Posted on 03/23/2020 9:10:22 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The White House coronavirus task force on Sunday dangled new CDC guidance that might suggest some Americans with exposure to the 2019 novel coronavirus could return to work wearing a mask.
Vice President Pence on Sunday said the guidance “will make it possible for people that have been exposed to return to work more quickly with—by wearing a mask for a certain period of time.” He suggested it would be spelled out in more detail this week.
When asked about the potential guidance on Monday, Pence said it was still in the works, and might be targeted at a small subset of workers deemed critical.
“We're specifically looking at people that work in critical infrastructure—people in law enforcement, people in critical transportation,” he said. “The guidance we're looking for unpacking is how the people who may have come into contact with someone who tested positive for coronavirus, if they have no symptoms, [may] be able to return to work [and] wear a mask for a certain period of time.”
Pence said the proposed guidance would be before the president and possibly even before the public on Tuesday. But experts had already begun to blast Pence’s floated proposal as a dangerous one.
William Haseltine, president of the global health think tank ACCESS Health International, who recently chaired the U.S.-China Health Summit in Wuhan, called the potential guidance “deadly, deadly advice” as U.S. cases of the virus climbed to more than 40,000 infections and more than 500 deaths.
Most Americans have been told by federal agencies to avoid large gatherings—even if they have not been exposed to the deadly virus. Orders to stay inside except for essential needs like grocery runs and trips to the pharmacy have also been issued in a slew of states.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
read it all, even tho Piper is not totally kind to the President
19 Mar: The College Fix: Stanford epidemiologist warns that coronavirus crackdown is based on bad data
by Greg Piper, Associate editor
‘Like an elephant being attacked by a house cat’
“If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR [virus] tests, the number of total deaths due to ‘influenza-like illness’ would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average.”
This was not written by some right-wing crank claiming coronavirus is a conspiracy to deny President Trump a second term, or an excuse to bring down capitalism.
It’s from a sobering and illuminating essay by Stanford University epidemiologist John Ioannidis, co-director of its Meta-Research Innovation Center, published in the life sciences news site STAT.
The coronavirus-driven crackdowns on public life by state and local political leaders are being made in a data vacuum, Ioannidis warns, and extreme government measures to prevent infections may actually lead to more deaths...
His own “mid-range guess” for the COVID-19 mortality rate – 0.3 percent of the general population – would produce 10,000 deaths, but that would not even register a blip “within the noise” of estimated deaths from “influenza-like illness.”...
The conventional wisdom to “flatten the curve” – managing the load on the health system through social distancing – could even backfire, Ioannidis writes...
https://www.thecollegefix.com/stanford-epidemiologist-warns-that-coronavirus-crackdown-is-based-on-bad-data/
I’m a reporter for The Daily Beast who has covered education, crime, politics, and breaking news. I’ve worked as a local crime reporter for the The Waco Tribune-Herald, fact-checked at a travel magazine and done freelance political reporting for The Texas Observer. I graduated from McGill University in Montreal.
>> who recently chaired the U.S.-China Health Summit in Wuhan [Nov, 2019]<<
Yeah, how’d that go?
CBC tries to give more weight to the “experts” who question Ioannidis, but fails:
19 Mar: CBC: Prominent scientist dares to ask: Has the COVID-19 response gone too far?
Leading epidemiologists publish duelling commentaries, igniting debate on social media
by Kelly Crowe
It’s a clash of titans — an epic battle between two famous scientists over the world’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In one corner, influential Stanford University epidemiologist John Ioannidis, who wrote a commentary asking whether taking such drastic action to combat the pandemic without evidence it will work is a “fiasco in the making.”
Across the mat, prominent Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch punched back with a defiant response titled: “We know enough now to act decisively against COVID-19.”...
Ioannidis told CBC News he worries about the consequences of those measures (lockdowns).
“Put a stall to the entire economy. Tell people to stay at their homes, get depressed, commit suicide, domestic violence. Who knows? Child abuse, children losing their education, companies crashing … unemployment, the stock market already dropping 20 per cent.
“Is that the solution?”...
The day after Ioannidis’s bombshell commentary appeared on the medical news website STAT, the site published Marc Lipsitch’s response...
Prof. Ross Upshur of the University of Toronto is a public health expert, a physician and a scholar of the ethics and history of global health emergencies...
He has corresponded with Ioannidis over the years and respects the Stanford professor’s expertise: “He is one of the most cited, most highly regarded researchers.”...
“Of course there’s a lack of data,” said Upshur. “It’s all nice to stand on the sidelines and say, ‘Hey, you know we don’t have very good data. These are not evidence-based decisions.’ Well, of course they’re not, because we don’t have the evidence.”...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-covid-pandemic-response-scientists-1.5502423
Lipsitch is the guy who spread the story the FakeNewsMSM reported, claiming up to 70m of the world’s adults could get infected. doubt if any MSM noted his follow-up tweet revising that figure down:
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health: The latest on the coronavirus
March 2: Coronavirus may infect up to 70% of world’s population, expert says (CBS News)
According to Marc Lipsitch, 40% to 70% of the world’s adult population could become infected with the new coronavirus, and of those, 1% could die from COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus. (In a later tweet, Lipsitch revised his estimates downward, to 20% to 60% of adults becoming infected.)
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/the-latest-on-the-coronavirus/
in Lipsitch’s hasty response to Ioannidis on Stat News, he also admitted Ioannidis was correct - there is no good data on covid-19:
18 Mar: StatNews: We know enough now to act decisively against Covid-19. Social distancing is a good place to start
By Marc Lipsitch
(Marc Lipsitch, D.Phil., is professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and director of Harvard’s Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics)
In a recent and controversial First Opinion, epidemiologist and statistician John Ioannidis argues that we lack good data on many aspects of the Covid-19 epidemic, and seems to suggest that we should not take drastic actions to curtail the spread of the virus until the data are more certain.
He is absolutely right on the first point...
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/we-know-enough-now-to-act-decisively-against-covid-19/
Ioannidis should head the President’s covid team.
CBC tries to give more weight to the “experts” who question Ioannidis, but fails:
19 Mar: CBC: Prominent scientist dares to ask: Has the COVID-19 response gone too far?
Leading epidemiologists publish duelling commentaries, igniting debate on social media
by Kelly Crowe
It’s a clash of titans — an epic battle between two famous scientists over the world’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In one corner, influential Stanford University epidemiologist John Ioannidis, who wrote a commentary asking whether taking such drastic action to combat the pandemic without evidence it will work is a “fiasco in the making.”
Across the mat, prominent Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch punched back with a defiant response titled: “We know enough now to act decisively against COVID-19.”...
Ioannidis told CBC News he worries about the consequences of those measures (lockdowns).
“Put a stall to the entire economy. Tell people to stay at their homes, get depressed, commit suicide, domestic violence. Who knows? Child abuse, children losing their education, companies crashing … unemployment, the stock market already dropping 20 per cent.
“Is that the solution?”...
The day after Ioannidis’s bombshell commentary appeared on the medical news website STAT, the site published Marc Lipsitch’s response...
Prof. Ross Upshur of the University of Toronto is a public health expert, a physician and a scholar of the ethics and history of global health emergencies...
He has corresponded with Ioannidis over the years and respects the Stanford professor’s expertise: “He is one of the most cited, most highly regarded researchers.”...
“Of course there’s a lack of data,” said Upshur. “It’s all nice to stand on the sidelines and say, ‘Hey, you know we don’t have very good data. These are not evidence-based decisions.’ Well, of course they’re not, because we don’t have the evidence.”...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-covid-pandemic-response-scientists-1.5502423
Lipsitch is the guy who spread the story the FakeNewsMSM reported, claiming up to 70m of the world’s adults could get infected. doubt if any MSM noted his follow-up tweet revising that figure down:
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health: The latest on the coronavirus
March 2: Coronavirus may infect up to 70% of world’s population, expert says (CBS News)
According to Marc Lipsitch, 40% to 70% of the world’s adult population could become infected with the new coronavirus, and of those, 1% could die from COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus. (In a later tweet, Lipsitch revised his estimates downward, to 20% to 60% of adults becoming infected.)
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/the-latest-on-the-coronavirus/
in Lipsitch’s hasty response to Ioannidis on Stat News, he also admitted Ioannidis was correct - there is no good data on covid-19:
18 Mar: StatNews: We know enough now to act decisively against Covid-19. Social distancing is a good place to start
By Marc Lipsitch
(Marc Lipsitch, D.Phil., is professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and director of Harvard’s Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics)
In a recent and controversial First Opinion, epidemiologist and statistician John Ioannidis argues that we lack good data on many aspects of the Covid-19 epidemic, and seems to suggest that we should not take drastic actions to curtail the spread of the virus until the data are more certain.
He is absolutely right on the first point...
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/we-know-enough-now-to-act-decisively-against-covid-19/
Ioannidis should head the President’s covid team.
apologies for the accidental double posting.
Freakonomics... how many people die if we crash the economy even further? Suicides, crime from desperate people? Other illnesses ignored?
I’ll put my TRUST in Trump and Pence to get us back to the “main road” in one piece.
You have a very valid point. Very valid.
I think the point you make is that this can only last for a sort duration.
ACCESS Health International is a globalist organization headquarted in New York.
They are partners with the *cough* (C W I D T?) BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION.
...one of their recent presentations was...*cough* Digital Health
Building a Sustainable Healthcare System: Presentation at the 9th U.S.-China Health Summit (Wuhan)
Event Summary by William A. Haseltine — November 25, 2019
...Haseltine is (as far as I can make out) the chair and founder.
Source:
https://accessh.org/events/ and links from there.
I thought that too but according to UCSF online conference a few weeks ago UCSF Experts on the Epidemiology, Science, & Clinical Manifestations of COVID-19, and UCSF Response 20-30% of COVID-19 hospitalizations end up in the ICU. 17-29% of hospitalized patients end up with ARDS. The quick development of ARDS is another scary pattern. Clear CXR on admission ARDS within hours in some cases (usually these patients have hit the shortness of breath stage). It may look the same from 20,000ft but it's not the same in the trenches.
I highly recommend the video conference put out by UCSF. Many of the questions people have about treatment are being tried at UCSF and they share their guidelines for treatment. One question left open is prophylactic treatment for medical workers. That will likely be tried once some real data becomes available on patients. There will be a lot of nurses that I know of that would gladly try it even with the information we have now.
I guess people don’t understand speculation these days.
Words like *may*, *might*, *possible*, *maybe*, do NOT indicate certainty.
They are looking at options to try to safely reduce the impact of the virus. I would not expect them to take those actions if they were not feasible.
I may not be the head of a globull stink tank but when I see SK, Japan with everyone walking around with a mask and having a fraction of cases compared to other countries, my little simple brain says there might be something there
Heads I win; tails you lose. Eh?
Thank you!
gmta
Dr. Nancy Messonnier, Rod Rosenstein’s SISTER is in charge of the Respiratory Diseases at the CDC!!! Seems like she is another COUP PLOTTER!
More suicides will occur than Virus deaths!
It sounds like a good idea to me. It’s like having vaccinated people working.
But of course that wouldn’t give the Federal government complete control over our lives, kill the economy and destroy the United States, which is actually what the left wants.
Good info in your post:
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3827673/posts?page=22#22
And grey_whiskers’ one about AccessHealth:
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3827673/posts?page=50#50
Connect a lot of dots.
Many thanks!
It’s not Mike Pense’s “idea” but one that has been used in China and Italy when there is a huge influx of patients that overload the hospital system. This is the purpose for the military tents being assembled across the country. Health workers who have tested positive but are not ill can receive patients who have also tested positive in separate facilities. The whole point is to STOP THE SPREAD OF THE VIRUS. Since everyone in the tents will have been tested positive, there is no risk to spread it to others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.