent in those who received a high level of antibodies.

On Monday, Dr. Peter Marks, the director of F.D.A.’s center for biologics, evaluation and research, said that the agency reviewed published studies of plasma and conducted its own analysis of data from the Mayo Clinic’s program of hospitalized patients who received plasma. Although the size of the benefit varied, he said in a statement, “there appears to be roughly a 35 percent relative improvement in the survival rates of patients” who received the plasma with higher versus lower levels of antibodies.

He added: “Given the safety profile observed, the totality of evidence regarding potential efficacy more than adequately met the ‘may be effective’ standard for granting an Emergency Use Authorization.”
more...
100% would've been saved if we had a president..you know they've been having states report the numbers to them sidestepping CDC since the beginning of August, right?
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
100% would've been saved if we had a president..you know they've been having states report the numbers to them sidestepping CDC since the beginning of August, right?
This is duplicity of another kind and level, Donald sidestepped the CDC because they would not commit scientific fraud, these SCIENTISTS and government employees are misrepresenting data that can affect treatments and medical decisions, it has profound professional implications for anybody associated with it.

There is a widespread belief in the professional community that convalescent plasma is of some value, how much is yet to be determined with any degree of accuracy or rigior, this bullshit just fucks things up. It's like public health measures, masks, medications, vaccines, testing and treatments, Donald fucks up everything he touches. His next target is fucking up any national lockdown Joe might impose after he is elected as part of a comprehensive national emergency covid recovery program. Already Donald is playing politics with the idea of nation wide coordinated action for a few months.
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
This is duplicity of another kind and level, Donald sidestepped the CDC because they would not commit scientific fraud, these SCIENTISTS and government employees are misrepresenting data that can affect treatments and medical decisions, it has profound professional implications for anybody associated with it.

There is a widespread belief in the professional community that convalescent plasma is of some value, how much is yet to be determined with any degree of accuracy or rigior, this bullshit just fucks things up. It's like public health measures, masks, medications, vaccines, testing and treatments, Donald fucks up everything he touches. His next target is fucking up any national lockdown Joe might impose after he is elected as part of a comprehensive national emergency covid recovery program. Already Donald is playing politics with the idea of nation wide coordinated action for a few months.
the next two months will be the longest of my life.
 

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
My thought is, and I'm a nobody, is that there is too much money in the stock market to bail out of it. I had thought that a "correction" would have happened before Obama left office, but it didn't and hasn't since. Now, since the "economy" won't be buying stuff, the stock fucking market will crash with a big cymbal. That's just coming from an observer. Man, I love the flowering time, it makes me smile.
Today, Exxon and Raytheon were both dropped from the Dow. There is only one oil company left on the Dow now.

Apple is set to do a 4 to 1 stock split.

Tesla is set to do a 5 to 1 split.

The crash you're talking about is coming.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Jesus Christ, now they are fucking with scientific data, pulling it out of their asses, these guys are the fucking government and scientists, not the popular press.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F.D.A. ‘Grossly Misrepresented’ Blood Plasma Data, Scientists Say
Many experts — including a scientist who worked on the Mayo Clinic study — were bewildered about where a key statistic came from.

At a news conference on Sunday announcing the emergency approval of blood plasma for hospitalized Covid-19 patients, President Trump and two of his top health officials cited the same statistic: that the treatment had reduced deaths by 35 percent.

Mr. Trump called it a “tremendous” number. His health and human services secretary, Alex M. Azar II, a former pharmaceutical executive, said, “I don’t want you to gloss over this number.” And Dr. Stephen M. Hahn, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, said 35 out of 100 Covid-19 patients “would have been saved because of the administration of plasma.”

But scientists were taken aback by the way the administration framed this data, which appeared to have been calculated based on a small subgroup of hospitalized Covid-19 patients in a Mayo Clinic study: those who were under 80 years old, not on ventilators and received plasma known to contain high levels of virus-fighting antibodies within three days of diagnosis.

What’s more, many experts — including a scientist who worked on the Mayo Clinic study — were bewildered about where the statistic came from. The number was not mentioned in the official authorization letter issued by the agency, nor was it in a 17-page memo written by F.D.A. scientists. It was not in an analysis conducted by the Mayo Clinic that has been frequently cited by the administration.

“For the first time ever, I feel like official people in communications and people at the F.D.A. grossly misrepresented data about a therapy,” said Dr. Walid Gellad, who leads the Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Prescribing at the University of Pittsburgh.

It is especially worrisome, he said, given concerns over how Mr. Trump has appeared to politicize the process of approving treatments and vaccines for the coronavirus. Over the next couple of months, as data emerges from vaccine clinical trials, the safety of potentially millions of people will rely on the scientific judgment of the F.D.A. “That’s a problem if they’re starting to exaggerate data,” Dr. Gellad said. “That’s the big problem.”

When asked where the 35 percent figure came from, an agency spokeswoman initially directed a reporter to a graph of survival statistics buried in the Trump administration’s application for emergency authorization. The chart, analyzing the same tiny subset of Mayo Clinic study patients, did not include numerical figures, but it appeared to indicate a 30-day survival probability of about 63 percent in patients who received plasma with a low level of antibodies, compared with about 76 percent in those who received a high level of antibodies.

On Monday, Dr. Peter Marks, the director of F.D.A.’s center for biologics, evaluation and research, said that the agency reviewed published studies of plasma and conducted its own analysis of data from the Mayo Clinic’s program of hospitalized patients who received plasma. Although the size of the benefit varied, he said in a statement, “there appears to be roughly a 35 percent relative improvement in the survival rates of patients” who received the plasma with higher versus lower levels of antibodies.

He added: “Given the safety profile observed, the totality of evidence regarding potential efficacy more than adequately met the ‘may be effective’ standard for granting an Emergency Use Authorization.”
more...
I get a visceral reaction whenever I see a shaky report touting treatments, medical claims that lack substance and exaggerated results in small trials. It starts with a slow burning anger. I can't help it. I know how much damage fake sciency articles and reports do.

So, thanks for the corrective memo. For some reason, it lifted my spirits seeing that others had a similar response to the "35%" claim.

Yeah, I'm an nerd.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Only America unfortunately has sufficient covid cases for large scale studies to be organised and carried out, in Canada we are hampered by the dearth of cases for the most part, as are other places. For a study to take place in the present environment first a scientist has to make a grant proposal and assemble several teams of specialists. Physicians to carry out the treatment and permissions from patients, hospitals and several justictions, then there is the separate team statisticians who will analyze the data, next the ethic specialists who will set the ground rules and halt the study for good or bad reasons, etc. Only after all the above has been addressed can a study begin and by the time all of the above is organized, the covid pandemic has subsided to low levels by using standard public health measures. In addition, with something like convalescent plasma, doctors are very reluctant to have patients in a placebo group, so are the patients.

I imagine Obama's Pandemic team would have foreseen much of this and would have the scientific teams ready to go and the research organised in a timely and logical manner. These are largely organisational and preparation issues, but they have greatly impeded research into all treatments thus far and I feel much can be done to expedite the process. I'm sure Joe's future pandemic team is looking at these issues,
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
From German TV on the long term effects for some people.

We have covid cases popping up here in NS, we can go weeks without a case, but currently have 5 active cases and one recent death, but most cases came from outside and were in clusters. We wear masks and are ramping up testing to higher levels in anticipation for schools and universities to open. We have a lot of foreign and students from other provinces, they are important to the economy and everybody goes through entry protocols of isolation and multiple testing. There is going to be a focus on the university communities because of certain social conditions ( young, stupid, horney, etc), schools will have appropriate measures too. The federal government just gave the provinces $2 billion in additional aid to prepare the education systems, if it were America's scale, the feds would be giving $15 billion to the states, based on population for education safety enhancement and covid preparation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More long-term damage caused by COVID-19 than expected | COVID-19 Special

Thousands of people of all ages are staying sick for weeks -- even months. A study by Denmark's Aarhus University found a third of corona patients suffered long-term side effects. For some, the virus doesn't just come and go. It stays. The disease can damage the lungs, heart and brain, increasing the risk of long-term health problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top