Data Comparisons

Cost of Quarantine?

843 Comments

Idle question: Does anyone know who pays cost associated with being quarantined under various circumstances?

Examples: Japan makes you stay on the floating petri dish? Italy or Tenerife makes you stay in your hotel?

None of the articles I’ve read discuss this issue. But I think it would matter if you were considering the risks of travel. If anyone can point me to any info, I’d love to read it.

843 thoughts on “Cost of Quarantine?”

  1. Note: I did learn that those put in 14 day quarantine by the US had food, water etc supplied by the US government. (We haven't had any hotels or ships quarantined yet. )

  5. Here's a story about a cruise ship passenger who was not allowed to leave Cambodia and being moved to a five star hotel — I have to think that U.S. officials picked up the bill!
    "
    For at least half a day, it seemed like Staudenmaier would be able to get on a flight and return home. But as she waited for a flight out of Cambodia at the airport in Phnom Penh, Holland America and U.S. officials received the news about the passenger’s positive COVID-19 test in Malaysia.

    The determination was made that no more passengers would be allowed to leave, which led to Staudenmaier and others getting transported to the Sokha Phnom Penh Hotel, a five-star hotel where she has been since Saturday.
    "
    link here:
    https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/what-its-like-in-quarantine-after-coronavirus-hits-your-cruise-ship/2077893/
    .
    [Edit: Oops.. Too many posts in a row. I'll post more in a few hours if I find anything else.]

  6. In Australia the government paid for fights back to Australia and for the accommodation, internet etc during the quarantines and then the flights home. Their was a suggestion early on for a $1,000 fee but this was withdrawn after outcry.

  7. I've been reading David Abel's account of his shipboard quarantine on Facebook here
    https://www.facebook.com/david.abel.75
    unfortunately much of his account appears to be video logged, and my loathing for watching video as opposed to reading is preventing me from investigating in detail.
    I did read that they took him offship and put him in a hostel. Didn't sound like he was much pleased with the choice, but a hostel sounds like somebody trying to save money. I doubt he paid for that.
    .
    [Edit: Oh. I forgot to mention. He was apparently given an option to disembark and quarantine ashore and elected to stay on the ship. I was hoping to find some mention of the costs involved in this but haven't yet.]

  8. mark,
    One reason I wonder is that I'm pretty sure if you get stuck in a hotel because the airport closes due to inclement weather YOU pay. The hotel doesn't let you stay for free. Of course, perhaps you have travel insurance that covers it, but the hotel isn't stuck with it.
    .
    In this case, of course, the government ordered the quarantine. So far, in US cases, the US government seems to be picking the quarantine location. (They sometimes pick swanky places– but still their choice!)
    .
    I found an article that says the government in Tenerife hasn't figure out who pays yet!!! The people quarantined are in a 4**** hotel that costs about $220/night. If going was a stretch expenditure for you in the first place a bunch of extra nights could be a killer. Worse: they are boring extra nights!
    .
    Anyway… more close to home, my Mom has been planning a trip to Japan. I'd like her not to go. Initially, I thought she'd be reluctant to cancel. I wanted to know if there were additional potential downside in addition to the whole "getting sick and dying" or "having a really boring vacation because everything was shut down." things.
    .
    It sounds like perhaps she wants to cancel too likely because of the whole 'getting sick and dying' issue.

  9. I'm right there with you – I'd certainly want my mom to cancel. But I'm risk adverse by nature these days. I like the way you put it though; a possibility of 'getting sick and dying' can definitely put a damper on a trip!

  10. If she does go, get her to talk to somebody about travel insurance and COVID-19. They may be able to give her definite answers to some of these questions about bills in case of quarantines, at least if she buys their insurance…

  11. Lucia,
    As of two days ago, there were 159 reported cases in Japan, exclusive of those who were quarantined on the cruise ship. Even if she went, the risk of infection would appear low, at least for now. The Japanese are pretty careful about not spreading illnesses (masks, hand washing, not a lot of hugs like in many Latin countries) so if the virus spreads rapidly in Japan then it is a safe bet it will spread in other countries.

  12. Steve,
    Good point. I'd still be nervous, but.. what are the odds. I guess it depends on how likely one feels the situation is to worsen quickly.

  14. Ed Forbes,
    Yes, but two other circuits had earlier ruled the other way. It is certainly headed to the SC, where the conservative majority will uphold the law as written….I suspect that lefty judges just see their rulings as a way to keep the Trump administration from taking perfectly legal actions which they disagree with… if delayed long enough (until he is no longer in office) Trump’s policies can be reversed before ever going into force. Do I think those lefty judges know their rulings will ultimately be reversed? Yes, of course they do; but they just don’t give a sh!t about the law.

  15. SteveF,
    I'm sure the risk of infection isn't huge. But, with respect to taking a vacation, the risk that movements will be limited, thing will close and so on may be sufficient to result in a disappointing vacation.
    .
    I'm hoping the trip is cancelled by the club she belongs to! But I have no power over that. 🙁

  16. The global economic impact of the coronavirus is likely to be more due to fear of the illness than the illness itself. The risk of death is very low: average risk in the range of 1:500 for people under 60 years old, and near zero risk for those under 10. For nearly all people, the illness is more like the flu than like ebola. The elderly do face greater risks (up to ~15% death rate for those in their 80’s), but the economic impact of that cohort is not large. Fear of the illness is what is disrupting supply chains and frightening investors, not the number of people who are likely to die. What is needed to calm markets is announcement of an effective treatment for the illness, such as anti-virals developed for other coronaviruses like SARS, which are currently being tested against coronavirus 19.

  17. lucia (Comment #180163): "I'm sure the risk of infection isn't huge. But, with respect to taking a vacation, the risk that movements will be limited, thing will close and so on may be sufficient to result in a disappointing vacation."
    .
    There is also a risk of being placed in quarantine upon return to the U.S.

  18. I've been tracking this since it hit the news as we have a trip to Ireland in two weeks. Not worried so much about the virus outbreak but potential over reactions due to it. Asia/Italy would have already been canceled.

  19. The results of the first double-blind placebo-control study of an antiviral will be available in April. If the antiviral is reasonably effective, the scare should rapidly subside.

  20. OK_Max (Comment #180104): "the CDC says it's no longer a matter if the coronavirus will spread in the U.S., but when."

    https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/national/cdc-no-longer-a-matter-of-if-coronavirus-will-spread-in-us-communities-but-when
    .
    That was not a statement by the CDC. It was a comment made by the head of the CDC department responsible for vaccinations during a telephone briefing on what is being done in the way of preparedness. There is a link to the transcript in the link provided by Max.

    It is not actually clear that the official meant to say what she is being quoted as saying. She does say exactly that at one point, but the context of that statement and statements made elsewhere say something different. Since she was speaking extemporaneously, it may have merely been infelicitous wording that gave an impression subtlety but significantly different from what was actually being said.

    The alternative interpretation is that for planning purposes, the CDC is assuming that there will eventually be community spread of COVID-19.

  21. It's odd the way the bottom has dropped out for Bernie in South Carolina recent polling. I wonder what's causing that. Suddenly Biden is the clear leader there again.
    *shrug*
    [Edit: Good lord, is that the power of Clyburn's endorsement? If so that's spooky.]

  24. Tom Scharf,
    "Domino's Pizza, ha ha. Up 23%."
    .
    I'm only going to buy Domino's pizza if the delivery person is wearing an N95 mask and rubber gloves. 😉

  25. mark bofill,
    "It's odd the way the bottom has dropped out for Bernie in South Carolina recent polling. I wonder what's causing that. Suddenly Biden is the clear leader there again."
    .
    Maybe some Dems are waking up to the electoral catastrophe Comrade Bernie could cause. I don't think black Americans are all that supportive of the extreme left (Bernie) or the Stepford Gay Guy.

  26. I think that mark is just focusing on noise in the polls. Not only is there sample size noise, but comparisons between polls is complicated by the fact that each has its own biases.

  27. Tom,
    That doesn't surprise me. Things that an outbreak will encourage:

    * watching tv, streaming, dvd's.
    * eating at home.
    * grocery delivery.
    * online vs in store shopping.

    Pizza delivery while watching Netflix or surfing the net? That's going to surge.

  30. Japan closes all schools for a month. Seems to be a bit extreme. Are all the parents going to stay home too? The Olympics in Japan looks to be the next casualty.
    .
    The good news for the US is that China, Europe, and Japan are first and will have done a lot of experimental actions to see what works and what doesn't.

  31. "Only nine of 93 Democratic superdelegates interviewed by The New York Times said that Senator Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) should be the nominee if he does not arrive at the Democratic national convention with a majority."
    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/dem-superdelegates-signal-willingness-to-pass-over-sanders-in-brokered-convention
    .
    The best case scenario for Trump. Sanders gets the shaft at the convention and he responds by running as an independent for President.

  32. Japan's just had a patient that recovered and was released on Feb 1st test positive again. That's really not good. That combined with a S. Korea's doomsday cult apparently intentionally spreading it within the church to speed up the end of the world, likely has them a lil nervous.

  34. Dale A Hofstetter (Comment #180193)
    February 27th, 2020 at 2:23 pm
    ""Japan's just had a patient that recovered and was released on Feb 1st test positive again. That's really not good. That combined with a S. Korea's doomsday cult apparently intentionally spreading it within the church to speed up the end of the world, likely has them a lil nervous.**
    _________

    It's possible to get flu twice in the same season, but I don't know about getting the same kind twice, or that fast.

    Never heard about that crazy cult. Hope S. Korea is doing something about them.

  35. Tom Scharf (Comment #180179)
    February 27th, 2020 at 10:17 am
    The big winner in the last few days coronavirus market sell-off? Domino's Pizza, ha ha. Up 23%.
    _________

    I should have foreseen that and broke my rule of not speculating.

    My S&P 500 index fund has lost 12% in the last 7 trading days. So far, I have resisted the temptation to buy.

  36. marc bofill,
    Nah, probably won't work in your lifetime….. if ever. The required temperatures with boron-hydrogen are crazy high. That said, at least those people don't appear to be outright criminals spouting mumbo-jumbo nonsense. But they probably *are* misrepresenting the probability of success to mislead investors. As for patents… they are often not worth the paper they are printed on.

  37. I read something to the effect that they claim that using new laser tech they avoid the necessity of the crazy temperatures, but it's so far removed from my field I can't evaluate the claim. A petawatt laser pulse for a picosecond accelerates the holy hell out of the hydrogen into the boron, or something similar.
    It's not really new. They seemed to be at the same place they are now three (3) years ago, minus the patent.
    I'm going back to holding my breath waiting for Super Tuesday results.
    (inhales deeply and shuts mouth)

  39. mark bofill,
    I skimed a couple of their earlier papers…. the equivalent temperatures they were talking about were >10^8 K (if I read their graphs correctly). Makes sense, there is a lot more electrostatic repulsion to overcome with boron.
    .
    And you are right; I also saw no real technical progress over the many years they have been publishing papers; it all seems to be theoretical, along with some arm waves about ever higher laser energies becoming available. The target seems me to be investors, not technical progress.

  40. I read their patent; mentioning global warming was something of a red flag for me. Not the sort of thing I've seen in patents before (not that I read all that many, but.. I've looked at some over the years).

  41. mark bofill,
    Popular publications are playing fast and loose with the word ‘patent’. As far as I can tell, multiple patents have been *applied* for, none granted. I read their most recent application – a big nothingburger: no data, no examples, no tests of any kind… zip.
    .
    The mention of fossil fuels and global warming in the opening paragraph is a tip-off that the patent application is not serious. Looks more and more like an investor hustle to me.

  42. mark bofill,

    I was mistaken, there was a patent granted in September 2019…still rubbish like the corresponding application that I read. It is just an idea, not a real process.

  43. Yep. Nobody would be happier than me to be proven wrong by a working device. Show me the generator! Till then, meh.

  44. Alabama looks like the only really solid Super Tuesday state for Biden. Because here in Alabama, we don't hold the dementia against you, I guess. Bless our hearts.

  45. I have not seen anything recent on Alabama, Arkansas, or Tennessee. I'd guess that at least the first two are pretty solid for Biden. Isn't he leading in North Carolina? And it looks like Virginia and Texas are free-for-alls.

    Sanders could get shut out in the 7 southern states and might well lose Minnesota and Massachusetts to the home teams. That should blunt his momentum, even if he ends up as the single candidate winning the most states, votes, and delegates.

    It looks like the strong areas for Sanders have been the Northeast and West. So the rest of March might be slim pickings for him.

  46. Mike M,
    "That should blunt his momentum, even if he ends up as the single candidate winning the most states, votes, and delegates."
    .
    Based on the polling data I have seen, he will almost certainly get the lion's share of the delegates. In California alone he will get a great many delegates: (https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-02-28/bernie-sanders-leading-in-california-poll)
    Looks like Sanders has taken away much of Warren's support, and may end up with 2/3 of the delegates or more… he could get all 415 California delegates. They don't call it the left coast for nothing.
    .
    I will make a prediction: By next Wednesday, the 538 Blog will have Bernie as the overwhelming favorite, with >85% chance of being the nominee. Most Dems in Washinton will be horrified, as they should be. I suspect some will start hoping for another heart attack. Since Pelosi says she prays all the time, the Lord may receive a request about Bernie's heart.

  48. There's room for consolidation on the anti-Bernie side too. Pete is dropping out soon.
    The only reason Klobuchar stayed in was in case Biden flopped. He flopped, but looks like he will still be doing better than her.
    Bloomberg should have avoided buying his way onto the debate stage.

  49. The latest RCP average for CA is:
    32% Sanders
    17% Warren
    12% Biden
    10% Bloomberg
    10% Buttigieg
    10% Other
    10% Undecided

    So in theory, Sanders could take all the *state level* delegates. But that would require 4 other candidates *each* coming just short of 15%. That won't happen, although Sanders might well get a clear majority of the state level delegates.

    But that is only about 25% of the delegates. Most will be allocated by Congressional districts. So, for example, if Buttigieg gets 10% of the vote he might still get 5% of the delegates by clearing the viability threshold in the suburban districts where he is relatively strong.

    If Sanders wins a bunch of Southern states, he will be on his way. But it is not clear that will happen.

  52. "BTW, Sanders leads Trump by 4.7 % in the RCP average."
    .
    Yup. I notice the RCP [average] for the 2016 race ended with Clinton 3.2% up on Trump. I don't know if this addresses anything, since no apparent point was made in the initial observation there by Max, but. I guess it's fun noticing random factoids. Well, I *hoped* it would be. It didn't really seem all that fun…
    Oh well. Nothing's ever as good as we want it to be.
    *shrug*

  53. OK_Max,
    The national averages mean nothing. It is only the individual states that mean something… as I am sure you are already aware. Just ask Hillary if you are in doubt.

  54. Re mark bofill (Comment #180233)

    mark, I am puzzled why you seem to believe references to polls about Sanders vs other dems are germane, but a reference to a poll about Sanders vs Trump is pointless.

    Perhaps I am wrong presuming you do think references to polls about Sanders vs other dems are germane here. After all, the subject lucia introduced is "Cost of Quarantine?"

  55. SteveF (Comment #180234)
    February 28th, 2020 at 4:00 pm
    OK_Max,
    "The national averages mean nothing."
    ________

    I doubt the GOP thinks it means nothing.

    If it means nothing, bad-mouthing Sanders is a waste of time.

  56. The various Democrats are up on Trump by 1.6 to 4.8 points, suggesting that only 1.6% of those polled care who the Democrat nominee is. So it is basically Trump vs. a generic Democrat. I don't think that is a good predication of what will happen to a specific Democrat when exposed to intense scrutiny, with Trump shining a spotlight on the candidates weaknesses. Bernie has lots of those.

  57. OK_Max,
    “ If it means nothing, bad-mouthing Sanders is a waste of time.”
    .
    What? I have not a clue what point you are trying to make. Sanders has lots of political baggage from his many years as a socialist gadfly. His policies are bonkers as far as I am concerned, and he is fair game for criticism.

  58. Max,
    My remarks at not at all germane to the main topic. I wasn't wondering how your observation related to the main topic. I wondered if you were attempting to imply … *something* … about Sanders eventual chances against Trump.
    .
    I am always pleased to elaborate as clearly as possible about my comments and the thinking that leads to them. You? What were you trying to imply earlier with your observation about Sanders lead?

  59. I don't think Sanders is likely to win against Trump. I think it is *possible* that Sanders may win against Trump. Certainly, I am interested in discussing Sander's strengths and shortcomings.

  60. mark bofill (Comment #180241

    **I am always pleased to elaborate as clearly as possible about my comments and the thinking that leads to them. You? What were you trying to imply earlier with your observation about Sanders lead?**
    _______

    There is a lot of interest here in who the Dems will choose to run against Trump. My impression is many Trump supporters want the Dems to nominate Sanders rather than Biden because they believe Sanders would be easier to beat. The poll average showing Sanders ahead of Trump suggests he may not be easy to beat.

  61. Thank you Max. At least I understand what you are trying to get at now. A clear statement always beats the hell out of verminy insinuation, in my view.

  62. SteveF (Comment #180240)
    February 28th, 2020 at 5:10 pm
    OK_Max,
    “ If it means nothing, bad-mouthing Sanders is a waste of time.”
    .
    What? I have not a clue what point you are trying to make.
    _______

    You said the averages of polls showing Sanders ahead of Trump "mean nothing." But your desire to criticize Sanders anyway suggests you fear those polls may mean something, may mean Sanders could become president. If those polls had Trump leading Sanders by a huge margin, I doubt you would spend much time criticizing Sanders.

  63. OK_Max (Comment #180243): "My impression is many Trump supporters want the Dems to nominate Sanders rather than Biden because they believe Sanders would be easier to beat."
    .
    My impression is that most Trump supporters would be quite happy to see the Dems nominate Biden. I think Biden would be easier to beat than Sanders.

  64. "My impression is that most Trump supporters would be quite happy to see the Dems nominate Biden."
    .
    Mike,
    Indeed. I think it's fair to say that there is even controversy in Democrat circles as to whether or not nominating Sanders is handing the 2020 election to Trump. Some believe Sanders has the best chance against Trump (and there are polls to support this I believe). Some think he's got no chance.
    Only time will tell.
    .
    [Edit: Well, assuming Sanders wins the nomination eventually…]

  65. Results against Trump are effectively identical no matter who is put forward as the Democrat nominee. That is interesting. How much do you know about Amy Klobuchar? The average man on the street knows a lot less. Yet she does as well against Trump as any other Democrat.

    That suggests that if pollsters asked about Jack Russell as the Democrat nominee, he would do about as well as any actual candidate. But I am pretty sure that if the Dems nominated an actual Jack Russell, then Trump would win easily. Even many Trump haters would prefer a figurative pig to a literal dog.

    Perhaps 10-20% of the electorate might change their vote depending on who the Democrats nominate. The large majority of those voters are not paying attention to the primary campaign; they won't tune in until the fall. So Jack Russell's support would not nosedive until then.

    I think that Sanders, Biden, and Buttigieg would all turn out to be Jack Russells.

    Of course, all bets are off if COVID-19 moves to community transmission, does not abate with warm weather, and tanks the economy. Then even Jack Russell might have a fighting chance.

  66. Most of the NeverTrumpers are also NeverEverSanders. So they will either sit out the vote or go third party. This will ultimately hurt the left's chances. As I said before 95% of the vote is locked in, but once a real human is nominated and the people actually start paying attention a few weeks before the vote then things will likely change.
    .
    Perhaps they will even do some math such as $60,000,000,000,000 in new programs / 330,000,000 people = $181,000 from each citizen in the US.

  67. Or Sanders can embrace MMT, abolish the Fed, and just start printing money to spend.
    I don't think that ends well either.

  68. mark bofill (Comment #180261): "Or Sanders can embrace MMT, abolish the Fed, and just start printing money to spend."
    .
    From what I understand, that is exactly his plan.
    .
    mark: "I don't think that ends well either."
    .
    Agreed.

  69. Tom Scharf,
    “Perhaps they will even do some math such as $60,000,000,000,000 in new programs / 330,000,000 people = $181,000 from each citizen in the US.”
    .
    Nah, Sanders voters don’t do math, or don’t care about the results of such calculations. They think all of Sanders’ programs will come out of the hides of ‘the rich’. They want to tear down free enterprise, not figure out what can or can’t be afforded.
    .
    .
    mark bofill,
    “Or Sanders can embrace MMT, abolish the Fed, and just start printing money to spend. I don't think that ends well either.”
    .
    When you think that nobody should be wealthy (for strictly moral reasons) following policies which destroy most wealth is a feature, not a bug. Sanders is terrible for anyone who believes in property rights, or who aspires to be more wealthy than they are today. He is a Bolshevik, which is why he will never reject other Bolsheviks like Castro, Pol Pot, Maduro, etc… IMO, he should be ranting and waving his arms at trees in the Vermont forest, not running for president.

    .

  70. Steve,
    I think so too. I have a hard time understanding how anybody thinks a Sanders administration would be a good idea.
    Plenty of people tell me he won't be able to do any real damage without Congress. What staggers me about this is that liberals seem to think it'll be OK because he'll be hobbled by Congress.
    Talk about playing with fire.

  71. mark,
    "Plenty of people tell me he won't be able to do any real damage without Congress."
    .
    I think he could do *terrible* damage without Congress getting involved. He can promulgate outrageous regulations. He can, and will, (like Obama) refuse to enforce laws that he disagrees with. He will staff every Federal agency and every federal court with leftist hacks who don't give a sh!t about the law and who will punish people and businesses based on their politics. He will do everything possible to hamstring fossil fuel production…. and much more. He would be an economic and social catastrophe.

  72. I haven't found particulars yet, but I seem to be reading that Biden has won the South Carolina primary.
    Ugh. I gotta take one of my kids to a concert tonight. I'll post later if I survive with eardrums and sanity intact.

  73. Looks like Joe Biden will get close to 40 delegates out of South Carolina. Unfortunately for Joe, the states with the most delegates on Super Tuesday have early mail-in ballots, so any ‘bump’ Biden might get from his South Carolina win will be diminished.

  74. The threat of Republicans voting for Sanders in the South Carolina Dem primary seems to have been overblown.

  75. Biden might well get a big bump from today. Part of the bump is just actual voting revealing what might be missed in the polls. So Biden's huge win today is a good sign for him in the rest of the South, even for votes already cast. And it might make him the main choice of "stop Sanders" voters on Tuesday. The fact that a lot of ballots have already been cast might not matter much since there is surely a lot of overlap between the voters who might be affected by today and those who have not yet voted.

  76. GoodNess. To think that 25 years ago the evening wouldn't have even begun yet for me.
    Nite all.

  77. Well good! Good for Biden. At least Biden is in the same eco/political universe as the rest of us. He's not my choice obviously, but a Biden Presidency would be a whole lot less destructive than Sanders in my opinion.
    I can rest a little easier now moving towards Super Tuesday. I'm pleased to be wrong about Sander's ascendancy. Southern black voters appear to have more sense than I realized.

  78. Tom Steyer drops out:
    "I would find it hard to believe that failed presidential candidates Tom Steyer, or Mini Mike Bloombeg, would contribute to the Democrat Party, even against me, after the way they have been treated – laughed at & mocked. The real politicians ate them up and spit them out!"

  79. mark bofill (Comment #180261)
    February 29th, 2020 at 3:02 pm
    Or Sanders can embrace MMT, abolish the Fed, and just start printing money to spend.
    ______

    If the federal government needs more money than tax revenues are providing, it can

    (1) raise taxes
    (2) borrow money
    (3) print more money
    (4) any or all of the above

    mark, you mentioned only printing money, which makes wonder if you believe it is the least desirable way for the government to raise
    money. If that is your belief, I would be interested in your explanation of why.

  80. The U.S. has never funded deficits by "printing money". They have done it by borrowing, often with the Fed colluding by expanding the money supply to keep government borrowing from crowding out private sector borrowing and/or sending interest rates through the roof.

    Has any government ever actually tried paying bills by literally printing money? Maybe Wiemar Germany? Or Argentina? Does MMT actually call for doing that? Or is MMT just dusting off the silly idea that there is no limit to government borrowing?

    If not obvious, those are real questions.

  81. Max,
    I'm not an expert on MMT. I find a description here:
    "Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is a heterodox macroeconomic framework that says monetarily sovereign countries like the U.S., U.K., Japan and Canada are not operationally constrained by revenues when it comes to federal government spending. In other words, such governments do not need taxes or borrowing for spending since they can print as much as they need and are the monopoly issuers of the currency."
    https://www.investopedia.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-4588060
    .
    I am also far from being an expert on economics, but I believe that the value of currency – while no longer tied to a standard like gold, is *still* in fact tied to the value of the goods that can be purchased with that currency. I believe that the unchecked printing of money will drive unchecked inflation, as it always has whenever it's been tried. This seems like a poor idea to me.
    .
    I am aware that MMT advocates understand this. They appear to believe that *raising taxes* are the way to control inflation. At which point I think the discussion becomes unserious. This is simply a pretext for government takeover and economic ruin, as far as I am concerned.

  82. I'm sorry Max. I should have been clearer.
    "you mentioned only printing money, which makes wonder if you believe it is the least desirable way for the government to raise
    money."
    Generally speaking, yes. I think this is a highly undesirable way for a government to raise money, at least I can say that. The least desirable? … I'm not certain that's exactly correct. There's likely an arbitrarily large number of bad ways for governments to raise money and it's conceivable that there are worse ways…
    .
    " If that is your belief, I would be interested in your explanation of why."
    See prior post.

  84. Wow. If the Investopedia article cited by mark (Comment #180283) is accurate, then calling MMT crazy is an insult to crazy people. Even Krugman thinks it is nuts.

  86. SteveF (Comment #180263)
February 29th, 2020 at 3:33 pm
    Tom Scharf,
“Perhaps they will even do some math such as $60,000,000,000,000 in new programs / 330,000,000 people = $181,000 from each citizen in the US.”
.
Nah, Sanders voters don’t do math, or don’t care about the results of such calculations. They think all of Sanders’ programs will come out of the hides of ‘the rich’. They want to tear down free enterprise…
    _____________

    No, a cost of $181,000 per capita is way too much. Our national debt per capita is already about $66,000, which seems like a lot. I’m not sure, however, my life would be any better if in the past government had belt-tightened to make it zero today instead of $66,000.

    Under the Trump Administration, the national debt has increased from about 100% to 105% of GDP. At least some of that added debt probably resulted from the tax cut, but the cut stimulated the economy.

    The U.S. debt seems modest compared to Japan’s national debt of more than 200% of its GDP. Some say Japan flirts with Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), but the country’s leaders say not.

    I haven’t formed an opinion on MMT yet, but I know Warren Buffett and Paul Krugman don’t think much of it.

  87. Mike M. (Comment #180282)

    **The U.S. has never funded deficits by "printing money". They have done it by borrowing, often with the Fed colluding by expanding the money supply to keep government borrowing from crowding out private sector borrowing and/or sending interest rates through the roof.**

    Yes, I don't think the U.S. has funded deficits by literally running more money off the the presses.

    Bernanke Admits To Congress: We Are Printing Money, Just 'Not Literally'

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2013/07/17/bernanke-to-congress-we-are-printing-money-just-not-literally/#5f92ea48109b

    **Has any government ever actually tried paying bills by literally printing money? Maybe Wiemar Germany? Or Argentina? Does MMT actually call for doing that? Or is MMT just dusting off the silly idea that there is no limit to government borrowing?**

    Maybe the Wiemar Republic did. I have read that shopping Germans were carrying money around in carts.

    My impression of MMT is it's saying the limit to government borrowing is not as limited as many economists think. But my impression could be wrong.

  88. Re mark bofill (Comment #180284)

    "you mentioned only printing money, which makes wonder if you believe it is the least desirable way for the government to raise
    money."
    Generally speaking, yes. I think this is a highly undesirable way for a government to raise money, at least I can say that. The least desirable? … I'm not certain that's exactly correct. There's likely an arbitrarily large number of bad ways for governments to raise money and it's conceivable that there are worse ways…
    .
    " If that is your belief, I would be interested in your explanation of why."
    See prior post.
    _________

    mark, thank you

    I'm not sure what's the best way for government to raise money when it needs more. I'm inclined to favor raising money through taxes, but that wouldn't be the best way during a recession as it would just add to the suffering. Borrowing is a good way during a recession or war. As a goal I favor a limit on the ratio of national debt to GDP, but I'm not sure what that limit should be.

    It seems possible for government to raise money for itself just by printing up more. Print it, deposit it, spend it. The supply of money would increase, which can be inflationary, but so can spending borrowed money to stimulate the economy. But as Mike pointed out, the government doesn't literally print money in order to have more to spend. So, I apologize for asking you a question about a practice that doesn't exist.

    The Federal government does at times in effect increase the supply of money by buying back Treasury securities, thus putting money back in the hands of the bond holders. I wonder if this results in a need for more printing of dollar bills. I say this because I rarely use paper money anymore.

  89. Max,
    I read what I thought was an insightful discussion someplace that mentioned exactly these points. I wish I could recall the link. One key issue they pointed out was this – with the Fed, the government doesn't get to print more money because it wants to spend more money on programs. The money supply gets expanded or reduced because it's what the Fed believes will benefit economic health overall.
    If we remove that, we put decisions about printing more money in the hands of politicians who have motives to expand the money supply *other than* the economic health of the country. At their idealistic best, we have no better than what we have now. Much more probably though, we end up with short sighted or economically illiterate politicians who screw up the economy because it's in their short term political interests to do so.
    I'm not the originator of this thinking; I'm plagiarizing somebody else as best I can from memory. But I think I agree with this, largely.

  90. But *yes*. I forgot my original point, which was simply to say, yes, there are times when printing more money is beneficial.

  91. In the past, we have had arguments over terms likes "elites" and "establishment". A term that might help is "clerisy". The interests of the clerisy naturally aligns with the rich and powerful, which puts them on the side of the elites even if they are not themselves elite.

    This article has a good description of how the middle class has divided into the clerisy and the yeomanry and how the two different groups relate to power:
    https://quillette.com/2020/02/27/the-two-middle-classes/

  92. I also read some wacky MMT stuff about the government causing unemployment by establishing a currency, and needed a 'jobs guarantee' program. I tend to avoid or ignore that part because it seems pretty nonsensical to me. Charitably, maybe I just don't grasp the genius there and the fault is mine.

  94. Huh. I thought Buttigieg would be the next to go, but I did not expect that to happen until Wednesday, if not later.

  95. Mike, as an entrenched member of the yeomanry I found your link interesting. Living in a neighborhood of yeomanrys (?) I’ve often found it difficult to explain why we have similar thoughts on governance while experiencing wildly different routes to the same economic strata. We’ve got guys raised by coastal entrepreneurs that graduated from private colleges and guys like me raised in childhood poverty who used ROTC to get a degree.

    Perhaps we should try to find some members of academia for the next poker game.

  96. Ah crap, I’m Jerry liked I’ve posted before. Just fat fingered my name.

  97. With mayor Pete Butter out, it comes down to Biden and Bloomberg on the left, and Sanders and Warren on the nutcake-extreme-left. I looked at a bunch of Super Tuesday state polls, and it looks to me like Bernie comes out the clear winner…. but polls have been wrong before.
    .
    One interesting factoid: comrades Bernie and Warren together have well over 50% support among dems in California. It is no wonder the state is a financial basket case.

  98. Hyperinflation = greater than 50% inflation/month.

    Historic examples include Weimar Germany, Zimbabwe and the record holder post WWII Hungary where at the peak, prices were doubling every 15 hours.

    "Some historic photos depict Germans burning cash to keep warm because it was less expensive than using the cash to buy wood."

    https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/061515/what-are-some-historic-examples-hyperinflation.asp

    More recently we have Venezuela, which is getting close to the record for duration of hyperinflation.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevehanke/2019/11/13/venezuelas-hyperinflation-drags-on-for-a-near-record36-months/#d6664c16b7ba

    All these countries were, or are for Venezuela, printing money to pay the bills. IIRC, Weimar Germany was stamping three zeros on currency that came through the banks. If that's not printing money, then nothing is. I did find a reference that stated that hyperinflation was not a monetary phenomenon but was due to interest rates. I didn't bother to click on it.

    Btw, the Bank of Japan owns most of Japan's government debt. Possibly surprisingly, this has not led to inflation. That may be because Japan has negative interest rates on its government debt.

    "

    Globally, there is more than $8 trillion in government bonds trading at negative rates. While this is excellent news for indebted governments, it does little to make businesses more productive or to help low-income households afford more goods and services. Super-low interest rates do not improve the capital stock or improve education and training for labor. Negative interest rates might incentivize banks to withdraw reserve deposits, but they do not create any more creditworthy borrowers or attractive business investments. Japan's NIRP certainly did not make asset markets more rational. By May 2016, the BOJ was a top 10 shareholder in 90% of the stocks listed on the Nikkei 225.

    There appears to be a disconnect between standard macroeconomic theory by which borrowers, investors, and business managers react fluidly to monetary policy and the real world. The historical record does not kindly reflect governments and banks that have tried to print and manipulate money into prosperity. This may be because currency, as a commodity, does not generate an increased standard of living. Only more and better goods and services can do this, and it should be clear that circulating more bills is not the best way to make more or better things."

    https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/080716/why-negative-interest-rates-are-still-not-working-japan.asp

    So much for government spending and MMT. We have counter examples in the real world. It's also why GDP has to be PPP corrected to mean anything. Not that even PPP corrected GDP is a particularly good measure to start with.

  99. Re Mike M. (Comment #180293)

    Mike, “Clerisy” is a new word for me. I looked it up and found this at Websters:

    English philosopher-poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834) believed that if humanity was to flourish, it was necessary to create a secular organization of learned individuals, "whether poets, or philosophers, or scholars" to "diffuse through the whole community … that quantity and quality of knowledge which was indispensable." Coleridge named this hypothetical group the clerisy, a term he adapted from Klerisei, a German word for clergy (in preference, it seems, to the Russian term intelligentsia which we borrowed later, in the early 1900s). Coleridge may have equated clerisy with an old sense of clergy meaning "learning" or "knowledge," which by his time was used only in the proverb "an ounce of mother wit is worth a pound of clergy."

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clerisy

    Likely what most clerisy think would differ by geographic area (for example, those in California philosophically different than those in Mississippi). I don’t know, but regardless of geographic differences, the clerisy may have more in common with each other than they do with the working class. In some places, particularly rural areas and small towns, the clergy may be more influential than the clerisy.

    Mike, I probably should have read your linked article before commenting.I will read it now.

  100. I have not followed the printing money discussion closely, but it should be remembered that it is repaying debt with cheaper dollars and carrying debt at artificially lower interest rates that is most attractive to a government that spends big time and borrows to do it. The Federal Reserve as a government agency and peopled by those with political views favoring big and bigger government is certainly motivated to attempt to artificially aid the government to borrow cheaply. The US federal debt would grow much faster if interest rates were not kept artificially low by the Federal Reserve.

    A further rational for the Federal Reserve to print money or create money out of thin air is to jack up the economy during a so-called business cyclical slump. These slumps usually occur after the Federal Reserve has pumped the economy artificially by printing money. The basic problem, as the Austrian school of economists often point out, is that the Federal Reserve artificially creating easy credit causes mal investments, i.e. investments that are not sustainable but occur because borrowing becomes easier. Without the Federal Reserve's involvement with the money supply and so by artificially creating problems that to which it in turn artificially reacts, the credit available would be rationed by market forces to those investments that are more sustainable and thus avoiding the business cycles or at least the peaks and valleys of those cycles.

  101. It's hard to be a self elected clerisy in today's world. There is little doubt that today's cultural clerisy believe they are wonderful, yet have little energy to devote to their alleged "followers". They are way too busy trying to impress each other with their own virtue. It's all rather tiring.

  102. What are the odds Bernie would survive the coronavirus? I hope he washes his hands really good.

  103. Klobuchar is out too.
    .
    Let me share a completely baseless (but mildly entertaining) conspiracy theory that I've just concocted out of thin air. Warren is staying in because she and Sanders both expect a contested convention where the delegates refuse to hand the win to Sanders. She's the compromise Sanders will agree to. I suspect they've explicitly agreed to this (between themselves, Sanders and Warren), although I have absolutely not the teeniest shred of evidence to support this claim.

  104. I am surprised by Klobuchar dropping out now, since that might give Minnesota to Sanders.
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/mn/minnesota_democratic_primary-7035.html
    But there do not seem to be any really recent polls there, so maybe she has results showing her support slipping and Biden's gaining.

    I looks like the Democrat establishment is now openly lining up behind Biden, so he could well be the nominee.

    Warren is running above 15% most places, but unlikely to win anywhere. Her strategy seems to be to accumulate enough delegates to finish in a clear third place position and to block either Biden or Sanders from a first ballot victory. Then she hopes to be the compromise candidate.

    I can not believe that there is any actual deal between Warren and Sanders.

  106. Warren wants a deal for the VP position, I suspect she already has one with Sanders.

  107. Mike M. (Comment #180293)
    March 1st, 2020 at 3:07 pm

    Mike, I enjoyed reading your linked paper and learning about "clerisy." I would like to comment on what I believe is wrong
    about this paper.

    No doubt the occupational composition of the employed American labor force has changed in recent decades, with a rising share of the jobs going to workers in professional fields and a shrinking share to skilled and semi-skilled blue-collar workers and small business owners. However, I do not agree with the author that this shift has split the middle class into “two distinct, and often opposing, middle classes.” On the contrary, there always have been distinct upper- and lower- middle classes, the professions (doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, etc.) having more education and higher incomes than blue-collar occupations ( carpenters, plumbers, mechanics, machinists, etc). He may, however, have a point about the decline in small business owners, as many would be upper middle class.

    I believe the author also overemphasizes the influence of government and non-profit employers. I would like to call attention to the following two paragraphs from his article:

    “Today’s clerisy are concentrated in professions whose numbers have grown in recent decades, including teaching, consulting, law, the medical field, and the civil service. In contrast, the size of the traditional middle class—small business owners, workers in basic industries, and construction—have seen their share of the job market decline and shrink.2 Some professions that were once more closely tied to the private economy, such as doctors, have become subsumed by bureaucratic structures and—in the United States, at least—shifted from a dependable conservative lobby to an increasingly progressive one.”

    “In contrast, the clerisy has a far less adversarial relationship with the uber-rich, since they operate in large part outside the market system. Like the Catholic Church in Medieval times, this part of the middle class enjoys something of a symbiosis with the oligarchal elites, the main financiers of NGOs, and the universities, and dominates the media and culture industries that employ so many of them. They are often also beneficiaries of the regulatory state, either directly as high-level government employees, or as consultants, attorneys, or through non-profits.”

    After reading the above two paragraphs, I have to wonder if the author is aware that (1)government employment (federal, state, and local all together) has shrunk as a percent of total non-farm employment in the last three decades, declining from 16.1 % of the 109.2 million total in January 1990 to 14.9 % of the 152.2 million total in January 2020, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and (2) In the private sector, while employment in non-profit organizations has been growing faster than for-profit employment, it represents only a very small share of the private sector total employment, 10.2% in 2016 (more than one-half in health care) according to a John Hopkin’s study.

    Furthermore, the author fails to acknowledge that employment in professional occupations is concentrated in the private sector. In 2018 private employers accounted for 90% of workers in computer and math occupations, 83% of those in architecture and engineering, 86% of those in management occupations, and 86 % of health care practitioners and technicians.

    Below are data from 2018 on U.S. employment in occupational groups usually requiring post-secondary education and training. The first number is total employment, the second number is private employment. Private employment is calculated as a percentage of total. Employment numbers have been rounded to 000’s. Percentages were calculated after rounding. All total, almost three-fourth of these workers were in the private sector.

    Management 7,617 6,533 86%
    Business and financial operations 7,721 6,437 83%
    Computer and math 4,384 3,948 90%
    Architecture and engineering 2,556 2,246 88%
    Life. physical, and social sciences 1,172 726 62%
    Community and social services 2,172 1,379 64%
    Legal 1,128 852 76%
    Education, training, and library 8,780 2,246 26%
    Art, design, sports, and media 1.951 1,789 92%
    Health care practitioners and technical 8,647 7,438 86%

    TOTALS 46,128 33,594 73%

    https://quillette.com/2020/02/27/the-two-middle-classes/

    Current Employment Survey https://www.bls.gov/ces/

    Occupational Employment Survey https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/000001.htm

    http://ccss.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2019/01/2019-NP-Employment-Report_FINAL_1.8.2019.pdf

  108. They are dropping (out) like flies!
    .
    Tom Scharf,
    "Warren wants a deal for the VP position, I suspect she already has one with Sanders."
    .

    Probably so, but if she siphons away too many extreme left votes from Bernie, then she'll get no invite to be VP. It is actually a pretty good wager: should Bernie win, there is a very reasonable chance that Bernie's VP will assume the presidency in the next few years. If Biden does too well tomorrow, and it looks like Bernie may not get to 50% by the convention, then Warren will likely go back to the reservation for a while so that left field is completely clear for Bernie.

  109. An interesting issue is if Bloomberg will drop out for Biden. Like Warren with Sanders, if Bernie does too well tomorrow and it looks like he may get to 50% by the convention, then Bloomberg will be under a lot of pressure to throw his support (and his billions) behind Biden. But it has always been a vanity project for Bloomberg, so he might not be sensitive to pressure.

  110. Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #180341)
    ** The US federal debt would grow much faster if interest rates were not kept artificially low by the Federal Reserve.**

    Yes, but low interest-rates usually mean low inflation rates. Real debt, particularly if long-term, shrinks as inflation rates rise. At least that's been my experience with mortgages. But I don't know the duration/maturity characteristics of outstanding Treasury securities.

    **Without the Federal Reserve's involvement with the money supply and so by artificially creating problems that to which it in turn artificially reacts, the credit available would be rationed by market forces to those investments that are more sustainable and thus avoiding the business cycles or at least the peaks and valleys of those cycles.**

    Before agreeing with you on that I would have to look at the history of business cycles (pre-Federal Reserve). Perhaps you have already.

  111. OK_Max,
    "Treasury bonds are U.S. government debt securities with a maturity range between 10 and 30 years and which are marketable and set at a fixed interest rate. T-bonds pay semiannual interest payments until maturity, at which point the face value of the bond is paid to the owner."
    .
    Since T-bonds are an interest sensitive commodity, they are both a place to park wealth with low risk of default (esp. 10 year bonds), and a place where interest rate moves can generate substantial profits or losses (esp. 30 year bonds). I would be afraid of holding 30 year bonds, because interest rates are likely to rise significantly over the next decade(s).

  112. OK_Max (Comment #180361),

    My initial reaction to your comment is that you missed the point. But now I see that Kotkin missed (or at least failed to clearly state) a key point that I provided for myself.

    A big part of the gap between the clerisy and yeomanry is a matter or values and world view. It used to be that there was a great deal of overlap of values and interests between the two groups, but not any more. It is the clerisy that has changed.
    (1) The clerisy supports multiculturalism while the yeomanry thinks that immigrants should assimilate into our society.
    (2) The clerisy supports identity politics, the yeomanry thinks we are all Americans.
    (3) The clerisy has internationalist outlook, the yeomanry puts America first.
    (4) The clerisy is skeptical of national sovereignty, the yeomanry is patriotic.
    (5) The clerisy supports "free trade" on ideological grounds, the yeomanry does not.
    (6) The clerisy has a preference for open borders, the yeomanry reject that.
    (7) The clerisy largely supports foreign intervention, the yeomanry thinks the military should defend the homeland.
    (8) The clerisy has adopted a pseudo-religious environmentalism that the yeomanry have no use for.
    (9) The clerisy promote libertine social mores, the yeomanry advocate traditional values.
    (10) The clerisy is dismissive of religion, the yeomanry is still largely religious.

  113. Mike M. (Comment #180369)
    "A big part of the gap between the clerisy and yeomanry is a matter or values and world view. It used to be that there was a great deal of overlap of values and interests between the two groups, but not any more. It is the clerisy that has changed."
    __

    **OK_Max (Comment #180361),

    **My initial reaction to your comment is that you missed the point. But now I see that Kotkin missed (or at least failed to clearly state) a key point that I provided for myself.**

    Mike, I understood what Kotkin was saying, and there may be a grain of truth to it, but he didn't back it up with data that would give magnitude to his claims. I think he exaggerates.

    **A big part of the gap between the clerisy and yeomanry is a matter or values and world view. It used to be that there was a great deal of overlap of values and interests between the two groups, but not any more. It is the clerisy that has changed.**

    You are right, Kotkin didn't really get into that. I see differences in values and world views as age and education related, the clerisy tending to be younger and more educated (and obviously more recently educated) than the yeomanry. Differences in believes by age is nothing new. A good example from the past is how opposition to our involvement in Viet Nam was primarily from young people.

    Differences in views can also come from race, ethnicity, gender, and religion. Differences in views between geographic areas reflect history and tradition.

    After looking at your list of 10, I have decided that I am more a clerisy than a yeomanry, but I am weak on few of those clerisy values.

  114. SteveF (Comment #180366)
    I would be afraid of holding 30 year bonds, because interest rates are likely to rise significantly over the next decade(s).
    _________

    I feel the same way. But beware, I'm almost always wrong about bonds.

  115. OK_Max/SteveF
    The thing with long terms bonds currently is there is little UPside (low interest) and quite a significant DOWNside (capital loss if interest rates to down.)

  116. Lucia,

    I think you mean risk of capital loss if interest rates go up.
    .
    But yes, that is true. You would have to use treasury note futures to gain money with rising interest rates.

  117. Chris Matthews has been driven from MSNBC for a combination of a) stating that selecting Bernie as nominee is both obviously insane and obviously suicidal for Dems, and b) complimenting attractive women. Both are forbidden among the woke.
    .
    As usual, the left always eats its own. Just ask Trotsky. At least Matthews avoided the ice axe.

  118. lucia (Comment #180407): "The thing with long terms bonds currently is there is little UPside (low interest) and quite a significant DOWNside (capital loss if interest rates to down.)"
    .
    I don't think that is true. I *think* that at present the coupon rate on Treasury bonds is rather high compared to interest rates. Because of that, they are selling at a premium. As a result, there is some "risk" to capital, but it is not really a risk since you know exactly how much capital you will lose if you hold the bond to maturity. So that can be incorporated into the yield calculation. At present, T-bond yields are low, but that is because they are low risk compared to other investments.

  119. One of the reasons the stock market is doing so well over the past decade is because bonds have such low returns relatively. This drives more money into stocks. One issue I have noticed is that one could previously diversify their portfolios among other global stocks (Europe, Asia, etc.) but globalization is causing all the markets to march in almost lock step.

  120. It seems the Democrats managed to put down their internal squabbling in order to unify against Sanders, the recent drop outs look orchestrated. This was something the Republicans could not manage to do in 2016. Whether it will work or not is an open question. Biden and Bloomberg may still split the sane vote to allow Sanders to win. We will know much more after today.
    .
    Chris Matthews being fired follows the same path. Past behavior is breaking some new shibboleths retroactively and must be punished severely. The strange thing is there is not a single person on the planet that is willing to defend him lest they be the next victim of the mob. The issues here are the unfairness of punishing old behavior with new standards and the severity of the punishment does not fit the crime (it is both end of current employment and he is black balled for life). It is possible to change society's cultural standards without being so vindictive. This from the self proclaimed tolerant and "love Trumps hate" crowd. This has gone down into the sewer of religious feverishness. The clerisy has spoken, indeed.

  121. lucia,

    If you think that interest rates are unlikely to go lower, you're not paying attention. There are trillions of dollars worth of government bonds out there in the world that 'pay' negative interest rates. When we get a recession, it's likely that the same thing will happen here even though there is good evidence that it won't help. The Fed has already announced they are likely to lower rates to compensate for the Covid-19 epidemic.

    A lot of the Fed's quantitative easing money went into stocks. Low interest rates have also motivated companies to swap equity for debt, otherwise known as stock buybacks using borrowed money. OTOH, something like half of non-junk corporate bonds are only one rating step above junk. A recession would likely make a lot of those bonds have junk status. That means that pension funds that have been chasing yield would have to dump any they held into a probably very illiquid market.

  122. Tom Scharf,
    Maybe Fox could offer Matthews a part time spot…. his “Bernie is frickin’ insane” comments would be better received by the non-woke Fox viewers. There would be a lot of nice ‘rub their noses in it’ if Matthews was on Fox a bit.

  123. Tom Scharf (Comment #180415): "It seems the Democrats managed to put down their internal squabbling in order to unify against Sanders, the recent drop outs look orchestrated. This was something the Republicans could not manage to do in 2016."
    .
    Kasich and Cruz tried that 4 years ago, but it did not work. I think the reason was that a big chunk of Cruz supporters preferred Trump to Kasich and a big chunk of Kasich supporters preferred Trump to Cruz.
    .
    Tom Scharf: "Whether it will work or not is an open question. Biden and Bloomberg may still split the sane vote to allow Sanders to win. We will know much more after today."
    .
    As long as candidates can clear the 15% threshold, it really does not matter if they split the vote. If a bunch of Klobuchar and Buttigieg supporters vote for Bloomberg or Warren today, it could still help to stop Bernie. Those candidates clearing 15% will sharply reduce the number of delegates that Bernie wins.
    .
    Warren staying in the race might have a similar effect. A lot of Democrats will surely be dismayed by having to choose between the Crazy Old Man and the Senile Old Man. If they vote for Warren rather than staying home, it will cut into Bernie's delegate count.

  124. People keep comparing this year's Democrat primaries to the Republican's 4 years ago. But I think the two are very different. Sanders is not really an outsider; he is a career politician who has been in Congress for 30 years. His views (or at least the way he presents them) are within the range of Democrat opinion, both within Congress and among past seekers of the Democrat nomination.

    2012 is a better analogy. A I-can't-believe-we-are-going-to-nominate-this-guy front runner with the strongest challenger representing an extreme position within the party. It is just that Biden is even weaker than Romney and Sanders is stronger than Santorum. So unlike Santorum, Sanders actually has a chance.

  125. A rare day here in Huntsville; I have a vote that actually might affect something. Republican Senate primaries.
    Looking forward to the smoke clearing tonight in the Dem Primaries so we can see where we're at!

  126. >This was something the Republicans could not manage to do in 2016.

    I've posted the numbers here before. If Rubio had dropped out prior to Super Tuesday, then there was at least a 400 delegate swing from Trump to Cruz. Cruz was down 100 delegates after Wisconsin.
    100 of these delegates are in Texas, where Cruz finished just under the 50% needed to get all the delegates.

  127. Well, at least Bloomberg won't have wasted *all* his money: He took American Samoa with 50% of the vote. Gabbard finished a strong second.

    Otherwise, it looks like Bloomberg is at risk of getting shut out. I think Biden might well take a majority of the delegates picked today.

  128. MikeM,
    $50 million here, $50 millions there…. soon your talking big money. Or was it $500 million? It's so hard to remember what Bloomberg spent!!

  129. Mike will probably pocket 100 or 150 delegates. Three or four million dollars per delegate seems steep, but for Mike, it is pocket change. I’ll bet if he offered that money directly to potential delegates, it would cost Mike a lot less than $600 million. Oh wait, that would be unlawful.
    .
    Bernie will almost certainly dominate California, so nobody is going to leave tonight way ahead. But I was mistaken…. I expected Bernie to be way ahead by tomorrow morning. Maybe Chris Matthews (‘Bernie is insane’) falling on his sword was a good choice.

  130. Hummmm…
    Biden will likely end up a little ahead of Bernie (75 delegates?). Will Warren and Bloomberg siphon off enough delegates to keep either from reaching a first ballot majority at the convention? Hard to say, though that should be clear by April. If they don’t, then either could still win, although in the remaining states Biden probably has an edge. If they do, then superdelegates will make Biden the nominee. So Biden will most likely be the nominee. Bernie’s bros will not be happy, but the bigger issue is if they will turn out in November for Biden.

  131. Trump just torpedoed Sessions with a tweet, probably for good. There's a runoff on the 31'rst, but Sessions was slightly behind Tuberville before Trump weighed in.
    I don't see how a football coach is better than an experienced Senator, but that's Alabama for you.
    *shrug*

  132. Surprise surprise! Bloomberg is out.
    [Edit: even less surprising, he's endorsing Biden.]

  133. SteveF (Comment #180454)
    So Biden will most likely be the nominee. Bernie’s bros will not be happy, but the bigger issue is if they will turn out in November for Biden.
    _____

    Steve, I hope you are right about Biden.He's been my first choice for quite some time, but I was afraid he was fading. Now I think he likely will win the nomination.

    I suspect Bernie's backers dislike Trump enough to show up at the polls in November regardless of who is the Dem candidate.

    Yesterday an RNC exec said something about Bloomberg having accomplished his objective of de-railing Bernie, implying that was
    the main reason for his campaign. Maybe I misinterpreted the comment, but I thought Bloomberg's goal was to be president. not just keep Bernie from being president. Does anyone here have any thoughts on Bloomberg's objectives?

  134. mark bofill (Comment #180455)

    I don't see how a football coach is better than an experienced Senator, but that's Alabama for you.
    _____

    Trump knows he can't count on Sessions to do 100% of what he wants. Trump probably thinks Tuberville might, and is willing to take the risk.

  135. Max,
    Oh, I understand Trump's dickish reasoning. I weep over the lack of sense the good people of Alabama display here, but it's just my opinion.
    I'm sorry; looking back on my comment I can see how you'd think I was wondering why *Trump* didn't support Sessions. It logically follows from the structure of what I said. Just isn't what I meant.
    .
    [Edit: To answer your question above — my personal opinion is that Bloomberg thought he was going to win until fairly recently. I don't think he set out to stop Sanders or anything of the sort.]

  136. I am looking forward to the Ides of March.

    Biden with center position on the debate stage, Sanders on his left, Warren on his other left. Warren knows her only hope is to take down Biden, so she gives him the full Bloomberg treatment; Sanders is happy to pile on. Biden holds his own for about 15 minutes, which is about as much air time as he had in any prior debate. Then he starts to get increasingly befuddled and incoherent. By the second hour, it is clear to anyone watching that he is not mentally qualified to be President.
    .
    Consider this: Biden barely campaigned in most of the states he carried yesterday. But when he campaigned heavily in Iowa and New Hampshire, he did badly. People like the idea of Biden as an opponent for Trump. Lots of experience and gravitas with an image as a relative moderate. But when subjected to scrutiny, he is revealed as an empty shell. The party knows this, which is why they waited until they were desperate before backing him. Now they have placed all their eggs in a soggy paper bag.

  137. I don't see why experience in the Senate should be seen as a qualification for the Senate. By that logic, election to the Senate should be for life.

    Maybe Alabama voters see Tuberville as better representing their interests and value.

  138. When I apply for a job, first thing everyone seems to want to know about is my experience. Go figure.

  139. Experience is relevant. I didn't make an argument that senators should serve for life, and I don't agree that the idea that experience is relevant logically implies anything like that. But by all means, tear that strawman up.

  140. Wall Street is pretty happy about Biden. Anyone but Warren / Sanders. The establishment may now back Biden since he is the last man standing against Sanders, which will drive voters to Sanders, ha ha. Warren is toast thankfully, I just couldn't bare the thought of a Native American president. All those tepees, peace pipes, pow-wows, and bigotry against cowboys.

  141. Mike M.,

    "Maybe Alabama voters see Tuberville as better representing their interests and value."

    Maybe Alabama Republican voters have trouble distinguishing their a$$ from a hole in the ground. Can you say Roy Moore? Sure he didn't win this time, but he received nearly 7% of the vote in a crowded field. If Sessions doesn't win the runoff election, I might think seriously about betting that Doug Jones wins reelection in November.

  143. I know almost nothing about Tuberville and have no idea if he is a good candidate or a bad one. I reject the idea that Sessions should be the nominee just because he has been in the Senate before.

  144. marc bofill,
    "Surprise surprise! Bloomberg is out.
    [Edit: even less surprising, he's endorsing Biden.]"
    .
    That makes Biden the dominant favorite. $600 million for 100 delegates… that he then gives away? Yikes! He would be smarter buying ocean liners and jumbo jets for his personal entertainment.
    .
    .
    Tom Scharf,
    "Warren is toast thankfully, I just couldn't bare the thought of a Native American president. All those tepees, peace pipes, pow-wows, and bigotry against cowboys."
    .
    LOL

  145. DeWitt,
    Doug Jones won in a narrow race against a total nut cake.
    .
    Unless Tuberville turns out to have regularly dated underage girls (or boys!) he would likely beat Jones. In spite of Trump still being pi$$ed with Sessions, I suspect Sessions will win the run-off, because the people who voted for Rep. Bradley Byrne will probably prefer Sessions.

  146. Mike,
    "I reject the idea that Sessions should be the nominee just because he has been in the Senate before."
    .
    I agree with this. After all, Doug Jones has been in the Senate as well, and I don't support him.
    My impression (which could be unfounded) is that there is little difference in the substance of policies supported by Tuberman vs Sessions. I think the entire issue is that Trump is still pissed off at Sessions for recusing himself at the start of the Mueller investigation. Voters liked Sessions well enough in 2014 that he ran unopposed and won.
    Probably a case could be made that Sessions should not be re-elected Senator because he recused himself as Trump's AG. I don't personally support such a case. I think Sessions ought to be re-elected.
    Setting politics completely aside, I find it somewhat repugnant that Trump cannot set aside a peevish opposition for an established conservative who put his reputation on the line to support Trump early on, who's *only* offense seems to be that he did what virtually any other law enforcement official would do upon discovering that he was in charge of an investigation who's scope included himself and recused himself.
    Who knows how it would have worked out had Sessions not done this. It certainly could have worked out badly. We know what *did* happen though; it worked out [ok]. Mueller found nothing, presumably because there was nothing to find. I don't see how Sessions interference would have done anything except add fuel to the fire and possibly gotten both Trump and Sessions thrown out on their butts if not imprisoned for process crimes.
    That's just my view. Adding insult to injury, Sessions *to this day* does not take Trump to task for any of this, although it would be obviously politically foolish in the extreme for him to do this. But that Trump can't let it go is petty, offensive, and in the end downright stupid in my view.

  147. marc bifill,
    "Who knows how it would have worked out had Sessions not done this."
    .
    I think what set Trump off was that Sessions didn't just resign when it was clear that the Muller investigation was not going to be meaningfully supervised by Rod Rosenstein. Someone like William Barr would never get involved in "process crimes", but I think would have made a difference in how long the Muller investigation took. I agree Trump should let his anger with Sessions go. But I also think Trump should quit the stupid tweeting and be more thoughtful in his public statements. Trump is not going to do those things either.

  148. Steve,
    I missed the mark there regarding 'process crimes' and was considering adding a comment saying so. I agree with you. Maybe Sessions should have resigned [sooner].
    Its past, it worked out. Holding grudges about it diminishes Trump in my estimation. I agree, he ought to let it go and reconsider the impulsive tweeting. I agree that he probably wont.

  149. I have heard that Mike Bloomberg has ordered a new Boeing 747, painted a combination of navy blue and robin's egg blue, which will be called "Mayor Force One". There are rumors he will build a new house in Northern Virginia which is an exact duplicate of the White House, but which he will call the "Right House".

  150. Is there something about socialism that is particularly attractive to Hispanics (serious question)? Sanders seems to be getting a high percentage of the Hispanic vote and a lot of Central and South American countries have been damaged by democratically elected socialists like Chavez and Morales. AMLO may be taking Mexico down the same road.

  152. DeWitt,
    I think the Cubans, Venezuelans, and Nicaraguans are very much opposed to socialism…. they have seen it in action. Mexicans, Guatamalans, Colombians, etc, have mostly lived under right wing governments, and corrupt and incompetent ones at that. Those groups dominate the Hispanics who support Sanders.

  153. SteveF,

    The problem seems to be that the lessons don't last very long. See, for example, Argentina.

  154. I am amazed to see that Tuberville is running for the Senate. I don't have time to look it up, but his exit from Cincinnati as coach was not good, and he did really awful and sleazy things to recruits. (don't have time to look it up)

    ……
    Also, I have mixed feelings about Sessions who appears to be a genuinely decent human being. However, Sessions appointed Rod Rosenstein to oversee the independent counsel investigation.

    …….
    Rosenstein has to be the worst lawyer in the history of the world. He allowed Mueller to violate attorney client privilege and ransack Cohen's files. Also, the fact that the investigation was premised on gossip and and not any real facts should have been known to him, since it was in the FBI's files as of Jan. of 2017 and he had access to those files. How anyone in his position could authorize further FISAs and not check the FBI's files is beyond my imagination. However, that is what Rosenstein did.

  155. JD Ohio,
    “ How anyone in his position could authorize further FISAs and not check the FBI's files is beyond my imagination.”
    .
    Rosenstein wanted to remove Trump from office, and acted on that desire. He was a very bad guy doing very bad things. No other explanation seems needed.

  156. DeWitt,
    The voting population turns over almost completely in 50 years. So yes, lots of voters don’t have any memory of relevant history of the left. That is particularly a problem when the educational establishment downplays history as a subject of study, and distorts what history is taught to hide the negatives associated with leftist rule… those “educators” are mostly on the left after all, and not just in the States.

  158. So it is the Crazy Old Man vs. the Senile Old Man. I wonder what happens if it becomes obvious that Biden is not up to job, either via truly embarrassing debate performances, a health event, or such.

  161. shirleyweda,
    More than 3,000 people a *day* around the world die in car and truck crashes. Coronavirus should be avoided until a vaccine is developed, but some perspective is needed.

  162. marc bofill,
    I suspect she was finished at the time she claimed to be a native American so she would get a job teaching law at Harvard. She sold her soul to the devil of political correctness, and the Devil now gets his due. Couldn’t have turned out much better IMO.

  163. Mike M,
    “ So it is the Crazy Old Man vs. the Senile Old Man.”
    .
    Some might say “angry and crazy” for Bernie. My only advice for Bernie is to stop using his right arm to dramatize each point by chopping the air violently. He should switch to his left arm to dramatizr his points…… more appropriate for a Socialist.

  164. shirleyweda (Comment #180494): "There are more than 85,000 infected COVID-19 cases all around the world!"
    .
    It is indeed remarkable how such a tiny number is causing so many people to run around screaming that the sky is falling.

    That is less than 0.1% of the number of annual cases of influenza.

  165. Mike M. (Comment #180491)
    March 5th, 2020 at 10:01 am
    So it is the Crazy Old Man vs. the Senile Old Man. I wonder what happens if it becomes obvious that Biden is not up to job, either via truly embarrassing debate performances, a health event, or such
    _______

    The GOP has depended on strong support from elderly voters. Republicans poking at Biden's age-related behavior could offend the elderly and weaken that support. Biden's advanced age, however, could make voters give more consideration to his choice for VP.

    Biden may have the latitude to choose a running mate who can help his chances more more than Pence can help Trump's.

  166. OK_Max
    ** Republicans poking at Biden's age-related behavior could offend the elderly and weaken that support. **
    .
    It might not. Old folks want SSN , paid prescriptions and so on. But old folks actually don't like doddering old folks. If they did like doddering old folks, they'd all eagerly move to retirement villages, or assisted living facilities. One of the reason they resist it is *they don't want to be surrounded by old folks!**
    .
    The things is every old person thinks THEY are the exception who has remained sharp as a whip. They don't mind people noticing OTHER old folks have become doddering. They just don't like the suggestion THEY have.
    .
    **Biden may have the latitude to choose a running mate**
    Maybe. Or not.

  167. Mike M. (Comment #180499)
    March 5th, 2020 at 9:22 pm
    shirleyweda (Comment #180494): "There are more than 85,000 infected COVID-19 cases all around the world!"
    .
    It is indeed remarkable how such a tiny number is causing so many people to run around screaming that the sky is falling.

    That is less than 0.1% of the number of annual cases of influenza.
    _______

    COVID-19 is just getting started. We don't know how many people it eventually will affect and how many it will kill. This uncertainty causes fear, and likely causes the greatest fear ("the sky is falling") among those who find it hardest to cope with uncertainty.

    I have been vaccinated for flu, hopefully giving me immunity to some strains, but I have no immunity to COVID-19. While fear of catching COVID-19 has not kept me awake at night, I do not think it irrational of me to avoid unnecessary exposure until I know enough to assess the risks and consequences, and that may take a while. Just call me "Chicken Little Lite."

  168. lucia (Comment #180503)
    But old folks actually don't like doddering old folks. If they did like doddering old folks, they'd all eagerly move to retirement villages, or assisted living facilities. One of the reason they resist it is *they don't want to be surrounded by old folks!**
    _______

    Some seniors don't want to be around families with kids, so they move to age restricted ( 55+) communities. I suppose it's because kids can be loud.

    If someone doesn't want to be around people old like himself, I'm not sure what it says about him. I don't mean that in a bad way. I can only guess about the reasons.

  169. OK_Max,
    It’s not the age, it is the incompetence. I see lots of accidents, many of them serious, caused by very elderly drivers who are not physically and/or mentally competent to drive. Just last night I was behind a very elderly driver creeping along at 18 mph in a 35mph zone…. and lane control was an issue as well. There are (of course) lots of drivers in the same age range who are perfectly competent, but as Lucia notes, the elderly are not the people who should be evaluating their own competence.
    .
    I can see that Joe Biden is MUCH slower and less competent than he was even 12 years ago. I am sure I am not alone.

  170. OK_Max (Comment #180504): "I have been vaccinated for flu, hopefully giving me immunity to some strains, but I have no immunity to COVID-19."
    .
    The strains of flu against which you have no immunity are hundreds of times more prevalent than COVID-19.
    ————-

    The issue with Biden is not his age but his mental competence, or lack thereof. I would think that pointing that out would resonate with elderly people. They are all too familiar with senile dementia and surely do not want such a person in the White House.

  171. Older people tend to vote one way for two reasons, it is in their financial interest to do so (SS, Medicare), or their more advanced life experience is such that they distrust the messaging of certain candidates. Call this "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me" thinking. Obama's Hope and Change savior campaign will only work once every generation, everyone finds out that politicians are in fact not messiahs, but just administrators of a large complex state apparatus with limited control.
    .
    "We are the government, we are here to help" is a literal joke for a reason. Socialism / communism is not seen as a virtue for real reasons. It's not hypothetical.
    .
    Young activists believe they just have to wait until all the old people die off for the revolution to commence, but what happens instead is young people turn into different thinking old people. While my core values haven't changed a lot since I was 30 my thinking is much more nuanced than it once was. The younger generation thinks in black/white too often and are much more prone to reductive thinking and simplistic ideas as the answer to all problems. If I was to sum it up in a reductive simplistic statement, my thinking has changed to "nothing is ever easy". Beware charlatans with simple answers to complex problems (see every TED talk ever).

  172. We have nothing to fear but fear itself, see coronavirus. Mostly this will be another episode of a kill off of people who were already close to death anyway. While this clearly isn't the big one, it is a prelude to the coming zombie invasion pandemic. It will be interesting to see how competently our byzantine health system responds to this threat. They have had plenty of time to plan for this, and examine the effectiveness of what China has done, so this is a clear test for the health system. There will be shrill pronouncements of "it's all Trump's fault" and "socialized medicine would have fixed this" no matter what happens.
    .
    The best case scenario is that the fear of god is placed into the healthcare system and a competent fast track system is put in place for the rapid development of vaccines for the next outbreak(s). I read weird things like "we have to test vaccines for a year to ensure they are safe". Either find a way to test faster or take the risk if the virus is sufficiently deadly.
    .
    Now is probably not a good time to discuss the genetically modified weaponized small pox viruses the Soviets developed back in the Cold War. That is the really big one. Even if they did destroy it all, they certainly haven't forgotten how to make it. Non-state actors with ever cheaper bioengineering equipment could…
    .
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1039129770495563833
    .
    "And where is it now? "Nobody seems to know what happened to the many tons of frozen smallpox or the biowarheads," Mr. Preston writes."

  173. Mike M. (Comment #180514)

    **The strains of flu against which you have no immunity are hundreds of times more prevalent than COVID-19.**

    Sure, but I haven't had a flu in many years, and the last time it wasn't very bad. But I don't know how bad this COVID-19 could be. Maybe it's more contagious, maybe the mortality rate is worse.
    Until more is known about COVID-19, I will regard this disease as potentially more of a threat than a flu. Taking precautions won't change my lifestyle much. I won't have to do without necessities.

    I'm sure roadways are more of a threat to my health than COVID-19, yet I still drive because it's a necessity. Being in crowded places (shopping centers, sporting events, etc) isn't a necessity. Air travel for recreation isn't a necessity. Infrequent hand washing isn't a necessity.
    __________

    **The issue with Biden is not his age but his mental competence, or lack thereof. I would think that pointing that out would resonate with elderly people. They are all too familiar with senile dementia and surely do not want such a person in the White House.**

    Biden doesn't remind me of people I have know who had dementia.
    He seems sharper than the elderly I have know who did not have dementia. If age is a concern, Trump is no spring chicken, and his mental health is questionable.

  174. Tom Scharf (Comment #180516)

    **"We are the government, we are here to help" is a literal joke for a reason.**
    __________

    I was alway puzzled by that old cliche. It's attributed to a speech by Ronald Reagan. I haven't seen the context, so I don't know what he was talking about, but I suspect the implication is government will just make matters worse or is lying.

    If I interpret the cliche literally, I feel left out because no one from the government has ever said anything like that to me.

  175. Wrt to my post above (Comment #180474), a piece from today's WSJ:

    "Latinos Know Bernie Sanders’s Type
    Young ‘Sandernistas’ embrace a socialist strongman like those their parents fled."

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/latinos-know-bernie-sanderss-type-11583447697?mod=opinion_lead_pos9

    "Why is Bernie Sanders performing so well among Latinos? Consider a popular nickname for his supporters: Sandernistas. Latinos across the U.S. with roots like mine—my parents immigrated to America from Nicaragua—are accustomed to promises from left-wing populists. But some are forgetting what follows: dictatorship, destruction of institutions, and human suffering."

    "Many Americans won’t remember Daniel Ortega and his Sandinista Party’s socialist revolution in Nicaragua in the 1980s. In 1985 Mr. Sanders, then mayor of Burlington, Vt., said Mr. Ortega was “an impressive guy” and “Vermont could set an example to the rest of the nation similar to the type of example Nicaragua is setting for the rest of Latin America.” After a bloody war destroyed families and created a diaspora, Mr. Ortega crushed freedoms and targeted opponents. He lost power in 1989 but returned in 2006 after the voting age had been lowered to 16. Born after Mr. Ortega’s first run as dictator, young voters would bring on his second."

    "Much like the young Nicaraguan students who supported the Sandinistas, young Latino voters showed up for Mr. Sanders on Super Tuesday. Some 66% of Latinos age 18 to 29 went for Mr. Sanders in Texas and 71% in California, according to exit polls. It is striking to see the young show enthusiasm for the kinds of socialism their parents fled."

    "The failed proposals of the second-poorest country in the Western Hemisphere won’t make for a healthy politics or good policy in America."

    No wonder the Democrats want to lower the voting age.

  176. OK_Max
    **If someone doesn't want to be around people old like himself, I'm not sure what it says about him. I don't mean that in a bad way. I can only guess about the reasons.**
    It says they are typical.
    .
    In the first place, old people tend to get grumpy. MANY are set in their ways and have very strong preferences. MANY got used to being "top dog" in their family, bossing their kids around and want to boss other adults around. Certainly, they don't want other people to boss them around.
    .
    Popsie Wopsie was on the board for his 'retirement village' type condo association. If you think other boards are a PITA you have to go to one where everyone is over 55.
    .
    Want to read more? Here
    https://www.inquirer.com/philly/health/old-and-ageist-why-do-so-many-older-people-have-prejudices-about-their-peers-and-themselves-20180404.html

  177. OK_Max
    **Biden doesn't remind me of people I have know who had dementia.**
    Sure. But the problem is if someone old used to be sharp as a tack but no longer is…. that tends to be a sign of decline. The decline is generally not linear. Older people know this about older people.
    .
    One can complain it's ageism when the suspicion levied against themselves. But they KNOW the worry that a 70+ person who as declined with age will decline more is not and *unfounded* bias. It's based on empiricism.
    .
    You aren't going to persuade people– including old ones– to not share this bias because it's based on facts.
    .
    As for Trump: Yes. Prejudice against age goes against him too. The problem with people levying that against Trump is he always seemed like a blowhard. The observations we have of him in the past were, to some extent, as a "circus performer". So it's difficult to know if he "declined" or he's just the way he always was.
    .
    Great-Uncle Joe HAS declined. I was never a supporter of his, but he was sharper. His age is an issue because it's likely age is associated with the decline.
    .
    Great-Uncle Bernie HAD a heart attack. His health is an issue.
    .
    Trump? He's and old fart. He's fat. But so far as we can observe, no heart attack, diabetes,stroke, mental decline. He's a fat lump of blubber on the golf course, but he's walking. It's not hobbling.

  178. Lucia,
    "He's a fat lump of blubber on the golf course, but he's walking. It's not hobbling."
    .
    I walk on the golf course (when that is allowed), but I will think twice of posting any photos of myself on the golf course, and avoid limping as best possible…. to avoid any suggestion of blubber and hobbling. :-0
    .
    FWIW, I have seen no decline in Trump's mental acuity…. though he remains a jerk. Joe Biden's behavior clearly *has* changed: inappropriate anger, less self-control than a decade ago, more often confused about the situation he is in.
    .
    If Biden is suffering from the early stages of dementia, then the next 8 months may not be kind to him. My dad declined mentally pretty quickly once it was obvious he had a problem. There seems to be a certain level of decline which can be (and is) ignored, but once someone passes a threshold where the decline is obvious, and this usually means it starts to interfere with normal activities, then the decline is more rapid.

  179. Lucia: "As for Trump: Yes. Prejudice against age goes against him too. The problem with people levying that against Trump is he always seemed like a blowhard. The observations we have of him in the past were, to some extent, as a "circus performer". So it's difficult to know if he "declined" or he's just the way he always was."

    If you look at this video of Trump (as far as I can tell speaking extemporaneously), he obviously is pretty sharp when he applies himself to something he is interested in. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=lsu+football+team+at+white+house&&view=detail&mid=B7E60DE242EE029F5639B7E60DE242EE029F5639&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dlsu%2Bfootball%2Bteam%2Bat%2Bwhite%2Bhouse%26go%3DSearch%26qs%3Dds%26form%3DQBVDMH If this was Biden, he would confuse coach Orgeron with Bear Bryant or Woody Hayes. There is no way Biden could get through this.

  180. SteveF,
    Your experience with your Dad matches mine with my father. Jim's mother on the other hand declined slowly but steadily. Or at least the declines seemed this way. It might have been personality.
    .
    My mom's longer term memory is going. She was trying to refresh her memory about things like what grade I was in when we moved into her house and so on.

  181. JD… I can't watch it all. But I scrolled to where he starts. Yes, he turn on the charming actor. He comes off engaging, fun. He doesn't have dementia. He is a jerk but that's not age related decline.

  182. Lucia, thank you for the link to the piece on ageism among the elderly. I found the article very interesting, and in case anyone missed it, here is your link again:

    https://www.inquirer.com/philly/health/old-and-ageist-why-do-so-many-older-people-have-prejudices-about-their-peers-and-themselves-20180404.html

    My favorite quote from the article;

    **Why would older people be ageist?  Todd D. Nelson, a psychologist at California State University-Stanislaus, has called ageism "prejudice against our feared future self."**

    Up thread in your Comment #180503 you said "it might not" in reply
    to my statement that Republicans poking at Biden's age-related behavior could offend the elderly and weaken that support. I hope I am correct about your doubt being based on ageism among the aged.

    I can understand how some older people would rather not be in an aged community. Just because an elderly person doesn’t want to hang out with other elderly people however, doesn’t mean he won’t take offense at Republicans ridiculing Biden for showing his age. They are indirectly ridiculing that person too.

  183. OK_Max,
    ** Just because an elderly person doesn’t want to hang out with other elderly people however, doesn’t mean he won’t take offense at Republicans ridiculing Biden for showing his age. **
    .
    My point is there is no particular reason to think they WILL. Some might. Some might not. My guess is won't won't. They'll see it as different.

  184. OK Max: "Republicans poking at Biden's age-related behavior could offend the elderly and weaken that support."

    Older people won't be the least bit offended by jabs at Biden's age. As you age, you notice declines in certain areas. Even though I have been exercising for 7 days a week for the last 3 years, I have noticed my small finger dexterity and memory are not what they used to be. Biden is functioning at the level of an eighth grader now, and if he were to be elected President at the end of another 4 years, he would be lucky to be functioning at the level of a 6th grader.

    Biden is obviously in a serious decline. Older people would recognize that pretty much objective fact and would be looking for someone with some intellectual competence to run the country. They see the facts and don't deny them and have seen similar declines among their friends and associates.

  185. I will quote a few Trump gaffes from Rollin Stone’s article **Gaffe-Prone President Attacks Gaffe-Prone Candidate**

    Calling Hurricane Florence “one of the wettest we’ve ever seen from the standpoint of water”

    Calling Apple CEO Tim Cook “Tim Apple”

    Referring to 9/11 as 7/11

    Telling a crowd that “the kidney has a very special place in the heart”

    At a July 4th event, saying during the Revolutionary War, the Continental Army “rammed the ramparts and took over airports.”

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/gaffe-prone-president-attacks-gaffe-prone-candidate-869914/

  186. JD Ohio (Comment #180538)
    " Biden is functioning at the level of an eighth grader now, and if he were to be elected President at the end of another 4 years, he would be lucky to be functioning at the level of a 6th grader."
    ___________

    If you are basing your opinion on gaffes, I could say the same about Trump.

    Actually, I could say even more about Trump. Whereas Biden's gaffes may be a result of his lifelong struggle with stuttering, Trump's gaffes may mean he is out of touch with reality.

    Criticizing people for stuttering, or even worse suggesting stutterers have dementia, wouldn't be profitable for the GOP.

  187. Dementia is a difficult diagnosis to make the closer you are to it.
    A proper dementia will also usually gallop forwards after a slow start.
    Some of my saddest moments were having several highly intelligent patients call after a visit and say they had lost their script and could I write another one. This proved to be that pivotal moment as at subsequent visits, often with a concerned partner or daughter, it became obvious that they were suffering from dementia. In these cases they rapidly declined and ended up in care or at home with a lot of services shortly after.
    –
    Mr Mueller seemed a shadow of a man at his recent congress appearance, he certainly had al lot of trouble with recall and needed prompting.
    –
    No one would put Mr Biden up if he had been showing signs of dementia early on. Some of his gaffes seem to be the ones that he also used to make years ago.
    Watching his debate performances however there is a real concern as to how good his comprehension is, excuse a bit of deafness but then his replies also seemed to be continually off topic or miss the point.
    He certainly spruced up when he had Super Saturday.
    –
    If he is developing dementia it should accelerate. The medications for it simply halt the progression temporarily in a small percentage.
    If he gets on the debating stage and halfway holds his own I would say no he does not have it, just the normal aging forgetfulness Lucia alluded to. If he does have it he most likely will have to pull out on medical grounds though it would be covered over as some other sort of health problem.
    –
    He wanted the chance to run, he has the chance to run.
    Nobody, with 2 exceptions ever got to VP without having a lot of smarts somewhere.

  188. OK Max: 'Actually, I could say even more about Trump. Whereas Biden's gaffes may be a result of his lifelong struggle with stuttering, Trump's gaffes may mean he is out of touch with reality. "

    No. Biden has no concept of numbers or time. He claimed that a child tax credit would put 720 million women to work in the US, when the entire population of the US is about 330 million; putting aside adults v children and older women. https://freebeacon.com/politics/biden-child-tax-credit-will He also claimed that 150 million people were killed by guns since 2007. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-150-million-gun-deaths/ Anyone remotely familiar with numbers couldn't possibly make these stupid mistakes. These are the result of a current lack of intellect; they are not gaffes.

    Also claimed to have negotiated with Deng Xiaoping about 20 years after Deng died. Said he was running for the Senate, I believe in South Carolina recently. On and on. He can't speak extemporaneously for more than 10 minutes without putting his foot in his mouth.

  189. Biden has on a number of occasions completely blanked on coming up with Barack Obama's name.
    It appears they are using him as a placeholder to be replaced at the convention.

    However, it could just be they wish to preserve the entire party apparatus even if they lose the election. Having Bernie win would destroy a lot of jobs for party people in DC. None of them want to be scrapping like Steve Hayes and Bill Kristol.

  190. The issue with Biden is not occasional verbal slip ups. It is that he so often seems confused and out of it along with his short temper resulting in extremely inappropriate behavior that makes Trump seem well mannered.

  191. JD Ohio
    **He can't speak extemporaneously for more than 10 minutes without putting his foot in his mouth.**
    And he used to be able to do so. We all saw him in Senate hearings.
    .
    What we are seeing now is not a pattern of lifetime "stuttering". I know people who stutter. They stuttered when they were young. In THEM, stuttering is not a sign of mental decline. But in someone who was sharp as a tack (whether you like him or not) sudden appearance of things like this suggests something is wrong. In Biden's case, it suggests age related decline.
    .
    In a young person's case a change like this would ALSO be troublesome and ideally would be investigated. (One might suspect substance abuse, mini-strokes or so on.)
    .
    When a person runs for President, voters will speculate about the persons ability over the upcoming 4 years. No amount of attempting to shame people for doing so is going to prevent them from doing what they OUGHT to do.

  192. Re: Biden stuutering.

    My comments were entirely independent of any Biden stuttering. I haven't watched that much tape, and what I have seen didn't involve stuttering. I remember seeing him say he was running for the Senate witout stuttering, and also confusing his wife and sister without stuttering. On my other examples, I have no memory of the actual tapes, but no stuttering stands out to me. To me, he is simply functioning at a very low level.

    Don't remember him from 20 years ago and his abilities then. However, he has a long history of dishonesty beginning in law school when he was caught plagiarizing. His defense was that what happened was so stupid that he could not have done it. He was also caught on tape bragging about his law school academic performance, when, in fact, he ranked 76 out of 85 in law school.

    My nutshell for him is that he, at best, has always been a dishonest mediocrity, and at this point he has seriously declined.

  193. In 2012, Biden apparently did better than hold his own against Paul Ryan in the Vice Presidential debate. It might be interesting to compare that performance to one of this year's debates. Interesting to someone other than me, anyway. I can't take more than a few seconds of any politician since Reagan.

  194. JD Ohio (Comment #180551): "I remember seeing him say he was running for the Senate witout stuttering, and also confusing his wife and sister without stuttering."
    .
    Momentary gaffes make amusing sound bites and are memorable, but I don't know that they signify much.

    However, Biden has repeatedly responded to challenges from voters in an abusive manner. In one case he responded to a challenging question by calling the questioner fat and challenging him to a pushup contest. In another, he called the questioner a "lying dog-faced pony soldier", whatever that is. And there have been more. When an experienced politician engages in such public behavior, it indicates something seriously wrong above the neck.

    And Biden often has difficulty expressing himself in a coherent manner. Trump will often produce a word salad, but they appear to be of the thoughts-coming-faster-than-words variety. With Biden, it is shear befuddlement.

    His debate performances have been uneven. But with 7 or more candidates on stage, he could rely largely on rehearsed lines. It will be interesting to see what happens when he has to spend two hours going mano a mano with Bernie next weekend.

  195. DeWitt,
    “ Interesting to someone other than me, anyway. I can't take more than a few seconds of any politician since Reagan.”
    .
    It’s a real problem, and not just for you. I think the biggest issues are the constant dishonesty, the boundless stupidity, and the constant pandering to their slice of the voters. Since George W. Bush took office, I can hardly get my hand on the mute button fast enough with most all politicians. I remember I could tolerate listening to even an imbecile like Jimmy Carter for short periods…. though I disagreed with everything he said. Maybe when someone is younger they are more tolerant of stupidity.
    .
    Reagan, no matter one’s opinion of him, was not much of a panderer.

  196. Mike M,
    Maybe Biden can hold it together for two hours during a debate… but I kind of doubt it. If it is obvious he is confused/incapable of reasoned replies, then that will be very bad for the Dem establishment and their media enablers…. Bernie would be a disaster in November. Then again, Biden might be a disaster as well.

  197. I don't watch debates, and a town hall seems like the seventh level of h*** if you ask me. I don't care about anyone's gaffe rate, their gotcha moments, and I don't care about their debate prowess. If we were electing an Olympic Debater than I would. It's not completely irrelevant, but it is nearly irrelevant. People like Biden have a long history and that is all you need to know. I would have forgotten HRC's deplorables gaffe had she not come out the next day and stated only "I shouldn't have said half". At that point it is not a gaffe.

  198. lucia (Comment #180550)

    **When a person runs for President, voters will speculate about the persons ability over the upcoming 4 years.**
    ___________

    lucia, of course they will and they should.

    Voters will speculate on whether Biden's mind is going because his gaffes have been occurring more frequently.

    Voters will speculate on whether Trump’s struggle in pronouncing words is an early sign of Alzheimers.

    The following quote is from an opinion by a psychologists with a professional knowledge of dementia.

    **In Alzheimer’s, as language skills deteriorate, we see two types of tell-tale speech disorders, or paraphasias:
    Semantic paraphasia involves choosing the incorrect words. For instance, after Attorney General William Barr released a letter on the Mueller report, Trump said: “I hope they now go and take a  look at the oranges, the oranges of that investigation, the beginnings of that investigation."

    Phonemic paraphasia, which is linked to the moderate to severe stages of Alzheimer’s, is described as "the substitution of a word with a nonword that preserves at least half of the segments and/or number of syllables of the intended word.” For example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu becomes “Betanyahu,” big league becomes “bigly,” anonymous becomes “enenamas” or "anenomynous," renovation becomes “renoversh,” missiles become "mishiz," space capsule becomes “capsicle,” midterm elections become "midtowm" and "midturn" elections, and Christmas becomes “Chrissus.”**

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/09/does-donald-trump-have-dementia-we-need-know-psychologist-column/3404007002/

    The linked video has many examples of Trump struggling with words:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfOQBY5BrUA

  199. People at the DMV aren't there to help you as an individual, they are there to implement and enforce government policy. That is their job. Sometimes these are the same thing, many times they are not in your specific case. The alleged and professed good intentions of politicians does not make me believe a benevolent government will be the result.

  200. Tom Scharf (Comment #180556)
    I am with Tom on debates and even with regards to being a smooth and articulate speaker. It means little to me as it is primarily a performance issue much as it would be in judging a performer on TV or in films. Political debates are for showcasing the political pundits who appear on TV and have little to do with gaining more insights into what a politician once elected might do. I would much prefer that a series of questions from well-informed and knowledgeable people outside the world of TV and the media be posed to all the candidates and in turn the candidates reply within a bounded number of words but bounds sufficiently large to allow a thoughtful reply. Those replies could become public records that voters could reflect back on during the politician's incumbency.
    If the objection is that potential voters would not make the effort to read the replies, I think that is an admission that there is probably something wrong with our democratic process. Or it is pointing to a reason for limited government where uninformed voters cannot substantially affect other people's lives.

    Joe Biden was never a deep thinker (like almost all politicians are not) and used a good old boy approach with hopes of endearing his constituents. Another factor is the slowing down process of aging which can be avoided to a good extent by staying tuned in and being mentally and physically active. I suspect 8 years of being a vice president and 4 years out of the public's eye could have affected Biden negatively.

    My criteria for judging a politician showing the effects of aging would be if that person starting being more honest, straightforward and principled in their approach. I would then say that yeah that person is losing it.

  201. Let us see here. We have 3 potential candidates for president in Trump, Sanders and Biden who are at an advanced age where a not small percentage of people start slowing mentally and some quickly losing it altogether. This is a relatively well known observation. Yet these are the candidates favored by the voting public to be our next president. I have 2 non rhetorical questions: What does that say about their younger political opponents and the voting public generally?

  202. Kenneth Fritsch,
    It says few politicians are credible…. most are total phonies. Billionaires with private jets and multiple mansions ranting about *your* fossil fuel use, former attorney generals elected to be tough on crime who suddenly think almost nobody should go to prison, a former mayor famous for cutting violent crime rates, now apologizing for most everything he ever did, etc, etc. The cowardly pandering to gain public office is beyond revolting, and the lack of any bed-rock principles is shocking. They are simply not worthy.

  204. DeWitt Payne "In 2012, Biden apparently did better than hold his own against Paul Ryan in the Vice Presidential debate."

    I viewed portions of the debate, and it did appear that Biden could hold multiple thoughts in his head and expound about them reasonably. Not the case today.

    ……..
    Tom Scharf:
    "it [debate performance] is nearly irrelevant. People like Biden have a long history and that is all you need to know."

    In Biden's case I disagree with this. If his thinking (as evidenced by the debates and other public speaking engagements) is at the very low level that I believe it is, then someone else will be making decisions for him, particularly at the end of his 1st term.

  205. SteveF:" the lack of any bed-rock principles is shocking."

    Thoreau, in 1849: "[M]ost legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holders […] rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God."

  206. If the White House maid is making Biden's decisions for him it will be a distinct improvement on the current situation.

    Here's Kevin Drum, saying what I'm too lazy to recapitulate:

    "There he is, wearing a campaign cap and mugging for the camera. Interrupting Alex Azar when he’s on the verge of telling the truth about something. Bloviating about how he’s an innate medical genius. Complaining that he doesn’t want to unload passengers from a cruise ship because it might hurt his “numbers.” Griping that the Dow was all set to hit 30,000 until this whole virus thing hit. Bragging about the small number of deaths so far. Apparently demanding that every actual professional kowtow to him in public. Saying that he’s not to blame for cutting back on pandemic preparedness because “this is something that you can never really think is going to happen.” Clowning about how the testing has been perfect, “like the letter was perfect.” Snickering about how he told Mike Pence not to compliment a governor who had been mean to him. Bragging that he’s not bothering to take any special protections."

    And here is the idiot Drum is criticizing;

    ""I like the numbers being where they are. I don't need to have the numbers double because of one ship""

  207. Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #180560)
    March 7th, 2020 at 1:55 pm
    **Let us see here. We have 3 potential candidates for president in Trump, Sanders and Biden who are at an advanced age where a not small percentage of people start slowing mentally and some quickly losing it altogether. This is a relatively well known observation. Yet these are the candidates favored by the voting public to be our next president. I have 2 non rhetorical questions: What does that say about their younger political opponents and the voting public generally?**
    __________

    Good questions, Kenneth. My guess is it says (1) the voting public values the experience and name recognition of older candidates more than the health and acuity of younger candidates, (2) the voting public is disproportionately represented by older citizens, who may have an age bias, (3) younger candidates have had less time to develop campaign organizations and financial resources, and (4) younger candidates are more likely to have progressive agendas that appeal only to younger people. Obviously there are exceptions (e.g. Bernie Sanders).

  208. Mike M. (Comment #180553)

    **And Biden often has difficulty expressing himself in a coherent manner. Trump will often produce a word salad, but they appear to be of the thoughts-coming-faster-than-words variety. With Biden, it is shear befuddlement.**
    _________

    Mike, that is only one of Trump's symptoms. He displays semantic and phonemic paraphasia, speech disorders that are associated with early stage Alzheimer’s, as explained in the USAToday article I cited in my Comment #180550)

    Trump also exhibits other symptoms associated with Alzheimers, such as failing to recognize old friends and confusing his father with his grandfather.

    Below are more quotes from the article I previously linked:

    Memory loss is the symptom most closely associated with Alzheimer’s. While Trump famously forgets the names of people (as he did recently when he called Apple CEO Tim Cook “Tim Apple”) and places (as when he called Paradise, California, “Pleasure”), one could make allowances for such gaffes. More troubling, Michael Wolff reported in "Fire and Fury" that at the end of 2017, Trump failed to recognize "a succession of old friends" at Mar-a-Lago.

    Trump, 72, seemed to hit a new inflection point last week when he said, “My father is German. Right? Was German. And born in a very wonderful place in Germany.” In fact, his father was born in the Bronx and it was his grandfather who was from Germany.

    Dementia Care International says a "person may start to mix up relationships and generations” in the second stage of dementia.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/09/does-donald-trump-have-dementia-we-need-know-psychologist-column/3404007002/

  209. I would rephrase age bias as an experience bias, they even wrote this bias into the Constitution. This "elders" bias is ancient and is no doubt beneficial up until a certain point. Of course the opposing side's point of diminishing returns is judged differently than your side. It may be the case that the VP pick is more important when someone over 70 is running. Reagan was definitely losing it at the end and society somehow survived.
    .
    Lots of beneficial things happen by just your side winning independent of who the person on the ticket is. The remote diagnosis of psychological conditions by the opposing side's very serious people (aka experts) is worth exactly ZERO and only diminishes the credibility of their profession which they are more than happy to sacrifice on the altar of their moral superiority. These people are simply partisans masquerading as professionals. It's an abuse of their profession.
    .
    People who have been in the public space for decades will have innumerable gaffes, misspeaks, confusions, etc etc. People who speak impulsively will have even more. These can be easily farmed to make a person look bad but are utterly unconvincing to anyone who isn't already convinced.

  210. In case anyone missed it (and how could you not), the media has decided en mass that electability is just a euphemism for sexism, ha ha. Let's see if you can follow … it's not the democratic electorate that's sexist (impossible! not worthy of even discussing) but the democratic electorate is simply judging the rest of the electorate as sexist and making the intelligent choice to abandon Warren for the greater good. It must be really frustrating when the other side's sexism forces you to be sexist. They are so evil, those other people, corrupting my wonderfulness, ha ha. Next up is a long discussion on rationalization, or not.
    .
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/did-sexism-and-fear-of-sexism-keep-warren-from-winning-the-nomination/
    "Right, Maggie, which is just voters making a lot of guesses and assumptions about what will make someone a strong opponent for Trump. I think voters’ concerns about “electability” were largely — but not entirely — about sexism. Some people thought Warren was too liberal to get elected. Which isn’t unrelated to her gender — there’s research showing that voters generally think women are more liberal than they actually are. But it seemed like a different bucket of worries than “Will sexism doom a woman against Trump?” which is also something I heard a lot on the campaign trail."
    .
    All roads lead to the other side's moral failings.

  212. Thomas Fuller,
    "If the White House maid is making Biden's decisions for him it will be a distinct improvement on the current situation."
    .
    Sort of a riff off William Buckley's comment that people from the Boston telephone directory would be more capable of governing than Harvard's professors. It was funnier when Buckley said it.
    .
    I think it would help make political discussions more productive if we could be more honest about the fundamental disagreements. It is true that Trump is a liar, and arguably even more than most politicians, especially about things too small to matter… like inaugural crowd sizes.
    .
    That said, I think the main objection to Trump is more about the policies he wants to implement; that is where the fundamental political disagreement is. Yes, Obama was much more sophisticated, presented himself well, and was a far better liar than Trump will ever be. But he implemented policies which I found consistently damaging to the country and its future, ignored laws he disagreed with, skirted the Constitution when it was convenient, and could not bring himself to compromise with Republicans over any substantive issue. I rate Obama's policies as the most socially and politically damaging I have seen from any president in my lifetime.
    .
    Trump is a buffoon, an embarrassment, and a jerk, but he has already undone much of the damage Obama did via through foolish regulations and lawless executive actions. I would like it if Trump was easier to listen to, a lot more honest, not a jerk, and stopped the damned tweeting. But I will take those negatives because his policies are better for the country.
    .
    It would help if people focused more on policy disagreements and less on the politicians. Focusing on Trumps (many) personal failings, large and small, rather than his policies does not address his substantive policies that many voters support. Trump won in 2016 *because* of those substantive policies. Democrats would be wise to address the political message Trump brought in 2016, not the unpleasant nature of the messenger. So far, they have not.

  213. Thank you Steve. I wanted to say some similar things in response to Thomas Fuller but couldn't muster the will to do so. I agree substantially with what you've said.

  214. Thanks Mark. I wish Dems would at least think about the fundamental disagreements; I haven't seen a lot of willingness to do that. Saying Trump is "unfit for office" begs the question… it seems to me a easy cop-out used to avoid addressing the substance. Should voters allow unlimited undocumented immigration? Should undocumented immigrants never be deported? Should taxpayers have to pay for health care and other services for those undocumented aliens? Should the USA be involved in "nation-building" to install popularly elected governments in places where there is no history of that kind of government? Should we tolerate nations working to destroy their neighbors when those neighbors *do* have popularity elected government and are allies? My answer to all of those questions is a resounding "NO!". I often hear the comment "that's not who we are" in reference to Trump's policies…. to which I say: Speak for yourself, not for others.

  215. OK_Max
    "Mike, that is only one of Trump's symptoms. He displays semantic and phonemic paraphasia, speech disorders that are associated with early stage Alzheimer’s,
    Trump also exhibits other symptoms associated with Alzheimer's, such as failing to recognize old friends and confusing his father with his grandfather."
    –
    A little light humor.
    There are a lot of different disorders in the world that share or overlap in symptoms and signs.
    –
    Take TDR.
    Symptoms include taking the worst examples of normal behaviour and distorting them to attack another person with claims of medical illness. Also known as Munchausen's disease by proxy. The worst cases also display Sesquipedalian Loquaciousness.
    –
    Early stage cancer, diabetes and stroke often associated with a positive Apgar score.
    –
    Many cures are available, a little red hat with Margarine written on it for example but most sufferers prefer their illness.
    –

  216. T. Fuller: ""There he is, wearing a campaign cap and mugging for the camera. Interrupting Alex Azar when he’s on the verge of telling the truth about something. Bloviating about how he’s an innate medical genius."

    I pretty much agree with SteveF. Here is my particular take.

    When Trump was elected I was worried that the Federal Govt would fall to pieces. Nothing has happened. I was hoping he would grow a bit. That didn't happen.

    I chose Trump over what I considered the bad policies of the Dems. In this circumstance, Trump has, in effect, over-delivered. The Dems are LUNATICS. Open borders, seriously discussing letting prisoners vote, falsely calling a police officer victim a murderer (See lawyers Warren & Harris lying about Michael Brown case), fracking bans, and now cities preventing people from hooking up natural gas stoves. (See Berkeley)
    …….
    It is like the Dems are intentionally trying to screw up and impoverish the country. Symptomatic of how awful the Dems are is the ignorance of Brian Williams and Mara Gay (NYTs editorial) who confuse $1,000,000 with a $1.50 when talking about Michael Bloomberg campaign spending. They actually thought it was funny that they could make such an error — which explains how easily the Dems propose very expensive programs.

  217. angech (Comment #180579)

    A little light humor.
    There are a lot of different disorders in the world that share or overlap in symptoms and signs.
    _________

    True, and even if Trump did recently wet his pants (see photo in link), that along with his other dementia-associated disorders does't prove he has early-stage Alzheimers. But the possibility is something voters should consider.

    https://www.politicalflare.com/2020/03/internet-speculates-after-trumps-appears-to-have-wet-pants-at-tennessee-disaster-meeting/

  218. JD Ohio (Comment #180580)

    **I chose Trump over what I considered the bad policies of the Dems

    **When Trump was elected I was worried that the Federal Govt would fall to pieces. Nothing has happened."**
    _________

    I was just the opposite. I voted against Trump, but when he was elected I wasn't worried that the Federal Govt would fall to pieces.

  219. JD, isn’t the ability to confuse $1,000,000 with $1.50 at the heart of all the democrat proposals. If you think Bloomberg spent enough cash to give every American a million dollars then surely we could tax the rich enough to provide for all of the wonderful free programs.

    Innumeracy and it’s sister concept of how huge the earth and its resources are underlay the basis of their thoughts. Hell, I remember the trash crisis of the early 80s and doing a paper on it for my Earth Sciences high school class saying our community, in the middle of farm country Illinois, had enough landfill space already on the books to handle trash through 2010.

    I wonder if they ran out 10 years ago.

  220. Oh, I forgot, we can also cover everybody’s health care in the US including undocumented immigrants (yeah, I used their term) and save $450 billion and 70,000 lives a year. Holy smokes! It’s like it’s gonna be free. How could you possibly argue that.

    If you’re numerate you might have a problem.

  222. I think we have reached correction territory in the stock market, ha ha. This one has real reasons, but at some point the outlook will be more stable and hopefully a partial recovery. Don't expect that to happen for maybe a year. Not sure why low oil prices is "bad" for the economy beyond the oil and gas industry, I suppose its just fear from instability.

  223. Tom Scharf (Comment #180610)

    **I think we have reached correction territory in the stock market, ha ha**
    ______

    Tom, It's worse than that. We are on the edge of a bear market. The last time I looked today the S&P 500 was at 2,747, down 19% from the 3,386 close on Feb.19. A decline of 20% is bear market territory. .

  224. Fortunately we were up 29% last year. It's probably going to get worse before it gets better.

  225. MikeN (Comment #180609)

    Biden blanks on Obama's name.
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1236693671430455301

    "I blank on names a lot, but usually it's about celebrities, not people I know."
    ______

    Similar to what Biden did in your linked video, I've blanked in mid-sentence on my wife's name, then quickly just referred to her as my wife. Had she been present, I doubt it would have been very bad for me.

    Bad for me was the time my wife heard me refer to her by the name of a previous girlfriend. There was no way out of that gaffe.

  226. Trying to figure out how things will work if the CV works out half OK
    Panic until infection/death rate stabilizes, if it does.
    Everyone gets use to "limited" quarantines. Business picks up.
    Stocks rebound.
    Fingers crossed.
    OK Max I guess the problem relates to how we are presented our politicians by both the press and the other sides fake news.
    There is an absolutely horrible way of the press picking up every minor misstep and promoting it to the detriment of and demeaning of the politicians.
    By repeating this tittle tattle we are as guilty as the press that made it up in the first place.
    Saying someone might have alzheimers, on either side, does not reflect on us [me] in a good way.

  227. Numerically there are two inflection points. The first is when the infection/death numbers stop accelerating, the second is when they start declining. I would expect the markets to notice those.
    .
    Once the virus is out and beyond containment then doing mass quarantines like Italy won't really work to prevent further cases but they may "flatten the curve" of infections, slow the spread. This may counter productively make the outbreak last longer but this can be a good thing if it prevents saturation of health services.
    .
    Politicians and the partisan media (is there any other kind?) know this is going to be messy so it will be a blame game paradise. The news is crammed full of hot takes from the last 24 hours. The people we need most to spread good reliable information are incentivized to do the exact opposite.

  228. WRT coronavirus 19 and markets: I think there will be two potential turn-arounds, short term and long term:
    .
    In the short term, the results of placebo controled double blind tests of antiviral medication will be released by the end of this month. (They were developed for SARS and MERS, but never much used because the illnesses were contained by other means.) If these work with CV19, then people (especially older people) will stop seeing the illness as a potential death sentence.
    .
    In the longer term,

  229. In the long term, (a year or so) vaccines should become available. Even if they are not 100% effective, that should help calm people.

  230. There is also the fact that warmer weather will likely cause infection rates to drop. I *think* that is a property of all respiratory viruses. Also, although there have been cases in the tropics and southern hemisphere, it does not seem to be spreading much in those countries. The big problems have been in places where it is winter: China, Korea, Iran, Italy.

  232. mark bofill,
    One of the classic signs of dementia is loss of self-control: aggressive, inappropriate behavior, uncontrolled profanity, etc. That's Joe. I believe he is toast.

  233. mark bofill (Comment #180663)

    mark, when I first learned about what Biden did at Chrysler in Detroit I thought he could have responded to that worker in a diplomatic way rather than saying you are "full of shit," and that he did't help his campaign.

    After seeing the video and giving the incident more thought, however, I think what Biden did may help him. I liked him saying what he thought. Many others may too.

  234. OK_Max,
    Beto O'Rourke says: "Hell yes, we will take your AR-15.."
    .
    Biden accepts Beto's endorsement, then says Beto will be in charge of gun (confiscation?) policy.
    .
    The fellow who is full of sh!t here is Biden, not the angry gun owner. If he keeps this up he will lose in a landslide. Calling voters "full of sh!t" is never a good look for politicians. Ask Hillary how criticizing voters works out.

  236. Re angech (Comment #180640)

    "OK Max I guess the problem relates to how we are presented our politicians by both the press and the other sides fake news.
    There is an absolutely horrible way of the press picking up every minor misstep and promoting it to the detriment of and demeaning of the politicians."
    _________

    If the public isn't interested in a subject, the press won't give much attention too it. The public shares blame with the press for emphasis on crap about politicians.

  237. SteveF (Comment #180682)
    March 10th, 2020 at 6:49 pm
    OK_Max,
    Hillary inspired tee-shirts….they are still available…. but don't wait too long, or they could be sold out:
    https://www.redbubble.com/shop/p/23199891.88ZX2.unisex-tee-w
    _______

    Hillay's comment was directed at a group, but I haven't seen evidence it made a difference in the vote. Biden's comment was directed at one person who was rude to him. It won't gain him support among hard-core NRA members, but it demonstrates he won't kowtow to that group like so many gutless politicians will.

  238. Calling voters "full of sh!t" is never a good look for politicians. Ask Hillary how criticizing voters works out.
    ______

    I don't believe Biden lost all voters who are "full of shit" just by pointing out one voter is full of shit.

    I've been accused of being full of shit myself, and he didn't lose my vote. I like him even better for having the balls to say what he thinks.

  239. Max,
    "After seeing the video and giving the incident more thought, however, I think what Biden did may help him. I liked him saying what he thought. Many others may too."
    —————-
    Sure. Some people like Trump for a similar reason I believe. Possibly calling his constituents dog faced pony soldiers, liars, and telling them that they are full of shit will prove to be a winning strategy for him. We'll probably find out in about 9 months, unless Comrade Sanders wins the nomination.

  240. Steve,
    I've been trying to reserve judgement, but I have to say – it sure *looks* like he's (Biden is) losing his faculties. Time will tell I expect. I wonder if the DNC will try to foist somebody besides Biden or Sanders off for the nomination when crunch time comes. I can't imagine that going over well, but they don't appear to have any good choices at this point.

  241. OK_Max,
    "It won't gain him support among hard-core NRA members, but it demonstrates he won't kowtow to that group like so many gutless politicians will."
    .
    What? Were does that come from? Biden accepted Beto ("take your AR-15's") O'Rourke's endorsement, and said Beto would be part of his administration… to handle gun policy. The voter Biden called 'full of sh!t" appears to have been correct that Biden does actually want to confiscate one of the most commonly owned guns.
    .
    I doubt this will end well for Biden.

  243. SteveF (Comment #180689)
    ** The voter Biden called 'full of sh!t" appears to have been correct that Biden does actually want to confiscate one of the most commonly owned guns.**
    _______

    SteveF, I didn't know the conversation was just about A-15's and similar assault-type weapons. I will have to read about it again. Anyway, you may be overestimating the public's opinion of "one of the most commonly owned guns."

    Beto just wants what most Americans want, even Republicans. A Politico poll in 2019 found “Only 23 percent of all voters oppose an assault weapons ban.”

    “Most Republicans would support legislation banning assault-style weapons, a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll found Wednesday — a finding that contradicts President Donald Trump's claim earlier the same day that there's "no political appetite" for such restrictions.
    The poll found that nearly 70 percent of all voters would back such a ban. Support for an assault-weapons ban was higher, at 86 percent, among Democrats, who have been pushing for new restrictions on the firearms in the wake of two mass shootings over the weekend.
    Republicans typically are more reticent to support new gun restrictions, and Trump campaigned in 2016 on his strong support for the Second Amendment. But the poll found that 55 percent of GOP voters were comfortable with banning assault weapons, and 54 percent said they would support stricter gun laws more generally. Ninety percent said they would back universal background checks for gun sales.”

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/07/poll-most-voters-support-assault-weapons-ban-1452586

    Given the support for a ban on assault-type weapons, I’m not sure why politicians haven’t acted, but I suspect it’s in part because the NRA makes large campaign contributions.

    All the fuss is over civilian rifles that look like military assault weapons but lack the latter’s fully-automatic capability. Similar to their military cousins, however, these civilian rifles do have large capacity magazines, usually holding 30-round or more. While the civilian versions may look menacing, reduce their magazine capacity and they are no more a threat to public safety than any other rifle. I don’t know why the gun lobby doesn't promote reducing that capacity as an alternative to a ban.

  244. "Beto just wants what most Americans want, even Republicans. A Politico poll in 2019 found “Only 23 percent of all voters oppose an assault weapons ban.”
    —————–
    Say, is that all it takes, majority support. Neat. So what you're saying is that if it turns out a majority of racists in Alabama want segregation, or even slavery, we should roll with that.
    Or is there something more to it than the will of the majority in your view Max?

  245. mark bofill,
    Which is why it is critical having justices on the SC who will base their rulings on the actual words of the Constitution, not some imaginary constitution the 'woke' would find preferable. The idea that the USA is a pure democracy, where 50%+1 controls everything is simply wrong, and clearly so: the entire structure of the Federal government was designed to *avoid* simple majority rule.
    .
    I find it shocking that so many 'progressives' want to change the Constitution to make government a pure democracy via judicial subversion rather than through the amendment process the Constitution provides for. It falls in the same category as those who always want change the rules when they don't win. That is the behavior of a 6 year old, not a thoughtful adult.

  246. I'm ambivalent on gun control but "kowtowing to the NRA" is just an in-group talking point. The NRA organization is powerful because gun control is a single issue vote for many people, and a red flag for loss of liberty for others. Beto attempted to revive his foundering campaign by going extreme on guns (to wild applause) and it didn't work, then Biden put him in charge of gun control. That is very clear signaling. What Biden didn't do is get specific, and I doubt he will, he is trying to avoid the issue.
    .
    The left has no credibility at all on gun control issues. Exactly zero people believe they will stop if they win their "common sense" gun control legislation. They will just move on to the next restrictive step. Assault weapon bans and closing loopholes won't make a dent in gun crime. A handgun ban will.

  247. Biden is supposed to be the adult in the room, so this wasn't a good look. However the viral videos of "citizen ambushes politician" are already getting boring and tedious.

  248. Tom Scharf,

    " Not sure why low oil prices is "bad" for the economy beyond the oil and gas industry, I suppose its just fear from instability."

    It's because the US is no longer a net importer of oil. We are a net exporter of gas and oil. So the damage done to the oil industry, and the financial industry that backs some of the frackers, could exceed the benefits of lower oil and gas prices.

    "This response is partly panic but it’s also rooted in rational fear, despite the benefit for consumers from lower oil prices. The market worry is that the oil-price plunge will hurt the U.S. economy—the main support for global growth these days—by damaging U.S. shale oil production.

    Not long ago the U.S. imported most of its oil and natural gas. But the rise of fracking and horizontal drilling have made the U.S. an energy powerhouse. U.S. crude oil exports have soared from around an average of 490,000 barrels per day in January 2016 to 3.7 million barrels per day in December 2019. (See the nearby chart.) A sharp decline in global oil demand now hurts U.S. producers. The damage to producers and workers from a price collapse could exceed the benefit to consumers who pay less for gasoline.

    Some shale producers are especially vulnerable because they’ve relied on easy credit fueled by low Federal Reserve interest rates. Analysts peg energy companies’ bond issuance at anywhere between 10% and 16% of the U.S. high-yield debt market. Widespread defaults on that debt could have systemic financial consequences for banks and other lenders."

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/now-comes-the-oil-shocknow-comes-the-oil-shock-11583789996?mod=opinion_major_pos2

  249. It is amazing that the NRA still exists. But I guess foreign contributors to the Trump campaign still need a channel. As do gun manufacturers to members of Congress.

    If the NRA were a person rather than an organization the word vile would be appropriate.

  250. In addition to what DeWitt says, the "low price" is partly due to "real" factors and partly due to "manipulated" factors on the part of Russia and Saudi Arabia. To the extent that it's due to manipulated factors, the low price tends to drive out producers who we will need after the "manipulation" stops. So then we will have shortages and prices will rebound above the current level (until frackers can come on line– which takes a while if many have gone out of business.)
    .
    So what's happening has a potential for volatility that is very bad when it's hitting a product that is essential to the economy. It's not quite so bad if it hits a luxury item like caviar or fur coats!

  251. Thomas,
    Nah, not amazing. What really amazes me is that liberal/progressive types like yourself fail to grasp the obvious lessons of history, repeated over and over again. Disarming the populace opens the door to tyranny and widespread human misery, enslavement, starvation, and death. The NRA and the second amendment guard against that. And all of these progressive, liberal lovers of human freedom do their level best to erode that.
    *That* is amazing.

  252. China only had 24 new cases yesterday. 80,778 diagnosed cases for a population of 1,386,000,000, and it was the first outbreak. People need to get a grip.

  253. Thomas,
    It's not "amazing" the NRA exists. It exists because there are
    (a) individuals who support the 2nd amendement
    (b) hunters who support guns for sport

    These people buy guns and want them to be legal. Yes, that means gun manufacturers also exist. Like car manufacturers, tech companies, abortion clinics, pharmaceutical companies, real estate companies, teachers unions, restaurant workers unions and all sorts of collective entities, gun manufacturers try to influence the government (including members of congress) to implement policies in their favor.
    .
    You many not like the NRA's position. But there is nothing unique about those who do collecting together and trying to promote policies they prefer. The NRA taking political action is neither more nor less nefarious than teachers unions doing so.

  254. "If the NRA were a person rather than an organization the word vile would be appropriate."
    .
    It is the open contempt with which the left looks down upon people they disagree with as they sit upon their moral pedestals that guarantees their failure to pass meaningful gun legislation in the US. People who don't own guns know people who do and don't see them as vile monsters.
    .
    Everything has become a reflexive shaming exercise for the left, ha ha. I shed not a tear when the moral majority disappeared, but this stuff is just purity tests of a different color. Cultural bullies will always be with us.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Majority

  255. Thomas Fuller,
    "It is amazing that the NRA still exists."
    .
    Wow. You need to sped some time with a few good ol' boys from Louisiana… who all own multiple guns, and pride themselves on being able to hit a 4 inch target at 200 yards. They make the NRA sound positively… err…. progressive.

  256. mark bofill (Comment #180712)
    March 11th, 2020 at 5:42 am
    "Beto just wants what most Americans want, even Republicans. A Politico poll in 2019 found “Only 23 percent of all voters oppose an assault weapons ban.”
    —————–
    **Say, is that all it takes, majority support. Neat. So what you're saying is that if it turns out a majority of racists in Alabama want segregation, or even slavery, we should roll with that.
    Or is there something more to it than the will of the majority in your view Max**
    ____________________

    Laws prohibiting slavery and segregation are absolute, and Alabama voters can't change that.

    The 2nd Amendment does not give citizens an absolute right to bear any arms he desires. If it did, a civilian could carry fully-automatic rifles, grenades, rpgs, and other weapons that are a threat to public safety because they can be used by unhinged individuals for mass murder. Currently legal large-capacity magazines, standard equipment on assault-type rifles, also are a threat to public safety because they make it easy to rapidly fire large numbers of rounds.

  257. They are on the same legal footing; second and thirteenth amendments.
    Misses point of my question, but whatever.

  258. OK_Max (Comment #180750): “Only 23 percent of all voters oppose an assault weapons ban.”
    .
    A claim like that has little or no meaning unless the exact question asked is given.

    My guess is that a very different result would be obtained if you asked people if they approve of banning the most popular firearm in the country, even though it is almost never used in committing a crime.

    And by the way, that is NOT the position taken by O'Rourke and Biden. They want to send armed federal agents to people's homes to confiscate their AR-15s.

  259. Mike M,
    “ They want to send armed federal agents to people's homes to confiscate their AR-15s.”
    .
    Some months ago I had a discussion about this with a very successful (AKA rich) gentleman who lives near Baton Rouge. He was very clear: He would fire upon the agents immediately, and without hesitation. There are many thousands (millions?) of gun owners who are absolutely committed to keeping their AK style weapons. Anyone who suggests these arms can be confiscated without a revolution are delusional.

  260. The crazy thing about “dog-wistle” issues for the deranged left (like forced confiscation of AK style weapons) is that they would have nearly zero impact on murder rates, assaults, etc. Anyone serious about reducing murder rates would concentrate on illegally obtained hand guns, which are responsible for the overwhelming majority of all murders, as well as the vast majority of “mass shootings” (four or more victims).
    .
    Focusing on weapons which are almost *never* used for murder is foolish and counterproductive. Which makes one think that criminals and crime are not at all the targets of such “sensible gun control” proposals….. seems more like the desired outcome is ‘government intimidation of politically undesirable individuals’.

  261. OK_Max,
    “Currently legal large-capacity magazines, standard equipment on assault-type rifles, also are a threat to public safety because they make it easy to rapidly fire large numbers of rounds.”
    .
    Ummm… no, those weapons are responsible for a tiny (*tiny!*) fraction of shootings. Car accidents on any given day kill many times more people than are killed in a year by “assault weapons”. If you want to shoot rabbits, you need to go to where the rabbits actually are: nearly 100% of gun related murders are due to illegally obtained hand guns. Funny the focus of gun control is always on “assault rifles”. Has nothing whatever to do with crime, and everything to do with disarming people with whom you disagree politically.

  262. One of the examples that shows many libs are lying when they say they just want “common sense “ changes in the gun laws. Those who aren't lying are completely clueless.
    .
    https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/weatherby-vanguard-modular-chassis-bolt-action-rifle-.223-remington-20-barrel-10-rounds-luth-ar-man-1-stock-matte-black/FC-747115431434.html
    .
    . Weatherby Vanguard Modular Chassis Bolt Action Rifle .223 Remington 20" Barrel 10 Rounds LUTH-AR MBA-1 Stock Matte Black.
    .
    Calif, the liberal darling that outlaws “assault rifles”, has outlawed the above as an “assault rifle”. Even bolt action rifles with 10 rd magazines are being outlawed as an “assault rifle “.
    .
    It’s said to be dangerous driving while black. Now it’s becoming illegal to own a gun that’s black.

  263. I'm not sure how fast I can change clips. I'll check when I have time. My guess is about 1.5 seconds.
    It's not that difficult or time consuming. The clip limit isn't going to impact much of anything.

  264. mark bofill,

    The Mythbusters in episode 189 tested an Uzi and a MAC-10 to see how fast they could fire and change magazines. Both pistols emptied their magazines in about two seconds. It took ten seconds to empty two magazines for both weapons, which implies a reload time of six seconds. For four magazines, it took 27 seconds. That's 8 seconds of firing time and 19 seconds for three reloads, again about 6 seconds. I seriously doubt you can change clips in 1.5 seconds unless you're Roland of Gilead, the gunslinger from the Dark Tower movie/Stephen King novel.

    https://mythresults.com/hollywood-gunslingers

    Neo in The Matrix didn't reload. He carried a lot of guns and discarded the empties. That's probably the most effective tactic for an individual.

  265. mark bofill (Comment #180752)

    They are on the same legal footing; second and thirteenth amendments.
    Misses point of my question, but whatever.
    _______

    mark, you may mean these two question mark-less questions:

    (1) **Say, is that all it takes, majority support.**

    (2) **Or is there something more to it than the will of the majority in your view Max.**

    My answers:

    (1) Yes, mark, on some issues all it takes is majority support. Although the 2nd amendment gives Americans the right to bear offensive arms, legislatures elected by majority have passed laws prohibiting civilians from owning rocket propelled grenades and a bunch of other offensive arms that could be used for mass murder of innocents. Courts uphold these laws through their interpretation of the intent of the amendment. I would imagine the judges believe the intent was not to guarantee individuals a right to the means of committing mass murder.

    If you believe these weapon laws that conflict with the 2nd amendment are a bad thing, please explain why? Real Question!

    (2) Yes, sometimes laws expressing the will of the majority are overturned by the courts on constitutional grounds. I'm sure courts would overturn a law legalizing slavery in Alabama ( your example).

    BTW, please call my attention to your questions by using question marks.

  266. Thanks Max.

    DeWitt, nope, not Roland. I'll let you know though how long it actually takes.

  267. Max,
    I'm on my cellphone. I'll answer you when I'm in front of a real keyboard tomorrow .

  268. mark bofill (Comment #180770)
    March 11th, 2020 at 6:02 pm
    I'm not sure how fast I can change clips. I'll check when I have time. My guess is about 1.5 seconds.
    It's not that difficult or time consuming. The clip limit isn't going to impact much of anything.
    ______

    Well, if it's easy to do that fast, there would seem to be no point in having a large magazine which just adds to bulk, reduces mobility, and makes firing from a prone position more difficult.

    But you probably mean under ideal conditions you think you could change a clip in 1.5 seconds. If you were under a lot pressure, a real life or death situation, you might pee in your pants, drop the clip, fall on your face, and wish you were someplace else.

    Most jams I've had occurred when inserting clips. That can cause a significant loss of time.

  269. I've realized I said 'change clip' and was actually thinking 'change magazines'. Sorry if this caused confusion.
    Max, I think response under pressure probably depends on practice / training.
    I've never had a gun jam, although I'm not someone who spends all that much time shooting.

  270. SteveF (Comment #180766)
    March 11th, 2020 at 5:26 pm
    OK_Max,
    “Currently legal large-capacity magazines, standard equipment on assault-type rifles, also are a threat to public safety because they make it easy to rapidly fire large numbers of rounds.”
    .
    **Ummm… no, those weapons are responsible for a tiny (*tiny!*) fraction of shootings.**
    _________

    Steve, the issue is the deadly potential. Not that you would, but suppose (just hypothetically) you wanted to shoot as many in a crowd, as you could possibly shoot from a safe distance and/or a concealed location. An assault-type weapon with a large capacity magazine would be an ideal choice of weapons.

    While an assault-type rifle with it's large capacity magazine is an ideal tool for a mass murderer , there are rifles just as good or better for hunting and recreational target shooting. But you do have to reload them more frequently, a disadvantage for the lazy.

  271. Second amendment isn't about hunting or recreational shooting. Not even about self defense.

  272. Mike M. (Comment #180755
    And by the way, that is NOT the position taken by O'Rourke and Biden. They want to send armed federal agents to people's homes to confiscate their AR-15s.
    ________

    Not what I saw. I saw choice of (1) buy back or (2) register.

  273. The SC has been very clear on how it interprets the 2nd amendment, it's not absolute, but it is pretty much written in stone that the right to own guns won't be touched without a new constitutional amendment. That's not a majority issue, it is a super-majority.
    .
    Concealed/carried semi-automatic handguns are where you need to look if you want effective gun laws. The best selling handguns have up to 15 round clips. I'm not sure how much extra damage one can get on rounds 16 to 30 but my understanding is that most murders are complete before the handgun clip has been emptied. An assault weapon may be the best tool for mass murder, but multiple concealed handguns in a public space wouldn't be far behind.
    .
    Immature emotional idiots with cheap/stolen handguns are the basis of most homicides. Men under 30 with handguns are the perpetrator and victims by a large margin. Gun control activists can't even typically get to this point of the discussion without broad brush deviating to the moral failings of their opponents, thus alienating potential supporters.
    .
    It's like environmentalism, the cause has merit, but I can't stand the sanctimonious people in charge.

  274. Tom Scharf,
    “.. but it is pretty much written in stone that the right to own guns won't be touched without a new constitutional amendment.”
    .
    I’m not so sure about that. Substitute two people like Ginsberg for Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and I suspect every restriction on ownership and use of guns would be acceptable to the SC. As Breyer has stated publicly, he thinks the way the Constitution is “interpreted” by the court has to change to match the political needs of the present. It is standard progressive dogma. For example: “If there are no active militias, then there is no right for an individual to own a gun.” That argument has been made many times. The only doubt is if the SC will accept that argument.

  275. mark bofill,
    "Second amendment isn't about hunting or recreational shooting. Not even about self defense."
    .
    Exactly. Those who want to limit (or eliminate!) ownership of guns start from the premise that the only legitimate reason for gun ownership is hunting or recreational shooting, while the fundamental reason the second amendment exists is the need for people to protect themselves from despotic government.

  276. Max, you said and asked:
    "Although the 2nd amendment gives Americans the right to bear offensive arms, legislatures elected by majority have passed laws prohibiting civilians from owning rocket propelled grenades and a bunch of other offensive arms that could be used for mass murder of innocents. Courts uphold these laws through their interpretation of the intent of the amendment. I would imagine the judges believe the intent was not to guarantee individuals a right to the means of committing mass murder.

    If you believe these weapon laws that conflict with the 2nd amendment are a bad thing, please explain why? Real Question!"
    —————-
    The second amendment was intended to empower people to resist a tyrannical Federal government (see Federalist 46) *explicitly*. Already, our Federal armed forces are so overwhelmingly powerful relative to the weapons available to citizenry that many people scoff at the notion that the people could ever resist our military at all. We are already weak relative to our professional standing military. We do not need further restrictions on guns, certainly not restrictions that will have no net positive effect anyway.
    .
    I'm not an anarchist. There can be (and *there is*) a reasonable degree of regulation and oversight. As you point out, I can't have a rocket launcher, or a hellfire missile, or a tank with a working gun turret. Without paying a fortune and jumping hoops I can't have a fully automatic weapon. Fine. This far, no farther.
    .
    It's not a wiffle ball world, and it's never going to be a wiffle ball world. People can make explosives readily at home. People drive vehicles capable of causing significant damage. People fly airplanes. People can access poisons. At the end of the day, if an intelligent, resourceful, determined individual really wants to murder a large number of people, he's going to be able to do it. Freedom is inherently dangerous.
    .
    Not a great stopping point, but I gotta go for now..

  277. Here is polifact on Beto and gun confiscation:
    https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/oct/21/beto-orourke/despite-his-claim-presidential-candidate-beto-orou/
    ….
    Here is the conclusion:
    "Our ruling
    O’Rourke said: "To be clear, I’m not talking about confiscating anybody’s guns."

    O’Rourke has said "yes" and "hell, yes" when asked about confiscating assault-style weapons. And his mandatory buyback proposes taking those weapons from people, even if it involves a purchase.

    We rate O’Rourke’s claim that he is "not talking about confiscating anybody’s guns" as False.

    "

  278. mark bofill,

    " Already, our Federal armed forces are so overwhelmingly powerful relative to the weapons available to citizenry that many people scoff at the notion that the people could ever resist our military at all. We are already weak relative to our professional standing military. We do not need further restrictions on guns, certainly not restrictions that will have no net positive effect anyway."

    And a large standing army was also thought to be dangerous to freedom in the Federalist Papers as well. That's why an armed citizenry was important. The problem is that now that we do have a large standing army, the need for an armed citizenry is actually more rather than less important.

    Chavez in Venezuela banned private gun ownership in 2012, supposedly to prevent crime. It didn't prevent crime at all. If anything, crime increased and it left the citizens vulnerable to Chavez's gangs of armed thugs. According to the New Yorker magazine, Venezuela had "by various measures, the world's highest violent-crime rate" in 2017, and almost none of crimes that are reported are prosecuted.

    If we want to actually do something about crime, then we should strongly support stop, question and frisk. We should also support increased sentences for criminals that use guns. Both of these, however, are anathema to the woke because there will be racial disparity.

  279. Relating to time to change magazines, I offer this for general consideration:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp7MsUkO3sE
    .
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b1tvcW-Gic
    .

    Here's mythbusters and Travis Tomasi (3:30ish in):
    https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/12/16/rapid-magazine-changes-with-travis-tomasie/
    .
    It looks like this to me — if one cares enough to practice changing magazines quickly and has a gun that facilitates rapid magazine changing, one can learn to be pretty quick about it.
    .
    If somebody is motivated enough to go on a murder spree and die for it (as they invariably do die in the end, most often by their own hand I think), I think it's reasonable to suppose that they might practice rapid magazine changes.

  281. I think it's a progressive dream to callously reinterpret the wording of the 2nd Amendment to suit their political preferences, but I doubt it will happen. They might just find out why that amendment exists if they proceeded with court packing and judicially overturning that amendment, ha ha.
    .
    Personally I don't think we need a 2nd amendment at this point (state by state regulations would be fine with me but I know others disagree), but I really don't like the view that the way to fix it is legal chicanery and clever lawyers. This kind of thing requires the will of the people, and it was designed that way. Follow the rules.

  282. OK_Max,
    “ Steve, the issue is the deadly potential.”
    .
    As Mark already noted, there are lots of ways for crazies to kill a lot of people. I could rent a good size U-Haul truck, drive to a crowded place and run over 50 people at 60 miles an hour. Shall we ban U-Haul trucks? Real question.
    .
    I am a chemist. I could easily make a good size bomb using commonly available materials and use it to kill lots of people. Shall we ban training in chemistry, or restrict the availability of any material a chemist might use for a bomb? Real question.
    .
    I would support honest efforts to restrict the availability of hand guns, because that really could reduce murders. Restricting long rifles because they clips and look scary? No, that is both controversial and pointless, because long rifles are very rarely used in murders. So long as the focus is on restricting scary looking rifles, gun control measures will not succeed in significantly reducing murders.

  283. off topic … but the thread has deviated a bit anyway… some things have been said that I have a definite opinion on so here goes.

    Rather than focusing on "Gun crime", why don't they (the folks that want to take my rights away) focus on stopping "violent crime"?

    The fact is, criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. So creating more laws will not stop them from breaking them. Meaning that laws limiting firearm posession will not have an affect on criminals but do limit the ability of non-criminals from defending themselves from criminals.

    Whenever I hear that somebody wants to take away my right to own and use firearms… I know that they are either one of the naive… or one of the those who wants to make sure that I can't defend myself or my family from the next thing they want to take because I also know that they won't deprive themselves from having firearms.

    It is that simple for me.

  284. I believe sentencing is more punitive for crimes committed with guns, and felons with guns are sent back to jail or get increased terms. This doesn't necessarily deter a 19 year old gang member who thinks he has been disrespected. Many people are murdered for really trivial reasons that a good fist fight used to settle. Beyond punishment the best thing you can do with young violent offenders for the rest of society is keep them in jail until they are at least 30. Young, drunk, stupid, and armed isn't a wonderful combination.
    .
    Any effective ban on handguns would need to be executed with a decades long buy back policy to significantly reduce the existing stockpile. It would need to be staged. No carry, home use only, restricted "privileged" licensing, GPS tags, limited firing rate, traceable ammunition, remote disable for stolen guns like phones, and a bunch of stuff people would hate. I'm talking what might be effective, not what would be popular. It's a very heavy lift, but if you wanted me on board you better be talking about something that might work.

  285. I very much agree with pauligon59 (Comment #180844).

    The problem with "gun crime" is not guns, it is criminals.

    What needs to be done is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and/or to keep violent criminals off the streets. Restricting the rights of law abiding citizens has no effect on that.

    The most important thing is to vigorously prosecute criminals caught with guns. When the cops catch someone using a gun to commit a crime or catch a felon with a gun, the offender should be locked up for a good long time. That both reduces the number of violent criminals on the streets and discourages them from carrying guns.

    An excellent adjunct to that is stop-question-frisk since it both discourages bad guys from carrying and gets the ones that do off the streets.

  286. mark bofill (Comment #180827)

    The second amendment was intended to empower people to resist a tyrannical Federal government (see Federalist 46) *explicitly*.
    ____________

    mark, the Federalist papers are essays, not laws.

    Let's examine the wording of the 2nd Amendment, as quoted below:

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    Since the amendment was written about 350 years ago, we should examine the meanings of words back at that time. Samuel Johnson’s 1755 classic A Dictionary Of The English Language gives us definitions of key words in the 2nd Amendment at the time this amendment was written.

    militia: The trainbands; the standing force of a nation

    regulated: to adjust by rule or method

    bear: Johnson says this word has many different meanings,
    but in our context here it means “carry”

    arms: weapons of offence, or armour of defence

    https://johnsonsdictionaryonline.com/regulate/

    Given the above definitions, I would argue that the authors of the 2nd Amendment thought of a militia as a free nation’s army well regulated by rule from an elected authority representing the wishes of the nation’s people. I believe the purpose of the amendment was to protect the elected government from being overthrow by an outside force or overthrown from within by a dissatisfied group.

  287. OK_Max,

    That may have been the definition of militia in England at the time. It wasn't the meaning in the colonies. There was no standing army subject to colonial authority. The militia in the North American English colonies was all able-bodied males over 18 years of age. The authors of the Constitution were also the authors of the Federalist Papers. So we know for a fact that the Johnson Dictionary definition did not apply.

  288. Mike M. (Comment #180846)
    March 12th, 2020 at 10:59 am
    I very much agree with pauligon59 (Comment #180844).

    The problem with "gun crime" is not guns, it is criminals.
    ___________

    Mostly a criminal problem, but some of both.

    Lots of bad people in the U.S.

    Lots of guns in the U.S.

    Lots of bad people + lots of guns = lots of murders

    Lots of bad people + few guns = fewer murders

  289. Max,
    .
    RE: "mark, the Federalist papers are essays, not laws."
    Indeed. The significance of the Federalist Papers is in determining the meaning of the terms used in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and in establishing the intent behind the language used.
    .
    RE: "Given the above definitions, I would argue that the authors of the 2nd Amendment thought of a militia as a free nation’s army well regulated by rule from an elected authority representing the wishes of the nation’s people. I believe the purpose of the amendment was to protect the elected government from being overthrow by an outside force or overthrown from within by a dissatisfied group."
    You can think that if you'd like. You'd be wrong though. Read Federalist 46 here:
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp
    It considers in plain language in the second to last paragraph the possibility of State militias fighting the Federal government. Madison even does the math about the personnel available to State militias vs the Federal government at the time. I repeat; a big part of the purpose of the second amendment is to empower people to oppose the possibly tyranny of the Federal government. This isn't actually speculation on my part; it's pretty obvious to anybody who spends an afternoon reading the writings of the various Federalists and Anti-Federalist. It's well known.

  290. Re DeWitt Payne (Comment #180853)

    No offense intended DeWitt, but I am reluctant to accept you as an authority on the meanings of English words in English Colonies in the late 18th Century. I'll stick with Johnson's old Dictionary.

  291. Re mark bofill (Comment #180855)

    mark, the Federalist Papers were written four years before the Constitution. Obviously, this means the Papers are not an interpretation of the Constitution, not a clarification of the meaning of a document that didn't exist until four years later.

  292. OK_Max (Comment #180852): "I believe the purpose of the amendment was to protect the elected government from being overthrow by an outside force or overthrown from within by a dissatisfied group."
    .
    That is a truly perverse interpretation that is contradicted by mountains of documentary evidence, the most accessible being the Federalist, as cited by mark.

    The most that can be extracted from the definitions used by Max is that perhaps the Second Amendment was to protect the right of *states* to oppose the federal government rather than the right of individuals to oppose the government. But there is a lot of evidence that it was meant to pertain to individuals as well. It hardly matters since, as DeWitt points out, the militia was all able-bodied males over 18 years of age.

  293. OK_Max (Comment #180858): "the Federalist Papers were written four years before the Constitution."
    .
    That is a stunningly ignorant statement. The Federalist Papers were written to convince the voters of New York that the Constitution should be ratified.

    They *were* written before the Bill of Rights was drafted. Nevertheless, the Federalist provides context for the Bill of Rights.
    ——-
    Edit: To be charitable, Max's statement was more likely careless than ignorant.

  294. Max,
    "Obviously, this means the Papers are not an interpretation of the Constitution, not a clarification of the meaning of a document that didn't exist until four years later."
    ———–
    Look, tell it to constitutional scholars, not me. Anybody who is serious about understanding the meaning of the Constitution looks at the Federalist Papers. When you want to know what a political thinker meant when he wrote something specific, you look at his other writings and the context of the times.
    The Anti-federalists worried that the Federal government would trample the States and individual liberty. Madison wrote #46 to persuade and assuage the concerns, and Madison introduced the Bill of Rights, including the second amendment, to appease those concerns.
    This is a silly thing to argue about. You don't have to accept this, but it's uncontroversial and widely accepted practice to look at the Federalist Papers and other writings of the time to understand what the authors of the Constitution meant.

  295. I mean, the federalist papers and anti-federalist papers are *specifically* part of a pseudo-anonymous public debate about what sort of government to setup, by the people of the time who set up the government. It's not rational to brush the information contained in those writings aside.

  296. This has, unfortunately, degenerated into the same argument that has been going on for decades: As far as I can tell, progressives will *NEVER* accept that the Second Amendment was written to ensure an individual right to own arms, and are absolutely committed to subverting that part of the Constitution by any means possible, with the specific goal of disarming the population. I have been told very clearly multiple times by many different gun owners that they will go down firing their assault weapons at Federal agents rather than give them up.
    .
    It is as intractable an argument as abortion, and like abortion, will never be settled except via the ballot box….. and by that I mean via who gets elected president and appoints SC justices, because no repeal of the 2nd amendment is going to be approved by the required super-majority of states, even in the unlikely event it passed congress by the required super-majorities.

  297. Mike,
    "The most that can be extracted from the definitions used by Max is that perhaps the Second Amendment was to protect the right of *states* to oppose the federal government rather than the right of individuals to oppose the government. But there is a lot of evidence that it was meant to pertain to individuals as well."
    —————–
    Lots of evidence, yup. Here's what the politicians of the time had to say about it:
    “The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788
    “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778
    “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
    “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
    …
    And so on and so forth. There's an abundance of evidence that the founders thought *the people* ought to be armed.

  299. mark bofill,
    "and so on and so forth. There's an abundance of evidence that the founders thought *the people* ought to be armed."
    .
    Of course. The history and the evidence is very clear, as Scalia (and others) on the SC explained multiple times in opinions protecting the Second Amendment. None of that matters to progressives. Like spoiled toddlers, they want what they want, no mater the irrationality of their want or fallacy of their arguments. Lets hope grandpa Joe does not win in November, and Beto ends up working at McDonnalds rather than at the White House.

  300. OK_Max,
    We were already spelling things differently from Johnson's dictionary at the time of the revolution– long before in fact.

  301. Re Mike M. (Comment #180860)

    In my haste to reply to mark’s comment about Federalist Paper 46 and the Second Amendment to the Constitution, I in error said the Constitution instead of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

    Nevertheless, what I said about timing is correct. The Second Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on December 15, 1791,
    almost four years after the forty-sixth of The Federalist Papers was published on January 29, 1788.

  303. mark bofill,
    "Here is a paper talking about the history of such references called '[The Federalist] in the Supreme Court".
    .
    Progressives will *NEVER* accept that the second amendment means exactly what it says; you are wasting your time trying to convince OK_Max.
    .
    If Madison came back from the dead to shout his exact meaning in their faces, it would make no difference: progressives *reject* the legitimacy of the Constitution as plainly written and understood…. just as do progressive jurists. The difference is that "progressive jurists" can subvert the Constitution, while average progressive knuckleheads can't. Progressives reject the Constitution because they see it as a limitation on "progress"… whatever form "progress" happens to have taken on a given day…. no matter, in the end "progress" means "you do exactly what I say".
    .
    Progressives will never accept that the Second Amendment means what it plainly says, that the electoral college is legitimate, nor that each state should have equal representation n the Senate.

  305. mark, I'm sure the SC Justices have been referring to the Federalist Papers, but I don't know about "relying" on them. I didn't see anything about Federalist Paper 46 in your link, but did see the following:

    "The authors of the series of anonymous newspaper articles afterwards known to fame as "The Federalist" had no intention of compiling a law book. They were addressing the people at large and their aim was to influence public opinion, not to formulate priiciples for the guidance of courts."

    Anyway, I believe the 2nd Amendment is a relic from a time when muskets and primitive artillery were state of the art weaponry. It obviously could not and does not consider (1) the power an individual with today's legal firearms has to kill large numbers of innocent civilians, (2) Americans who own guns for militia purposes do not represent the majority, and (3) the lack of power a militia group equipped with todays legal firearms would have to combat government armed forces equipped with superior weapons.

    We need a new or revised amendment that guarantees citizens the freedom to own firearms for protection and recreation, while also recognizing the need to protect the public from abuse of this freedom.

  307. Lucia, if you don't mind and if it is of interest to you, do you have any insights as to why Elizabeth Warren did so poorly? To me it seems as if she would draw much the same support as Hillary Clinton did and it is hard for me to understand her finishing 3rd in Massachusetts. I think me being male doesn't help, but maybe it is something else.

    …….
    In any event, if so inclined, I would be curious about your opinion.

  308. JD Ohio,
    No idea! I have a hard time. Her politics are so different from mine that it's hard for me to look at other factors for not favoring her. I never understood why people liked Hilary at all. But at least Hilary was (when it suited her) not a socialist. So… dunno.

  309. SteveF (Comment #180871)
    **Progressives will never accept that the Second Amendment means what it plainly says, that the electoral college is legitimate, nor that each state should have equal representation n the Senate.**
    _______

    SteveF, you sure are right about me on 2 and 3.

    You say the Second Amendment means what it plainly says, while mark alludes to justices studying Federalist Papers for its meaning.
    I don't know what to think. I just hope would could all agree the Second is not sacrosanct.

    I would agree the amendment clearly means individual citizens are guaranteed the right to carry muzzle-loading firearms, the only personal firearms they had at the time. But the courts have since ruled the guarantee does not apply to all types of firearms (e.g., fully-automatic rifles), which seems like a serious handicap for the militia described in the amendment.

    If Madison came back from the dead today and had time to see what the country is now like, do you think he would prefer to leave the Second Amendment untouched or revise it? And if the latter, how?
    Real Questions.

  310. mark bofill (Comment #180878)
    March 12th, 2020 at 8:42 pm
    Done with you Max. Steve's obviously correct. Ciao.
    _______

    Thank God! I'm tired of discussing that 2nd Amendment. It got in the way of me thinking about the new bear market. Down 27% in less than 3 weeks. May be time to buy. Or may be not.

    Steve has moments of correctness. He's a good guy.

  311. I re-balanced the portfolio today. Sold some bonds to buy some stocks. Should the market drop more and the bond allocation gets to be too big I will do it again. And I'm buying stocks every two weeks in my 401k.

  312. OK_Max,

    The USA exists because of the conditions and especially the limitations placed on the Federal government by the Constitution.
    Absent those conditions, the Union would never have formed. It is clear that many people (including you) are unhappy that the Constitution blocks simple majority rule, hence the endless complaints about how the president is elected, the composition of the Senate, and more. The Constitution has clear means for amendment, and until the last several decades, amendments were enacted according to those means. But over the last decade, progressives have become ever more insistent that Constitutional limitations on simple majority rule must be eliminated via subversion, not by amendment. IOW: Can’t win under the rules? Then change the rules.
    .
    I am not sure I can adequately describe how angry this makes me. It shows me that progressives are disconnected from history, but worse, willing to gain desired political ends in any way possible, not according to laws enacted within the Constitutional structure. In short, progressives reject the legitimacy of the constitution. It is why I reject every progressive politician, and always will.

  313. I would not say that Warren did all that poorly. Nationally, she did better than Klobuchar, Buttigieg, and Bloomberg. Not to mention Harris, Booker, Gabbard and about 20 others.

    I think that a major reason for why she did not do better is that she is such a transparent phony. That enabled her to keep the support of the plutocrats while spouting populist rhetoric, but it turns out that people are not all that bad at spotting a phony.

    A big part of Warren's rise was the "she has a plan for that" shtick. But when pressed, it turned out that she did not have a plan for how to pay for it all. Bernie doesn't either, but he does not pretend to have all the answers.

    Another factor was that she tried to get to the left of Bernie on identity politics. It didn't work. She was not going to win over many Bros no matter what she did. But the more it didn't work, the more she pandered and the more she lost any chance of gaining support from the less extreme members of the party.

  314. Mike M,
    I think Warren is smart enough to know pretty clearly that paying for her proposals would at least require doubling Federal tax rates… and knows that 80% marginal rates would never be accepted by most voters. It goes back to her being a phony.

  315. > the lack of power a militia group equipped with todays legal firearms would have to combat government armed forces equipped with superior weapons.

    The US military has trouble dealing with militias in other countries equipped with similar arms or less.

  316. Earle (Comment #180886)
    March 13th, 2020 at 12:23 am
    **I re-balanced the portfolio today. Sold some bonds to buy some stocks. Should the market drop more and the bond allocation gets to be too big I will do it again. And I'm buying stocks every two weeks in my 401k.**
    _________

    Earle, assuming you are not nearing retirement, your re-balancing seems prudent for the long-term. I have no idea where and when the bottom will occur, but 27% off seems like a bargain.

    Some retirees who depend on their 401k's for living expenses only re-balance during bull markets (only from stocks to bonds) and do nothing in bear markets, which seems overly conservative to me, but it's not my money.

  317. I am waiting, perhaps foolishly, for a further drop. The restaurants are empty.
    I think the panic will blow over in a month or two.

  318. MikeN (Comment #180896)

    **The US military has trouble dealing with militias in other countries equipped with similar arms or less.**

    True, but the Taliban etc do have fully-automatic rifles and rocket propelled grenades, weapons that are against the law for American civilians to posses.

    MikeN (Comment #180899)
    **I am waiting, perhaps foolishly, for a further drop. The restaurants are empty. I think the panic will blow over in a month or two.**

    My guess too. Might take a little longer than two months. Just hope it doesn't revive next fall or winter.

  319. I'm a "never time the market" guy, although my best guess is we are near the bottom right now. My best guess is worth exactly zero. This is going to take at least a year to recover.
    .
    The markets act like tweaking meth addicts who just found a pound of stash on the side of the road in times like this. There are foundational reasons why the markets should contract now, but most of them have been known for a while and were easily predictable. I lived through 1987 and 2008, I'll live through this one too. One thing is for sure, don't.get.out.at.the.bottom. A lot of people did this in 2008.

  320. OK_Max (Comment #180902): "True, but the Taliban etc do have fully-automatic rifles and rocket propelled grenades, weapons that are against the law for American civilians to posses."
    .
    And they are regarded as enemy combatants. American troops will not want to drop bombs on American cities or use tanks to flatten American homes.

    Yes, citizens taking up arms against the government would be a desperate option. But a desperate option is infinitely better than no option. And the very existence of that option forces the government to think twice. At least.

  321. Tom,

    Based on the experience in China, the stock market probably won't bottom until the number of new cases of infection peaks. I think we're, at best, a few weeks from that. Presuming you have some cash to invest, this may be a once in a lifetime buying opportunity. The caveat on timing is that we still have the unknown of a recession. If, for example, people get accustomed to eating at home and streaming Netflix, they may be slow to start going to dinner and a movie/play again.

  322. Movies at a theater are mostly on their way out anyway. The at home experience is pretty good, you can go to the bathroom, you can pick what you want to watch.
    .
    People will resume eating in restaurants.
    .
    Maybe dancing will come back. (Ok… nah. Or maybe yeah. People will still like dates.)

  323. I am sitting in an airport American Airlines lounge in Brazil, and was chatting with a couple of Brits about coronavirus. One of them said he feared Trump would soon stop Brits from traveling to the States because of “so many” cases in the UK. I told him that the last number I saw for cases in the UK was well under a thousand, so a travel ban seemed to me unlikely. He replied “I think we are approaching a thousand *deaths*”, and immediately checked on his cell phone to prove it. Actual UK cases, about 800, and a handful of deaths.
    .
    This guy is a manager at a well known international company. The point here is that this whole thing has gotten completely out of hand, with even educated and well informed people imagining risks which are three orders of magnitude too high. Panic is never rational, and panic never generates good decisions. People need to tank a deep breath and calm down.

  324. Prediction:

    "Things" (both psycological and medical) are going to be bad for about 2-3 more weeks. Then improve.
    .
    A WSJ article indicates the FDA approved a new tests by Roche. It can be done using machines that are already "out there". People including those with symptoms and the worried well are now going to be tested. The number of identified cases will soar. This will make people more nervous.
    .
    BUT lots of people will be cleared. This will allow more precise quarantine to be implemented. Even if there is a 5% false positive rate it will mean *those cleared* will not need to self quarantine.
    .
    Those with symptoms who get a positive (whether false pos or real) should quarantine. But the result will motivate many to do so.
    .
    A few people will self quarantine unnecessarily. But that beats the heck out of EVERYONE social distancing.
    .
    Caveat: This prediction is contingent on the new test really working, being as available as the WSJ article in plies… yada yada…. I am not betting money. 🙂

  325. Lucia,
    Sure, accurate tests which are more available will help calm many (a good time to buy Roche stock!). I think an even bigger development will be the results of controlled (placebo controlled) tests of the antivirals developed for SARS and MERS. If the results indicate reasonable effectiveness, then treatment with those drugs will cut the death rate for the elderly and infirm, and dramatically reduce the panic, at least in countries where those drugs can be made available.
    .
    as I arrived at the airport here, I saw a family of five, mom, dad, and three kids, suitcases in tow, all wearing masks. The kids ranged in age from about 12 to about 7. As far as I am aware, nobody in that age range has ever even had symptomatic illness from the coronavirus. But the kids looked terrified. People really need to understand who is at risk, who is not, but most of all, calm down.

  326. SteveF,
    I'm fine with the masks. They (even bad ones) mostly catch droplets from sneezes and coughs. So their wearing masks probably protects me more than them. If it makes them feel better…. fine.
    .
    I'm not going out dancing tonight. I am going out dancing tomorrow (unless the venue cancels.) This happens to mean I am NOT driving to "more infected" Cook county (aka Chicago) but AM driving to less infected (rural-ish, small townish) Kane.
    .
    Though… this might not be sane because the "cook county" venue is more blue collar and the Kane county will be more "white collar, travel for my job" venues. For this break out, I think the "white collar-travel for my job" tend to be the "spreaders". So… whatever.

    I'll mostly dance with Jim. I'll bring some hand wipes in case their faucets are less than wonderful (which many seem to be.)

  327. Mike M,
    “ And the very existence of that option forces the government to think twice.”
    .
    Yes, and those who discount the danger 30 million armed citizens present to a despotic government do not understand the dynamics, how accurately many of those folks can shoot, or how dedicated they would be. The righteous rarely fear death. Hired guns do. We old chemists would focus on bomb making. 😉
    .
    All joking aside, an armed citizenry can’t easily be dominated by a despotic government.

  328. Lucia,
    “ If it makes them feel better…. fine.”
    .
    Those three kids in masks did not appear to be feeling better.

  329. Mexico has 12 cases and miraculously Trump hasn't shutdown the border yet. I suppose he's waiting until they get to 20.
    .
    Any actual data will help calm the nerves of the toilet paper hoarders. This is clearly a demonstration of people don't understand statistics and probability, and the media sure isn't trying to teach them. For those of you wanting to watch the apocalypse in real time:
    https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
    .
    China 80,945/1.3B = 0.006% population infection rate.
    Italy 17,660/60.5M = 0.029% population infection rate.
    .
    3,066 deaths China / 5M deaths from other causes during the outbreak = 0.06% chance of death caused by the coronavirus.

    These infection numbers may be under-reported and will go up (multiply by 100 if you want), but nobody is making an effort to show what the relative risk is. Anyone who says "it aint so bad" gets shouted down. Take it seriously, but come on. As I said before this is all good practice for a future bad outbreak so nothing is lost here. The paranoia will limit/slow down the outbreak.

  330. SteveF,

    Agreed about the kids feelings. The masks weren't helpful to them. Still, as horrible of things that can happen to kids, that's not something I'm going to lose sleep over.

  331. Question: Why are stores running out of toilet paper?
    Answer: Because every time someone sneezes, a hundred people sh!t themselves.

  332. Lucia,
    I for one, will not be going dancing over the next several weeks. Nor would I have gone dancing had there been no coronavirus outbreak. 😉

  333. Are we just seeing a repeat of the early 1900’s flu pandemic? Seems to me so. The profile of fatality versus age indicates that older people (who have weaker immune systems and, more importantly, have never experienced this specific virus) dominate the fatalities. The next time a similar coronavirus makes its debut, there will be a population of people who saw the virus as a younger person, and so will already have substantial resistance, in spite of an aging and weaker immune system. Yes, the flu still kills many, but nothing like the pandemic of the early 1900’s. I think I have had the flu 10 or more times in my life. I still get a flu shot (which gives me terrible flu symptoms for 16 hours!) but I have experienced many ‘wild flu strains’ which doubtless gives me a big immunological head start on any newer versions of the flu.
    .
    So my guess is: the coronavirus will kill many of the very old and infirm, but spare most everyone else, leaving behind a heard immunity which makes the next coronavirus version less consequential. Of course, an effective vaccine is the best answer to the coronavirus, but it is not clear how long that development will take.

  334. SteveF,

    "Are we just seeing a repeat of the early 1900’s flu pandemic? Seems to me so. The profile of fatality versus age indicates that older people (who have weaker immune systems and, more importantly, have never experienced this specific virus) dominate the fatalities."

    The problem with that is that the 1918 flu killed lots of younger people. The mortality vs age curve was W, not U shaped with a big peak at age 30 years.

    "The curve of influenza deaths by age at death has historically, for at least 150 years, been U-shaped (Figure 2), exhibiting mortality peaks in the very young and the very old, with a comparatively low frequency of deaths at all ages in between. In contrast, age-specific death rates in the 1918 pandemic exhibited a distinct pattern that has not been documented before or since: a "W-shaped" curve, similar to the familiar U-shaped curve but with the addition of a third (middle) distinct peak of deaths in young adults ≈20–40 years of age. Influenza and pneumonia death rates for those 15–34 years of age in 1918–1919, for example, were >20 times higher than in previous years (35). Overall, nearly half of the influenza-related deaths in the 1918 pandemic were in young adults 20–40 years of age, a phenomenon unique to that pandemic year. The 1918 pandemic is also unique among influenza pandemics in that absolute risk of influenza death was higher in those 65; persons 99% of all excess influenza-related deaths in 1918–1919. In comparison, the

  336. Too many less than and greater than symbols is likely the reason for the failure to copy.

    the (less than ) 65-year age group accounted for 36% of all excess influenza-related deaths in the 1957 H2N2 pandemic and 48% in the 1968 H3N2 pandemic (33)."

    More Americans died from the Spanish flu than were killed in all the wars of the twentieth century.

  337. SteveF (Comment #180889)

    **It is clear that many people (including you) are unhappy that the Constitution blocks simple majority rule, hence the endless complaints about how the president is elected, the composition of the Senate, and more. The Constitution has clear means for amendment, and until the last several decades, amendments were enacted according to those means.**
    ________

    Tax me commensurate with the power of my vote, and I'll stop complaining. Taxation with under representation is just about as bad as taxation without representation. It's the kind of inequality, the kind of unfair treatment, that led to the American Revolution.

    I'm starting to picture myself as an American revolutionary who wants fair treatment and you as a King George loyalist defending inequality.

    BTW, I didn't know the Senate composition (two senators for each state) could be changed by an amendment. Were you suggesting otherwise?

  338. The hermit kingdom of Alabama has finally succumbed to COVID-19. Actually the running joke (which is probably true) is that we've had just as many cases as everybody else, just that nobody had been tested and thus officially recognized.
    —————-
    "Tax me commensurate with the power of my vote, and I'll stop complaining."
    .
    That sounds like a promising idea. People who don't actually pay Federal tax maybe shouldn't be able to vote people into power to pick my pocket for them.
    .
    "I'm starting to picture myself as an American revolutionary who wants fair treatment and you as a King George loyalist defending inequality."
    .
    Outstanding! Keep thinking like that and maybe we'll go to an NRA meeting together someday. You're on the right track buddy.

  339. SteveF (Comment #180916)
    "All joking aside, an armed citizenry can’t easily be dominated by a despotic government."
    ______

    True, not dominated as easily as an unarmed citizenry, but still can be dominated, and some armed citizenry can even be a despotic government's ally.

    I've owned many firearms, but never did I buy one for the purpose of opposing a despotic government, nor do I know any gun owners who have. Most bought rifles and shot guns for hunting, some bought handguns for self-defense, or at least gave that impression. I suppose some could have been less than truthful for fear of being regarded as crackpots.

    I someone told me he bought a firearm because he feared the government was going to be despotic, I would would avoid him like avoiding a plague.

    If America ever did have a despotic government, armed citizens could be the ones helping it come to power rather than those opposing it. The communist dictatorships of the last century came to power through citizen uprisings.

  340. "Tax me commensurate with the power of my vote, and I'll stop complaining."
    .
    **That sounds like a promising idea. People who don't actually pay Federal tax maybe shouldn't be able to vote people into power to pick my pocket for them.**

    Well, you got me there, mark. Obviously, I didn't think that one through.

    **Outstanding! Keep thinking like that and maybe we'll go to an NRA meeting together someday. You're on the right track buddy.**

    Are you kidding! I'd rather kiss a pig's butt than be seen at an NRA meeting. Do they serve refreshments?

  342. We have enough acute care hospital beds for 0.25% of the populace. Globally critical cases, those that need those beds, are 6% of active cases. Lower by a third to account for uncounted mild cases or 2% . With those numbers the hospital system is saturated by covid19 alone at 12.5% of the population infected. Unfortunately our system is pretty efficient. In my city the acute care beds have a 62% occupancy rate. Those patients are not as likely to be there for elective procedures so figure on half those beds at least being unavailable. That puts the saturation point at under 7% population infected. The only way this doesn't get ugly is if the active case rate is a couple of order of magnitudes too high, we can slow the spread dramatically to keep the active cases under 7% of population, or both. Once the system is saturated you not only lose a significant portion of the critical covid19 cases but other critical accident and illness cases that would have otherwise survived. This math works at a regional level. Spare beds in Ohio do no good for those needed in California. Italy and Hubai's systems were swamped at a much lower infection rates. It'd be interesting to do the math limited to the outbreak regions to see why.

  343. "I someone told me he bought a firearm because he feared the government was going to be despotic, I would would avoid him like avoiding a plague."
    —————-
    You know, the Holocaust *was* real. The government of Germany murdered several million people without a fight, because the only people who had guns in Germany were Hitler's supporters. How do you feel about that Max?
    I'd think a progressive lover of freedom and human rights like yourself would have some problem with it, and maybe a little less contempt for the people who'd fight and die to prevent such things from happening again.
    I know maybe a dozen guys like that. Work, extended family. Mostly ex-military. A Navy guy, two Army people, several Marines.
    I'm proud of them, actually.
    [Edit: Oh. I blush to admit I'm not an NRA member. Although now that my attention has been drawn to it I'll see if I can't find the time to correct that.]

  344. You don't need to wear a wig mullet. If you'd prefer to kiss a pig's butt, the pig won't care if you're from Alabama or not.

  345. Andrew P (Comment #180939): "With those numbers the hospital system is saturated by covid19 alone at 12.5% of the population infected."
    .
    I would hope that such calculations are keeping public health officials and hospital administrators up at night. But they should not be keeping us up at night. Two big problems with Andrew's calculation is that that the 12.5% number is the percentage of the population experiencing significant infection at the same time. Actual cases will be spread out, there will be many asymptomatic cases, and many people won't catch the Wuhan virus. But, as Andrew points out, the 12.5% number also depends on assumptions that go in the other direction.
    .
    The real issue does not seem to be hospital beds, it is ICU beds. Lombardy has had 10K cases of Wuhan virus out of a population of 10M. They have 660 ICU beds, 6.6 per 100K. The U.S. has 20 per 100K.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/09/italian-hospitals-short-beds-coronavirus-death-toll-jumps
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3840149/

    Lombardy has had half of Italy's cases. The epidemic in Lombardy may have passed its peak, or maybe the recent dip is just fluctuation. It looks like it may be flattening out in Italy as a whole.

  346. let's see if HTML is working again.

    test

    nope. But it does eat less than and greater than symbols with no space between the symbol and the letter character. It just doesn't do the command.

  347. Time to recovery, 1-4 weeks?, is going to persist the infection rate a bit. Not expecting accuracy just trying to get a feel for how flat we need to keep the curve. Italy pretty much shut everything down to stop their outbreak. Pretty sure someone's done the math for Ohio's governor. As of Wednesday everything with over 100 people is closed except churches and "free speech" evemts. . We have 13 confirmed cases. The head of Ohio health did say we might have 100k already exposed which puts us at 1%.
    The added factor is ICU staffing is pretty specialized and when they fall hard to replace. Italy was keeping staff who tested positive but capable working on the covid wards.

  348. Andrew P (Comment #180945): "We have 13 confirmed cases. The head of Ohio health did say we might have 100k already exposed which puts us at 1%."
    .
    The head of Ohio health would seem to be an irresponsible fool.

    Either that or over 99.9% of cases are asymptomatic or produce no significant illness.

  349. It's not like there is no data here, China's outbreak is almost over and they started knowing almost nothing about this disease. Their infection rates are very small relatively. Quoting these huge infection rate numbers out of thin air like nothing would be done, when things are being done, and have been done elsewhere, is just as irresponsible as claiming it is a hoax. The messaging from the government is all over the place, as can be expected when there is no real central health authority. The least useful information is quoting "up to …" numbers without any context, climate propaganda does this constantly.
    .
    We do basically nothing about the flu every year and somehow 70% of the populace isn't infected.
    .
    Easy access to testing should help clear things up. If ~20% of people show significant to severe symptoms within 2 weeks than we don't have millions of zombie carriers out there.

  350. mark bofill (Comment #180941)
    "You know, the Holocaust *was* real. The government of Germany murdered several million people without a fight, because the only people who had guns in Germany were Hitler's supporters. How do you feel about that Max?"
    _____________

    I feel you are not big on German history.

    In 1933, Jews represented less than 1% (0.75) of Germany’s total population. Given that small number, the notion an armed German Jewish population could have stopped the Nazis seems preposterous.

    Now let’s look at some history of gun ownership in Germany.

    Owning guns was not illegal in Germany until the nation was defeated in WWI. In 1919 to comply with the Versailles Treaty the German government or Weimar Republic passed a law requiring all guns and ammunition to be surrendered. Despite the law many Germans refused to surrender their guns, weapons they had acquired before or during WWI.

    In 1928 the German government passed a law loosening requirements for gun ownership, but requiring licensing for gun owners and registration of the guns.This law made acquire guns easier for the German people, including members of the growing Nazi movement.

    In 1933 the Nazi Party came into power. They rose to power because they had popular support, not because they had guns. Once in charge of the government ,the Nazis used the licensing and registration records from the 1928 law to confiscate guns from Jews, Communist, and other opposition.

    In 1938 the Nazi government passed a law largely deregulating gun ownership except for anyone considered an enemy of the Party. A separate law expressly forbid Jews to have guns.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control_in_Germany#History_of_firearms_restrictions_in_Germany

    https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/germany-jewish-population-in-1933

    Of course Holocaust victims included not only Germany's Jews,
    but the Jews of other European countries and parts of Russia.
    Gun control in those countries is a separate subject.

  351. Max,
    1) Did the Nazis exterminate millions of people or did they not?
    2) Did those people have the means to resist (access to firearms)?
    If all you want to do is speak to obfuscate the issue, don't waste my time.

  352. Max,
    Your response is a long list of refuting things I haven't claimed:
    ——
    1) "Owning guns was not illegal in Germany until the nation was defeated in WWI."
    Point to where I said it was.
    2) "They rose to power because they had popular support, not because they had guns."
    I claimed otherwise where exactly?
    …………
    The idea that small insurgent forces can defeat a larger well organized military is far from preposterous, although it is almost besides the point. It is certainly possible that they could have slowed the slaughter down, even if they could not ultimately prevail. Who knows how many might have lived. Hitler's rule didn't last.

  353. A couple more details. I didn't say this:
    "the notion an armed German Jewish population could have stopped the Nazis seems preposterous."
    ——-
    Unless by 'stopped the Nazis' you mean 'resisted being slaughtered', which may or may not be the same thing.
    .
    You know, the really amazing thing is that you think the prewar Jewish population of Germany has anything to do with anything. There were perhaps half a million Jews in Germany before the war. The Nazis killed something like six million jews, mostly Russian and Polish. Polish gun laws were restrictive in the first place and firearms forbidden civilians on pain of death during the Nazi occupation. The Soviet Jews were already disarmed by Stalin starting in 1924.
    So no. "Gun control in those countries is a separate subject." is wrong. Disarmed civilians got slaughtered. If they had guns they could have fought. They at least could have imposed a cost in lives of those slaughtering them and disrupted and slowed the smooth flow of the execution machine.

  354. Oh, I see. I said "because the only people who had guns in Germany were Hitler's supporters." I should have said "the only people who had guns in Germany *or in the places occupied by Germany*." I'd have thought what I meant was obvious, but apparently not.

  355. mark bofill (Comment #180953)
    **The Nazis killed something like six million jews, mostly Russian and Polish.**
    ___________

    mark, I don't know whether fewer or more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed, nor do you, nor does anyone else.

  357. OK_Max,
    “ Tax me commensurate with the power of my vote, and I'll stop complaining. Taxation with under representation is just about as bad as taxation without representation.”
    .
    I don’t know where you live (I imagined Oklahoma, but could be mistaken). In any case, I live in Florida. We have between 16 and 17 million residents, or about 5% of the national population. By your rather strange logic, Florida should have 5 Senators, not two, or at least get some kind of tax relief because of the terrible ‘underrepresentation’ we Floridians suffer. This grave injustice doesn’t bother me at all. In fact, I never heard any Floridian complain about inadequate representation in the Senate.
    .
    The structure of our Federal government is set by the Constitution.
    If you disagree with the Constitution, then it provides the means by which to amend it, and I suggest you try. Good luck.
    .
    By the way, King George and the British Parliament never offered the colonists representation in Parliament; if they had, there may never have been a Revolutionary War.

  358. OK_Max
    **mark, I don't know whether fewer or more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed, nor do you, nor does anyone else.**
    .
    I do know if I were situated as the Jews were during WWII I would have preferred to have guns and died fighting. It's better than being unarmed and having little choice but to get on a train…. and then latter unarmed and in a camp… and later dead.
    .
    Maybe I guns wouldn't allow me to beat Nazis. But it would still be better.

  359. OK_Max,
    “ mark, I don't know whether fewer or more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed, nor do you, nor does anyone else.”
    .
    Unbelievable. You are allowing your policy preferences to interfere with logical thought.

  360. Steve,
    I know. I was too irritated by the response to do anything but thank Max and shut my mouth. When will I learn…

  361. lucia (Comment #180959)
    March 14th, 2020 at 6:04 pm
    OK_Max
    **mark, I don't know whether fewer or more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed, nor do you, nor does anyone else.**
    .
    **I do know if I were situated as the Jews were during WWII I would have preferred to have guns and died fighting. It's better than being unarmed and having little choice but to get on a train…. and then latter unarmed and in a camp… and later dead.**
    ___________

    lucia, I suspect you would have preferred to just leave the country. More than two-thirds of German Jews left Germany during the !933-1941 period.

    “In January 1933 there were some 523,000 Jews in Germany, representing less than 1 percent of the country's total population.”

    “Until October 1941, German policy officially encouraged Jewish emigration. Gradually, however, the Nazis sought to deprive Jews fleeing Germany of their property by levying an increasingly heavy emigration tax and by restricting the amount of money that could be transferred abroad from German banks.”

     By Octobr 1941, when Jewish emigration was officially forbidden, the number of Jews in Germany had declined to 163,000. The vast majority of those Jews still in Germany were murdered in Nazi camps and ghettos during the Holocaust.

    https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/german-jewish-refugees-1933-1939

  362. OK_Max
    ** I suspect you would have preferred to just leave the country. More than two-thirds of German Jews left Germany during the !933-1941 period. **
    Perhaps. But I don't see how that is relevant to preferring to own a gun rather than being forbidden.

    ** By Octobr 1941, when Jewish emigration was officially forbidden,**
    Yep. They couldn't leave. And didn't have guns. Perfect.
    .
    I think you think you are making an argument agaisnt letting them have guns. You are failing.

  363. SteveF (Comment #180960)
    March 14th, 2020 at 6:18 pm
    OK_Max,
    “ mark, I don't know whether fewer or more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed, nor do you, nor does anyone else.”
    .
    Unbelievable. You are allowing your policy preferences to interfere with logical thought.
    ______

    Supposing is not knowing. I know what I do not know. If, however, you would like to present a scenario, I will be glad to critique it.

  364. Max,
    I'm going to try to wrap this up out of consideration for other readers here. I think it's plain that you're either *acting* like a naive child or maybe perhaps you really *are* a naive child cognitively. Doesn't much matter, makes for poor quality discussion.
    The Nazis were trying to exterminate the Jews, as quickly and efficiently as possible. The extermination camps are evidence of this. The Nazis exhibited no restraint that I know of. If the people they were trying to eradicate fought back with firearms, I don't see how this possibly could have made their outcome worse. Nobody wants to be shot, people do not want to die, and I don't see how this fear of death at the hands of armed Jews could possibly have had any effect other than impeding and retarding the personnel rounding them up, if for no other reason than the caution involved with self preservation when facing opposition that might be armed. I would invite you to offer some plausible scenario to justify your claim that it's possible more Jews could have been killed had they been armed, but frankly you've demonstrated little beyond a willingness to spout inanities in this discussion as far as I am concerned, and I am no longer interested. Out of consideration for the rest of the Blackboard then, I will try to refrain from addressing this topic further, and I will try to refrain from engaging in [further] discussion with you.

  365. lucia (Comment #180963)

    **I think you think you are making an argument agaisnt letting them have guns. You are failing.**
    _______

    Not my argument. My argument: pick only battles you can win.

    “He whom the ancients called an expert in battle gained victory where victory was easily gained. Thus the battle of the expert is never an exceptional victory, nor does it win him reputation for wisdom or credit for courage. His victories in battle are unerring. Unerring means that he acts where victory is certain, and conquers an enemy that has already lost.”

    THE ART OF WAR, SUN-TZU, FOURTH CENTURY B.C.

  366. OK_Max
    **Not my argument. My argument: pick only battles you can win.**
    .
    Better argument: Prepare yourself so that you can win battles you need to fight.
    .
    I doubt Sun-Tzu advised giving up all your weapons so that you are ill prepared for battle and then deciding to be conquered because weaponless-you have no ability to fight. But if you can find a quote where he advises you disarm your army, point to it.
    .

  367. https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

    Good discussion on the numbers. There's a significant gap between the known cases at a time and the actual infected due to the delay between first symptoms and when the patients start to go serious. Hubai went into total lock down very early by the known numbers with most of China not far behind. This pushed their R0 under 2 and 12 days later their daily case rate peaked. 5 day average delay between infection and first symptoms and roughly 17 days to your first fatalities. 100k might be extreme for Ohio but it was mentioned as the upper bound. We only started testing last week. As of this morning we had 26 confirmed.(13 yesterday) most of them identified from travel though a few cases sources have not been identified. We know there's an under count. We can safely assume we have 1000s we don't know about from the experience of the countries further along with this outbreak.

  368. mark bofill (Comment #180965)
    I will try to refrain from addressing this topic further, and I will try to refrain from engaging in discussion with you.
    _________

    No need to, since you don't seem to understand, read through, or recall much of what I say anyway.

    Case in point:

    **OK_Max (Comment #180956) mark, I don't know whether fewer or more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed, nor do you, nor does anyone else.**

    What follows I took to be in reference to my statement above.

    mark bofill (Comment #180965) **I would invite you to offer some plausible scenario to justify your claim that it's possible more Jews could have been killed had they been armed,……**

    I didn't intend my referenced statement to be interpreted as claims, but if you believed I was making claims, you in fairness should also invite me offer a scenario to justify my claim that it's possible fewer Jews would have been killed had they been armed.

    If my "I don't know" was confusing, perhaps my answers to the following two questions will help clarify my meaning.

    Do you know is fewer Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed? NO

    Do you know if more Jews would have been killed had Jews been armed? NO

    I hope my answer to those two questions will help you understand what I meant.

    But you asked for a scenario. I'll do better and give you two.

    1. Rather than flee Europe, the Jewish population that did leave, instead acquired weapons through every available means, and prepared to stand their ground against a far larger and better equipped Nazi force that also had much popular support. Unfortunately, these brave Jews were slaughtered, thus adding to the total number of Jews killed by the Nazis.

    2. Fed up with anti-semitism the Jews of Europe armed themselves well for protection years before the Nazi came to power, doing it discretely so as to not arouse suspicion and fuel further anti-semitism. Ready when the time came, they so fiercely resisted the Nazis that Hitler to save military resources scrapped his Jewish policy, resulting in countless Jewish lives saved.

    PLEASE do not regard either of these scenarios as my claims of what would have actually happened.

  369. Biden Sanders debate tonight. I may try to watch this one to try to get a feel for Joe's acuity (or lack), although I don't know how much angry communist rhetoric I can withstand from comrade Sanders.

  370. mark bofill,
    I can’t stomach the thought of watching a raging Bolshevik and an early stage Alzheimer's victim spouting pure rubbish and alarmingly confused non-sense. I will wait for the inevitable videos of Joe’s very confused statements.
    .
    I really am surprised that Dems continue to support him; his mental decline is both obvious and substantial. Look to see who Joe picks as his VP candidate, because based on his obvious mental decline, that person will likely take over for Joe in a year or so if he wins in November.
    .
    See the video in this piece by Greenwald: https://theintercept.com/2020/03/09/it-was-democrats-and-their-media-allies-who-impugned-bidens-cognitive-fitness-yet-now-feign-outrage/

  372. The absolute incompetence of this administration has effectively condemned a large number of people, mostly similar to readers of this blog including myself, to premature death.

    Our failure to embrace the WHO testing regime meant that the virus was allowed to spread uncontrolled for weeks. Because it spread at an exponential rate it is now a nationwide phenomenon.

    Because of the administration's persistent attempts to minimize the scope of the situation, the general population did not adopt even minimal prophylactic measures.

    Serious and sober scientists now speculate on as many as 50 or even 100 million cases in this country. Because it is 10 times as deadly as the flu (1% mortality for Covid 19 vs. 0.1% for the flu), we may see as many as 1 million fewer blog commenters within a couple of months. I personally would consider it a great loss, especially if i'm one of them.

    But Trump's 'numbers looked good.'

  373. Thomas Fuller (Comment #180973): "The absolute incompetence of this administration has effectively condemned a large number of people, mostly similar to readers of this blog including myself, to premature death."
    .
    That is false in every way.

    So far as I know, there is only one response to the Wuhan epidemic where Trump went against consensus expert opinion. That was in imposing travel restrictions from China before most of the experts were ready to back that. In doing so, Trump saved us from much of what is happening in Europe.

    The testing failure is indeed shameful. That is on the experts at the CDC who are career civil servants. You can not blame Trump for that.

    Trump has never minimized this. He has always recognized the potential severity, but has refused to run around with his hair on fire. However, the biased media have done their best to depict Trump as not taking this seriously.

    The predictions of 50-100 million cases are not coming from "serious and sober scientists". They are coming from publicity seeking, and possibly politically motivated, alarmists.

    There will not be a million deaths in the U.S. There will not be 100K, or 10K. There might be 1000 or more, but I don't think that is likely. I am guessing at a few hundred.

    The number of deaths in the U.S. has been rising at a rate consistent with the reported doubling time of six days. Deaths lag infection by perhaps 3-4 weeks. The rate of infection probably started to fall last week, first due to individuals taking precautions, then as restrictions on large gatherings were imposed. So cumulative deaths should start to level off in 2-3 weeks. That would imply about a factor of ten more than there are now (60?). But that is probably an overestimate since a lot of the deaths to date have been in clusters, so they are not independent.

  374. It seems the highly infectious Trump Derangement Syndrome hasn't dissipated for some, but instead gotten even worse.
    .
    Response to a viral outbreak isn't about the current person in oval office, it is about the CDC and other health organizations whose job it is and has been to prepare for just such an event. Astoundingly China and Europe are having their problems even without Trump there to intentionally thwart any lifesaving measures. It is quite ironic that some of the defenders and supporters of "big government for all" are so quick to blame anyone but the government bureaucracy for an imperfect response to an unprecedented event. If the response is eventually botched, the refrain will predictably change to "we just needed more big government".
    .
    It is going to be messy, even if Saint Obama or Queen Clinton was in charge today. Team Science speculates!!!! Perhaps their worst dreams and models will prove to be true, but I suspect this will be yet another case of scare mongering and another eventual notch down in the credibility meter for the very serious people at Team Science.

  375. That's basically crap. Trump minimized the threat in numerous public statements. He dismantled the pandemic group at NSC. He's an idiot and we are all going to pay the price.

  376. CDC Flu:
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm
    .
    Estimates 40M in US will get the flu (~9% of the population), and 40K will die this year. If the coronavirus is 10x more lethal then all things being equal 400K will die from coronavirus. Things aren't equal, the flu is more easily spread before symptoms occur (conflicting information here), and no containment / mitigation measures are generally taken for the flu. Exactly what that does to the numbers is very unclear and hard to predict. Apparently flu cases are down 60% in Japan this year, likely due to coronavirus containment.

  377. Might turn out that way. Might be a lot worse. We had three months to get prepared. We didn't.

  378. When I really want to know how things might go in a crisis, I turn to the expert, the one with the Nobel Prize, for guidance on how we will fare in troubled times.

    Paul Krugman is the one who has been so right about Trump for so long. When Paul Krugman speaks I know it will soon come to pass.

    Amirite?

  379. Jews in Warsaw fought back with smuggled guns, and forced Germans to delay shipping them to camps for three months. Germans eventually took about a hundred casualties, 20 dead, when they moved in and had to burn the ghetto down block by block. There were some survivors who got out by tunnel, alive in the 2000s.

  380. Thomas Fuller, in this alleged three months delay, CDC notified clinics to be on the lookout in January, gave travel warnings to Wuhan and later China. Travel from China was banned.

    CDC and FDA insistence on following regulations from 1938 was a major problem.
    My suspicion is that the expanded testing will drastically lower the current mortality rate of the disease, and the 'millions dead' can be thrown out.

  381. Prepared how? Close the borders before any active cases? Total lockdown in Jan? Certainly preparation for testing could have been better. There was nobody in the media screaming for lock downs, I know, I read it every day. The biggest nanny state in the US (NYC) hasn't even closed their schools yet and the epic public transportation system there is a huge problem.
    .
    There are millions of vectors in/out of the US with the global economy. There are things beyond the control of government such as viral diseases. Once it broke out of China and into Europe this was inevitable because we can't control those areas and they failed to contain it and the US was basically surrounded. I doubt containment was very viable anyway. * We * can't stop the flu, and we only prepare for the flu by giving out partially effective flu shots. * We * tolerate this because we don't have a choice. The failure of thinking here is that there are mystical levers of power that only needed to be thrown to prevent all forms of suffering.
    .
    It is very typical that government botches things that are unprecedented (nobody thought to stockpile masks?). What I expect is that mistakes will be made, lessons will be learned, and the next outbreak will be handled in a more coordinated way, although this doesn't mean new viral diseases can be stopped.

  382. Thomas Fuller,

    "Serious and sober scientists…."

    I want some of what they're smoking.

    Also, when you make an assertion like that, you need to cite a source that the rest of us can go to and evaluate.

    If you want incompetence, the Chinese government was in denial that an epidemic even existed for at least a month. Then there's Italy, a classic example of the failings of a nearly purely government run health care system. The UK NHS has been overwhelmed just by the regular flu season the last several years. How they deal with COVID-19 will be interesting to watch.

    "The winter flu season has plunged Britain's government-run National Health Service into a full-blown crisis. Medical professionals are struggling to cope with an influx of patients. One doctor described his workplace as "an absolute war zone" and the "worst hospital conditions in my memory."

    This is hardly the first time that flu season — an utterly predictable event — has pushed the 70-year-old NHS to the brink of collapse. The chronic failures of Britain's state-run system should disabuse Americans of the notion that more government control is the answer to our healthcare problems."

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2019/01/22/the-nhss-winter-crisis-is-a-red-flag-for-americans-enticed-by-single-payer/#2c1073c3798b

  383. Thomas Fuller proves one thing: there is no cure for TDS.
    .
    Don’t worry Thomas, we and you will be alive after the corona virus is no longer seeming the end of the world, and will be commenting on blogs. Sorry, but Trump may well still be president when the corona virus is no longer a subject of discussion every day. At least you won’t need to contract another case of TDS…. you can just continue the one you have.
    .
    Funny reality: In Brazil, where I was until Saturday morning, the expression for giving someone a ride in your car is “dando uma corona”. The current situation at least increases the humor level a little.

  384. DeWitt,
    But government run health care is so much more ‘fair’ than any private system! Besides, we know from experience with the VA hospital system how effective the US government is with health care.

  385. "While Trump last week allowed hospitals and labs to start developing their own coronavirus tests, wrongly blaming Obama administration regulations for a delay, the same move could have been made weeks ago had the president and his advisers felt it was necessary, said two officials." Those two officials work for Trump.

    Trump said the number of cases "within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero. That's a pretty good job we've done."
    "We're going very substantially down, not up," Trump added.

    Idiot.

  386. Thomas Fuller,
    .
    It's possible that you're correct, and that Trump made a mistake.
    .
    See, the interesting thing is, when you *never* give Trump credit for anything and *always* pan the guy, you discredit yourself on the subject of Trump and nobody takes your arguments seriously anymore. It's the same-ol-same-ol.
    .
    Now, *I'm* perfectly OK with you doing that. It suits me to the nines for people to be able to casually ignore you when you complain about Trump. I'm pointing this out to you in a rare moment of charity. You might think about it.

  387. Because of Trump's travel ban on Europe, all Americans there came home at the same time. But they were limited to landing in 13 airports. And they had to be screened for symptoms and exposures. The screening only took 60 second per traveler.

    But there were hundreds of them crowded together. For hours.

    Because there weren't enough CBP staff to do the screening.

    Because Trump had sent hundreds of them to the Mexican border to protect us from brown people.

  388. I love it when Republicans tell Democrats how we are hurting ourselves. I see it on cable TV all the time. It's funny when they do it. It's funny when you do it too, Mark.

    Happy Sunday.

  389. LOL. Well, that's fine Thomas. Happy Sunday to you as well. Let us know if you ever get treated for Trump Derangement Syndrome.

  390. Thomas Fuller (Comment #180979): "We had three months to get prepared. We didn't."
    .
    What exactly did Trump fail to do that the experts said he should do?

    I am not saying that the U.S. government response has been what it should be. It failed in at least one major respect: the testing fiasco. But so far as I can tell, any failures have been on the experts, not Trump.

  391. Strangely I stood in airport security lines for hours months after 9/11. Little did I know that this was Trump's fault as well due to a time/space TDS paradox. But the world was saved when the government took over airport screening so in the future an event such as travel screening for a viral outbreak would be handled efficiently by the new government security apparatus, or not.
    .
    The government is not good at this preemptive stuff. They started scanning shoes only after a shoe bomber. They are reactive in nature. If you doubled the CDC's budget they probably still wouldn't stockpile masks. They would pay their people more and expand their bureaucracy. You can bet their budget priorities will be different next year.

  392. Thomas Fuller (Comment #180987): "Trump said the number of cases "within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero. That's a pretty good job we've done."
    "We're going very substantially down, not up," Trump added."
    .
    I found that a little hard to believe, so I looked it up. Here it is:
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-conference/

    Trump did say: "when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done".
    But when you look at it in context, he does not seem to be saying there would be no more new cases. He was probably saying the 15 would all soon be recovered.

    "Of the 15 people … 8 of them have returned to their homes, to stay in their homes until fully recovered. One is in the hospital and five have fully recovered. And one is, we think, in pretty good shape and it’s in between hospital and going home".

    "whether it’s going to be a breakout of larger proportions or whether or not we’re — you know, we’re at that very low level, and we want to keep it that way."

    "Well, I don’t think it’s inevitable. It probably will. It possibly will. It could be at a very small level or it could be at a larger level."

    "We do have plans of a much — on a much larger scale, should we need that. We’re working with states, we’re working with virtually every state. And we do have plans on a larger scale if we need it. We don’t think we’re going to need it, but, you know, you always have to be prepared."

    "I think schools should be preparing and, you know, get ready just in case."

    "I think that there’s a chance that it could get worse. There’s a chance it could get fairly substantially worse. But nothing is inevitable."

    ———
    I agree that Trump's fractured syntax and puffery are far from ideal in a situation like this. But a much bigger problem is the selective quoting by a biased press.

  393. Tom Scharf, I missed a flight because they decided to a hand inspection of every suitcase, with just one person doing it.

  394. >Because Trump had sent hundreds of them to the Mexican border to protect us from brown people.

    And from Chinese trying to cross illegally. Ninth Circuit judges ruled in February that Remain in Mexico and MPP should be thrown out, which would have forced the government to let all Chinese coming to the border into the interior to await their hearing. The same policy you called for on this board awhile back. The Supreme Court placed a hold on that ruling and let the government's policies continue.

  395. My perspective on anything coming from the mainstream press is summarized in the whole koi feeding in Japan "fake news" story.

    The web site https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ updates daily with numbers reported by various governments. It shows that in the U.S. the per capita number of reported cases is only 10 per million.

    There is inherent uncertainty in the numbers because they reflect differing stages of outbreak in the many countries, as well as differing levels of institutional competence. But they are the numbers we have and looking at the U.S. case rate I am much more inclined to infer there is a high degree of competence in the U.S.

    I understand that makes it hard for people to blame Donald Trump, but haters are gonna hate.

  398. Earle (Comment #180999): "If one scrolls down at that web page and looks at the section labelled "COVID-19 cases in the United States by date of illness onset", the numbers are very heartening."
    .
    Only if you ignore the warning that recent numbers (last two weeks, I think) are surely an under count.

  399. Mike M.

    All the numbers are an undercount. That's a given. I don't think we are anywhere near the end of the carona virus spreading in the U.S. But I think we have a system that is working effectively and will continue to do so.

  400. Earle,

    I guess I have no idea why you think the date of onset numbers are heartening.

  401. Mike M.,

    My use of the word "heartening" was in the sense of encouraging or to give cause for hope.

    Here's the last ten days of new case reporting:

    3/02 51
    3/03 48
    3/04 58
    3/05 74
    3/06 43
    3/07 79
    3/08 46
    3/09 50
    3/10 15
    3/11 2
    3/12 0

    It appears to be flattening out, but we have no idea how many have gotten sick in the last couple of days and aren't yet in the system. I am optimistic that the number will look like linear rather than exponential growth. I suspect we'll know in the next few days whether my hope is misplaced.

  402. I don't know if I should say this. I… I've got this growing impulse to shout at the sky and .. and post 'Orange Man Bad!' everywhere.
    .
    I think Thomas Fuller breathed on me while he was over here. I may be infected. I'm going into self quarantine until I get past this. In case I don't make it, it's been a pleasure knowing you guys.

  403. The average time to death for the coronavirus is 17 days, so we definitely have one easy to count metric for the outbreak as of 17 days ago. With violent crime metrics the murder metric is easy to count and there is little uncertainty of unreported cases. Once the death count starts to decline then one can be confident the outbreak is being contained with about a two week lag. The numbers are too low now to be confident of any trend. The general trend is of about a 2-3 month outbreak dominated by hot spots.

  404. Earle (Comment #181004): "Here's the last ten days of new case reporting:"
    .
    Your numbers are wrong. Last five days
    3/10 289
    3/11 271
    3/12 395
    3/13 562
    3/14 660
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_the_United_States#State_number_of_reported_cases_by_date

    Those exaggerate how fast it is growing, since some of that is identifying a larger fraction of the cases already there.

    You are looking at "by date of illness onset" and ignoring the fact that CDC says that cases from 3/5 on are unreliable since "Illnesses that began during this time may not yet be reported". Those numbers will jump bigly at the close of business tomorrow.
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-us.html

  405. Mark,

    I think you have a few days yet of incubation, before full-on derangement takes hold. Stand firm!

    Mike M.,

    It may be that I am hopelessly naive and it may be someone with your degree of certainty has all the answers. Yet I remain optimistic.

  406. 10 minutes into the "debate" and I am not sure how much more I can take.

    Bernie says that with single payer we would be so much better prepared. Unlike all the countries with single payer.

    Biden wants to make all health care free during the crisis. As if that won't overwhelm the system.

  408. Earle,
    I remain optimistic, but I also skipped some dance parties where people circulate, switch partners and so on.
    .
    I won't be cancelling my private dance lesson.

  409. Thank you Jesus. Bernie is keeping his voice down.
    It might just be me, but Biden appears to be kicking Sander's butt. (Note, I'm about 10-15 minutes behind because I restarted it from the beginning)

  412. MikeN (Comment #180981)

    "Jews in Warsaw fought back with smuggled guns, and forced Germans to delay shipping them to camps for three months. Germans eventually took about a hundred casualties, 20 dead, when they moved in and had to burn the ghetto down block by block. There were some survivors who got out by tunnel, alive in the 2000s."
    __________

    The Warsaw Ghetto was not only the home of Polish Jews, but also a holding area the Germans used forJews they brought in from other parts of Europe. In 1940 the Germans closed in the Warsaw Ghetto with a wall almost 10 ft high topped with barbed wire to control exit and entry. Those who tried escaping were shot on sight. A shortage of food resulted in poor health and even starvation for some.

    The Ghetto Jews were encouraged to volunteer for relocation to work camps with the offer of free food immediately and the promise of better living conditions ahead. Eventually, they learned the work camps were actually death camps, and the Nazi had to resort to forced removal. With no other option available, the Jews began fighting back, using weapon smuggled into the Ghetto by Poles who wanted to help. The resistance distracted Nazi policing of the walls and bought time, allowing some Jews to escape before the resistance was crushed.

    The attached link has the story of a young Jewish girl who escaped the Warsaw Ghetto.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18924842

  413. SteveF,

    No, Biden is telling his various lies without any real confusion and with quite a bit of fluency. Some fractured syntax, but that is normal for him, I think.

  414. Finally! Something resembling honesty. But the commercials will be over soon and the "debate" will be back.

  416. Mike M,
    So who will be Biden’s running mate? I’m thinking Occasional Cortex would be an inspired choice, but maybe Harris would be a more strategic choice. No wait, Occasional Cortex isn’t old enough…. it’ll be Harris by exclamation.

  417. Biden has promised to pick a woman. If he has any brains, he'll pick Klobuchar. So I have no idea who it will be.

  418. Well, it is over. Not just the debate, but the contest. The debate was basically a draw, which makes Biden the clear winner. Sanders has hit a ceiling at 30%, sometimes as high as 40%, sometimes no more than 20%. This won't change that. So Sanders now has no chance, other than maybe Biden catching the Wuhan virus or something similar.

  420. The perfect running mate for a 77 year old candidate with health problems: someone who has never held office higher than the lower house of a state legislature, representing about 50,000 people. A part time job, by the way.

    That the Dems might even briefly consider Abrams as a VP candidate explains a lot about why Biden will be the nominee.

  421. lucia (Comment #180967)

    OK_Max
    **Not my argument. My argument: pick only battles you can win.**
    .
    Better argument: Prepare yourself so that you can win battles you need to fight.
    ________

    But If I pick only battles I can win, I have already prepared.

    Knowing which battles "you need to fight" ain't alway's easy, so when in doubt pick only those you can win. I believe partisan fighters usually follow that kind of rule.

    lucia, your spirit would have made you a good candidate for one of the Jewish partisan groups that fought against the Nazis, such as the Bielski Brigade, the Armee Juive, or the United Partisan Organization (FPO).

  423. My sister, who lives in Manhattan, sent me this link:

    https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

    I think the model estimates are worst cases rather then an estimate of what will happen here, but who knows. I think he makes good points, though, about when an organization should close down to prevent further spread.

    Everything that Thomas Fuller says about the US being unprepared goes double for Europe. But at least they didn't have our CDC distributing not enough test kits which also didn't work.

  424. mark bofill (Comment #181028): "I don't know the truth or falsehood underlying the claims that the Trump administration degraded the NSC's pandemic handling abilities".
    .
    Me neither. But I don't know how it could be that the NSC is who we turn to in case of a pandemic. That is the job for agencies like the CDC and Public Health Service, not foreign policy bureaucrats.
    ——–

    DeWitt Payne (Comment #181029): "I think the model estimates are worst cases".
    .
    Indeed. But more to the point, the models are what might happen *if* we do nothing. As justification for strong action, they are useful. But otherwise, they are just tools to create panic, which is not useful. Well, I guess panic is useful to some people.
    ——–
    By the way, it seems that for a long time Italy did no testing at all.
    ———
    I am still looking for any criticism of Trump's actions that amount to more than Orange Man Bad.

    Trump's manner is a different issue. At a time like this, you want the President-from-central-casting. Of course, such a President is just a figurehead while the real work is done by the experts. Being a calming figurehead is not in Trump's skill set.

  425. I made an exponential model and things got real bad, real quick! 3 months from now there will be 459 quadrillion deaths, aaaagghh! I'm rechecking my assumptions. There's nothing wrong with hobbyists running some numbers but I am naively assuming the CDC, WHO, etc. paid real experts to build better models than "run an exponential equation in Excel". I haven't seen any info here at all, and the silence here is allowing hobbyists to fill the void because people want information. As we know when there is a spray of information the most extreme gets the most attention. Aren't there metrics for effectiveness of certain social distancing techniques?
    .
    De Blasio went from refusing to close schools to wanting to nationalize industries in 24 hours, ha ha.

  426. It depends on the definition of "panic". If you throw out the emotional part of it and call it decisive action then it makes sense to panic eventually. The media shouldn't use that word though. There is optimal timing for decisive action in the trade-off between disrupting lives and saving lives. Even if you knew where that point should be there is uncertainty of knowing where things are day to day because of the testing / information void. This was badly managed.
    .
    Assuming you know the pandemic is coming then there is also a question of how much to throttle flattening the curve. You don't want to be in economic lockdown for a year, nor do you want to overwhelm the health system by doing nothing by allowing the virus to flame out quickly.
    .
    One of the things the government(s) didn't do is properly notify and prepare people for the coming lock downs. It all happened rather quickly and was a shock to the system. Some hot spot areas are going to need go into Wuhan mode with empty streets I suspect.

  427. Tom Scharf
    "One of the things the government(s) didn't do is properly notify and prepare people for the coming lock downs."
    .
    If any government were to announce a coming lock-down, then people would immediately do all those things the lock-down is intended to stop…. like, for example, go elsewhere.
    .
    Why are stores running out of toilet paper? Because every time someone sneezes, a hundred people sh!t themselves.

  428. Mike M,
    "Being a calming figurehead is not in Trump's skill set."
    .
    Yup. And that is why the corona virus panic may end up costing Trump the next election….. he just can't play that calming-leader role, even when it is actually needed (which is very rarely). It has nothing to do with the response to the pandemic, testing availability, availability of masks, travel bans, etc, all of which I think were quite reasonable. It has everything to do with Trump not wanting to (or being able to!) control his often offensive behavior.

  429. The UK attempts to be nuanced on how to handle the virus and gets hammered by the usual suspects.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/coronavirus-pandemic-herd-immunity-uk-boris-johnson/608065/
    .
    "To avoid a second peak in the winter, Vallance said the U.K. would suppress the virus “but not get rid of it completely,” while focusing on protecting vulnerable groups, such as the elderly. In the meantime, other people would get sick. But since the virus causes milder illness in younger age groups, most would recover and subsequently be immune to the virus. This “herd immunity” would reduce transmission in the event of a winter resurgence. On Sky News, Vallance said that “probably about 60 percent” of people would need to be infected to achieve herd immunity."
    .
    "Much of this controversy stems from a lack of transparency: The models and data that have influenced the government’s strategy haven’t been published."

  430. Tom
    Obviously, exponential only works at "small" time scales.

    initially, the number of sick is:

    dNsick/dt = (r – (R+D))* Nsick
    r is rate of transmission.
    R is rate or recovery.
    D is rate of death.

    Initially "r" is "some number" which is almost constant. But eventally, it is affected by the number of possible infectable subjects, which declines because those who die or recover can't be infected.

    We really don't know r, R or D right now. But we do know that eventually, growth isn't exponential. Of course, it only deviates after lots of people are infected and either die or recover.

  431. TRACKING CORONAVIRUS WITH CELL PHONES

    JERUSALEM (JTA) — The Israeli Cabinet approved a measure that will allow the Israel Security Agency, or Shin Bet, to track the cell phones of Israelis who are infected with coronavirus.

    After approval of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Subcommittee on the Secret Services, the authorization would be valid for 30 days.

    Under the authorization, the agency would be allowed to use cell towers to track the movements of those infected with the coronavirus and who they came in contact with before going into quarantine. Anyone who came within about six feet of an infected person for more than ten minutes would receive a message telling them to self-quarantine, the Times of Israel reported.

    https://www.jta.org/quick-reads

    I'm not sure how that's supposed to work. How would they know who came within six feet of an infected person?

  433. OK_Max,

    Presumably they are tracking all phone numbers. They might not know who you are, but they know the number. So they phone and tell you to self quarantine.

    Other than the creepiness of tracking everyones phone, it's not a bad idea. Plus…. this would really make social dis-approbation effective. Imagine if you are meeting a friend for lunch at Panera. Suddenly, when they walk in, everyone's phone rings. EVERYONE will know who to blame for their need to quarantine.

    The infected who want to break quarantine will either need to leave their phones off or have the ringing phones effectively snitch on them. If you want to check if someone is safe to meet at Panera, make them let you text them just before going in the door. 🙂

  434. "Other than the creepiness of tracking everyones phone, it's not a bad idea."
    …
    The government's probably doing this anyway.

  436. I imagine they are using the transmitted time tagged GPS data, not the cell tower location.
    .
    Cell phone movement data would be quite useful for studying the rate of transmission versus people's movements and the effectiveness of certain social distancing techniques. The reduction in the amount of pollution over China was an obvious proxy for the magnitude of their economic lock down.
    .
    Having already had the coronavirus might be a employment plus in the near future. They will need to make up a new word for corona-virus-bias, ha ha.

  437. lucia (Comment #181040)

    "Imagine if you are meeting a friend for lunch at Panera. Suddenly, when they walk in, everyone's phone rings. EVERYONE will know who to blame for their need to quarantine."
    _________

    Of course! Why didn't I think of that. Thanks, lucia.

  438. I heard on the radio on Friday (I think it was) about an app being used in China. Each morning a person logs in and notes their vitals or whatever, and the system reports back with a code indicating their status. Anyone wishing to move about in public has to present their phone at entry points and show the code that they are presumably healthy.

  439. I think the intent is to notify other people once someone tests positive, this would be much more accurate than depending on people's memory and pick up lots of people you could not post identify like the person in front of you at the grocery store.
    .
    This seems like a good idea, but would need an opt-out for the privacy obsessed.

  440. **This seems like a good idea, but would need an opt-out for the privacy obsessed.**
    You can turn off your phone. But then you don't get calls.

  441. Sales of guns and ammo soar amid coronavirus panic.

    “Sales of guns and ammunition are soaring across the US as fears of possible social unrest amid the coronavirus crisis are prompting some Americans to turn to firearms as a form of self-protection.”

    “Larry Hyatt, owner of one of the country’s largest gun shops, Hyatt Guns in Charlotte, North Carolina, told the Guardian that the scenes of mass buying at his store were virtually unprecedented. “This is only the second time in my 61 years of business that we’ve seen anything like this,” he said, adding that the first occasion was the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut in 2012.”

    “A major online dealer of ammunition, Ammo.com, has put out figures for sales from 23 February to 4 March that give an indication of the scale of the surge. In that 11-day period sales increased 68% compared to the 11 days up to 23 February.”

    “Sales were especially pronounced in North Carolina and Georgia, which experienced a leap of 179% and 169% respectively. Other states with large increases included Pennsylvania, Texas, Florida, Illinois and New York.”

    **In a statement, Ammo.com’s marketing manager, Alex Horsman, said: “We know certain things impact ammo sales, mostly political events or economic instability when people feel their rights may end up infringed. This is our first experience with a virus leading to such a boost in sales.”**

    “The Trace reported that in Washington state and California, locations of early outbreaks of the virus, gun sales increased acutely propelled by Asian Americans fearful that they could face xenophobic and racist violence against their families given that the original source of coronavirus was China.”
    _________

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/us-sales-guns-ammunition-soar-amid-coronavirus-panic-buying

    https://www.thetrace.org/2020/03/coronavirus-gun-sales-washington-california-asian-americans/

    I am amazed. These scaredy cats should be buying stock, not guns. I might change my mind if the coronavirus starts turning people into flesh-eating zombies who try breaking into my house, like scenes from The Night of The Living Dead.

  442. There still isn’t any toilet paper in the stores I go to. Last week was a run on bottled water for reasons that totally escape me although today there was plenty of stock. We’re out of hot dogs, frozen pizza/burritos and eggs. Is buying guns any different than that? Why would you expect a different outcome?

  443. Jerry, toilet paper and food are daily essentials for everyone. By stocking up on the daily essentials you can suspend shopping at markets, thus reducing your exposure to the corona virus. If people bought guns as frequently as they bought toilet paper and food, they too could stock up on guns and suspend shopping at gun stores, thus reducing their exposure to the virus. But people don’t buy guns as frequently as they buy the daily essentials, so I doubt the sudden increase in gun sales is a result of fear of catching the virus from making too many trips to gun stores.

    I

  445. Earle,

    Thanks. That Dilbert cartoon is brilliant. The perfect response to Max's twisted reasoning.

  446. OK_Max
    **I am amazed. These scaredy cats should be buying stock, not guns.**
    It's not either/or. Anyway, many financial experts suggest diversification.

  447. OK_Max
    **I doubt the sudden increase in gun sales is a result of fear of catching the virus from making too many trips to gun stores.**
    Of course not. Gun owners are sane: their motive is self defense and defense of their families.

  448. Dystonia and apocalypse fiction are replete with gun fetish. There are always roaming gangs of bandits that need to be disposed of. The average Joe who barely knows how to shoot will then kill off an entire gang of experienced villains. What I find humorous is in some of the scenarios where >99% of the population has been killed off guns and ammo are somehow extremely rare when in fact there ought to be 100 guns for every person.
    .
    My wife has always been a toilet paper hoarder. We have great stacks of it in our garage well before any of this started. I was going to setup a stand out on my driveway and start selling it roll by roll.
    .
    We see frequent runs on the grocery store during hurricane threats. Water always goes first. Then reasonable things like batteries, etc. You can fill up your bathtubs people. Apparently there is some psychological trigger that people have with fear that makes them mindlessly duplicate the behavior of others. When one antelope starts running, they all start running. The brain is wired in funny ways.

  449. Tom Scharf,
    "You can fill up your bathtubs people."
    I have several 7.5 gallon potable water containers which I can fill from the tap before a hurricane. I have a whole swimming pool of water that would serve in a pinch. In the 2005 hurricanes, parts of the local water system lost pressure, which potentially allowed groundwater to enter the lines (wherever they leak), so people were advised to not drink the tap water for several days. After that episode, the county installed backup generators to maintain water pressure throughout the system, so it really should never be a problem again…. but people still clean drinking water out of the stores…. along with toilet paper every time there is the possibility of a hurricane.
    .
    I have always been astounded at the hysteria that even a tiny threat provokes. Nuclear power, tornadoes, hurricanes, the big tamale: climate change….. and a multitude of others. It's all bonkers. The hysteria is a thousand times more dangerous and damaging than the actual threat.
    .
    Willis posted an interesting analysis at WUWT of the passengers who were quarantined on the cruise ship in Tokyo harbor. Worth a read. Half of the people who tested positive for the virus never showed any symptoms at all, including all the people over 70 who are believed to be at greatest risk of death. Corona is not Ebola.

  450. Packaged deli meat was out, so I went to the deli counter. I commented that it was interesting to see what ran out first. Shelled cashews, almonds and walnuts were out. Peanuts were available. Lots of dried fruit was out.

    He reported (as of morning when he started) or I observed:

    * TP was out; paper towels still available. (The latter were out at 10 am.)

    * Handsoap is out; dish detergent is abundant. (I needed dish detergent.)

    * Huge 20 lbs bags of rice our out.

    * Dried beans are generally out. Canned are mostly easy to get.

    * Peanut butter, honey, jelly are abundant.

    * Some brands of bread were wiped out; others abundant. (This might have to do with delivery. I'm sure the bread bakers are still putting out freshloaves and deliverying.)

    * Of course Chlorox wipes are still out.

    * Frozen pizzas have been hit hard.

    * Certain choices in the Indian frozen food area were wiped out. I'm not sure what as I didn't read the labels. (The dried beans, rice and some other dried items in the Indian food aisle were also wiped out and others things remain abundant.)

    * Fresh meat is available, though the number of whole chickens was small. ($0.99/lb)

    * I'm not sure, but prices on breakfast cereals seemed higher than normal. I've got oatmeal.

    * Both brands of 1% milk was out. Skim, 2%, whole were abundant. I usually buy 1%, i bought 2%.

  451. SteveF (Comment #181070): :I have always been astounded at the hysteria that even a tiny threat provokes. … The hysteria is a thousand times more dangerous and damaging than the actual threat."
    .
    Indeed. I suspect that what happens is that a small percentage of people frantically acquire a six month supply of things. That causes some temporary shortages which induce others to think "I better get stuff while I can". So the whole thing snowballs.

  452. They amazingly had Clorox wipes when I went shopping, so I did the herd behavior and bought some. If you have bottles of bleach or isopropyl alcohol you can make your own, or even vodka. I suppose you can use pool chlorine as well.
    Hand sanitizers have been gone for weeks.
    The meat section was sparse, but had enough for anyone looking for something.
    The paper products were mostly gone.
    Canned goods were low on everything, but had just about everything in one brand or another.
    Other than that there were just weird random shortages here and there. The stock was much improved on Monday compared to the weekend. People can only stockpile once so supply should keep up after an initial surge.

  453. None of this will help Trump. Nobody is looking to Trump for fatherly advice during a pandemic. A multiple month lockdown is going to cause a recession and even if it isn't Trump's fault it's going to hurt him. A booming economy isn't really Trump either. Some obvious industries are going to need bailouts. Airlines, cruise, restaurants, and innumerable small businesses that can't survive two or three months with minimal revenue. This will ultimately help nice old grandpa Biden vs spastic Trump.

  454. MikeM,
    TP is sold in huge econo packages. I always buy an econo package, which lasts more than a month. I suspect many people buying ONE econo package early wipes out the supply. Similar for paper towels.
    .
    The TP and papertowel manufacturers say they have plenty. The hold up in restocking is having enough delivery personnel. IT's not lack of paper.
    .
    YOu are right this isn't going to help Trump. But it might not hurt him so much. People are used to him sounding like an idiot. OTOH: I'm not going to claim to be good at predicting.

  455. lucia (Comment #181064)
    March 17th, 2020 at 7:09 am
    OK_Max
    **I am amazed. These scaredy cats should be buying stock, not guns.**
    It's not either/or. Anyway, many financial experts suggest diversification.
    ________

    Oh, I know that. My answer was to a specific question.

    Jerry was talking about stocking up on toilet paper and asked me if
    buying guns is any **different** than that? I explained how it's different.

    Had Jerry asked me WHY people stock up on toilet paper and guns, my answer would have been they do so out of FEAR, fear of needing toilet paper and not having any, and fear of needing guns and not having any.

    Up thread I quoted Ammo.com’s marketing manager, Alex Horsman, saying "This is our first experience with a virus leading to such a boost in sales."

    Apparently, some people fear the corona virus, unlike previous viruses, will lead to the need for guns for some purposes. My guesses as to the purposes are:

    1. Guard their supply of toilet paper and food.
    2. Hunt game for food (are sales of fishing gear also up)?
    3. Keep suspected virus carriers at bay.
    or
    4. Rob others of toilet paper and food if need be.

    Others here may think of additional reasons. But keep in mind I already mentioned the zombies up thread.

  456. I keep up to 50 gallons of drinking water stored at all times. It is cycled daily so that it is fresh. All I have to do to access it is open the valve at the bottom of the hot water heater.

  457. OK_Max,
    **is any **different** than that? I explained how it's different.**
    Sure. But you ALSO specifically called people "scaredy cats" and advised them to buy STOCK not guns. That doesn't fit your claim that you are just trying to explain how buying guns is different from buying stocks. ,

    **My guesses as to purpose are:**
    .
    Uhmmm guard their homes from invasion if things really go to hell comes to MY mind. I don't think things are really going to hell, but it's a reason. There are probably reasons I haven't thought of. Even if neither you nor I have thought of them, they could be good reasons.
    .

  458. Luica,
    "…guard their homes from invasion if things really go to hell comes to MY mind."
    .
    That was my instant reaction, but I have decided it is not very constructive to engage Max about anything having to do with guns. Or the Constitution, or 50% +1 absolute rule, etc.
    .
    A complete breakdown of law and order does seem very unlikely, but that really *would* be a big threat compared to Coronavirus 19, and having a gun would be a very good idea. I venture there have been a few too many movies where some illness or another causes complete social breakdown.

  459. Tom Scharf (Comment #181074)
    March 17th, 2020 at 10:51 am
    "They amazingly had Clorox wipes when I went shopping, so I did the herd behavior and bought some. If you have bottles of bleach or isopropyl alcohol you can make your own, or even vodka."
    _____

    Good advice, Tom, but re the vodka, under 100 proof is not ideal.
    As alcohol concentrations drop below 50% (that's what 100 proof has) usefulness for disinfection drops. But still better than nothing.

  461. lucia (Comment #181080)
    March 17th, 2020 at 12:28 pm
    OK_Max,
    **is any **different** than that? I explained how it's different.**
    Sure. But you ALSO specifically called people "scaredy cats" and advised them to buy STOCK not guns. That doesn't fit your claim that you are just trying to explain how buying guns is different from buying stocks.
    _______

    lucia, I don't understand your point. You are referring to two different posts of mine. I see no conflict between them.

  462. Interesting article from a few years ago: https://aac.asm.org/content/53/8/3416
    Abstract:
    Until recently, human coronaviruses (HCoVs), such as HCoV strain OC43 (HCoV-OC43), were mainly known to cause 15 to 30% of mild upper respiratory tract infections. In recent years, the identification of new HCoVs, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, revealed that HCoVs can be highly pathogenic and can cause more severe upper and lower respiratory tract infections, including bronchiolitis and pneumonia. To date, no specific antiviral drugs to prevent or treat HCoV infections are available. We demonstrate that chloroquine, a widely used drug with well-known antimalarial effects, inhibits HCoV-OC43 replication in HRT-18 cells, with a 50% effective concentration (± standard deviation) of 0.306 ± 0.0091 μM and a 50% cytotoxic concentration (± standard deviation) of 419 ± 192.5 μM, resulting in a selectivity index of 1,369. Further, we investigated whether chloroquine could prevent HCoV-OC43-induced death in newborn mice. Our results show that a lethal HCoV-OC43 infection in newborn C57BL/6 mice can be treated with chloroquine acquired transplacentally or via maternal milk. The highest survival rate (98.6%) of the pups was found when mother mice were treated daily with a concentration of 15 mg of chloroquine per kg of body weight. Survival rates declined in a dose-dependent manner, with 88% survival when treated with 5 mg/kg chloroquine and 13% survival when treated with 1 mg/kg chloroquine. Our results show that chloroquine can be highly effective against HCoV-OC43 infection in newborn mice and may be considered as a future drug against HCoVs.
    .
    Seems some people in China and Korea read the literature: Chlorquine is now a common treatment in those countries for Wuhan coronavirus 19 illness. By wild coincidence, my wife takes a closely related compoun, hydroxy-chloroquine for the effects of autoimmune desease. I have suggested she can strut the streets without worry; she doesn't believe me.

  463. I was under the impression that the slow U.S. Wuhan virus testing response was due to the CDC disdaining the WHO test. It seems that was fake news. There never was a WHO test:
    https://thefederalist.com/2020/03/17/joe-biden-lies-about-coronavirus-testing-to-make-trump-look-bad/

    Dr. Fauci says that the U.S. testing response was slowed by a "technical glitch" (I think that means "screw up"), which is not news. But it seems that was the only delay.
    https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/487985-fauci-neither-trump-nor-cdc-to-blame-for-testing-delay

    We keep hearing how we are behind South Korea. But that is always put in terms how many tests they have done compared to us. With the numbers ramping exponentially, a small delay produces a big difference. I have not managed to find out the amount of time our test lagged behind theirs.

  465. OK_Max
    Your response to my comment quoted me, quoting you.
    ————
    "lucia (Comment #181064)
    March 17th, 2020 at 7:09 am
    OK_Max
    **I am amazed. These scaredy cats should be buying stock, not guns.**
    It's not either/or. Anyway, many financial experts suggest diversification."
    ———-
    Obviously I had engaged your quote about scaredy cates, buying stocks and not guns. If you quoted this and then changed the subject to some OTHER comment, then you are the one creating confusion.

    My response about either/or and financial diversification related to the specific sentence of yours I quoted. I wasn't referring to anything in any other comment.

  466. Mike M.,

    "I have not managed to find out the amount of time our test lagged behind theirs."

    According to the WSJ today, South Korea has the ability to test ~20,000 people/day and are not limiting the tests to those with symptoms. So far, they have tested more than 250,000 people or about 0.5% of the population. ( https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-south-korea-put-into-place-the-worlds-most-aggressive-coronavirus-testing-11584377217?mod=world_major_1_pos2 )

    "The government approved its first test kit on Feb. 4, made by Seoul-based Kogene Biotech Co., when the country had reported just 16 cases. Distribution of test kits started three days later, said Baek Myo-ah, a Kogene executive director. Three other suppliers also soon won fast-track rights to start production after a 10-day review. That prepared South Korea for the worst when in the span of two weeks the case count exploded from 31 on Feb. 18 to nearly 5,000.

    South Korea now has the ability to test up to 20,000 people a day at 633 testing sites nationwide, including drive-through clinics and pop-up facilities parked in front of newly infected buildings, health officials say. Samples get transported by van—where they are stored at about 40-degrees Fahrenheit in airtight containers—to 118 laboratories. An army of around 1,200 medical professionals analyze results.

    A diagnosis takes six hours, and patients typically get their results within a day. “It’s a speedy process,” said Son Young-rae, a senior South Korean health official."

    From the graphic in the article, it looks like testing started in mid-February and exceeded 10,000/day in late February. Testing peaked at about 15,000/day around March 1 Positive tests peaked about the same time. According to the CDC, 4,000 samples were processed on March 12. So in terms of fraction of the population tested, we're at least a month behind South Korea.

    The US testing limitation to those with symptoms should be dropped as soon as possible given the expected high rate of asymptomatic infections. For example, the Utah Jazz player Donovan Mitchell, who tested positive, showed no symptoms and continues to have no symptoms.

  467. And in yet another example of irony always increasing, the bans on plastic bags have been implemented at the worst possible time. Reusable bags are a great way to spread infection.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-plastic-bag-ban-backfires-11584399666?mod=hp_opin_pos_2

    "New York’s environmentalists have terrible timing. The statewide ban on single-use plastic bags took effect on March 1, the same day New York confirmed its first case of coronavirus. To protect the public, officials in the Empire State and elsewhere should immediately suspend their plastic bag bans.

    Much remains unknown about Covid-19, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says it “may remain viable for hours to days on surfaces made from a variety of materials.” Reusable shopping bags may harbor the virus and could facilitate its spread in grocery stores and pharmacies that remain open even as workplaces, schools and restaurants shutter. Yet in California, New York, Seattle and elsewhere, plastic bags are banned and shoppers are urged to rely on reusable bags.New York’s environmentalists have terrible timing. The statewide ban on single-use plastic bags took effect on March 1, the same day New York confirmed its first case of coronavirus. To protect the public, officials in the Empire State and elsewhere should immediately suspend their plastic bag bans.

    Much remains unknown about Covid-19, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says it “may remain viable for hours to days on surfaces made from a variety of materials.” Reusable shopping bags may harbor the virus and could facilitate its spread in grocery stores and pharmacies that remain open even as workplaces, schools and restaurants shutter. Yet in California, New York, Seattle and elsewhere, plastic bags are banned and shoppers are urged to rely on reusable bags."

  468. DeWitt Payne (Comment #181092): ""The government approved its first test kit on Feb. 4 … Distribution of test kits started three days later".
    .
    Thanks. So they got it approved the same day as the CDC and started shipping two days after the CDC. But the CDC test had a problem that caused a bottleneck. It looks like fixed CDC tests started shipping on Feb. 26.
    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/02/27/809936132/cdc-fixes-issue-delaying-coronavirus-testing-in-u-s
    .
    The epidemic started about 3 weeks earlier in South Korea than here, so of course we are 3 weeks behind in number of tests. But the delay in getting a readily used test cost us a chance to get out ahead of the epidemic.

  469. lucia (Comment #181091)
    "My response about either/or and financial diversification related to the specific sentence of yours I quoted. I wasn't referring to anything in any other comment."
    __________

    OK, thanks.

  470. Note that while South Korea has a single payer health care system with a private insurance (supplement?) option, they had several private industry sources developing tests from the start while in the US, we relied on a single government source, the CDC, for testing for way too long. Even now, the turnaround time for testing is too slow. They set up a drive-thru center in my area that was reported to have a 72 hour turnaround time. South Korea does it in six hours. In fairness, some of that may be due to a much smaller geographic area.

  471. lucia,

    Did you vote in the primary today? If so, did the virus seem to be affecting things?

    As I recall, Illinois used to have an open primary, or maybe it was just that independents could vote in either one. But that was a long time ago.

  472. Yes. I went around noon. Counting Jim and me, there were about 4 voters there. They had hand sanitizer, paper towels and everything to protect everyone.

    Most people were running uncontested. So… there's that. Illinois Primaries are often pretty unexciting.

  473. Daughter #1 at university, now mandatory online only classes, graduation cancelled
    Daughter #2 works in Ohio, working at home since Friday, they were already letting her work from home 1 day a week prior to the outbreak.
    Wife will be working at home starting tomorrow
    I've been working at home since the year 2000
    We are fortunate that we have the type of jobs that allow that.
    .
    62% of the upper 25% of income can telecommute.
    9% of the lower 25% of income can telecommute.

  475. Well, some time back (I went looking for my original comment but couldn't locate it) I predicted Biden wouldn't win the primary. It's not over yet, but … it's probably over. Biden's going to win the primary. I was wrong.
    I overestimated the influence of the more extreme Left on the Democratic party as a whole, apparently. It's also possible I underestimated the moderating effect of black voters on the nomination process.
    In this case, I'm glad to be wrong. I'd choose Biden over Sanders any day. What with the pandemic and the stock market in the toilet and the possibility of a recession, there's a real possibility Trump may lose in 2020.

  476. marc bofill,
    I was equally wrong; looked to me like Sanders was becoming inevitable.
    .
    "It's also possible I underestimated the moderating effect of black voters on the nomination process."
    .
    That's part of it. But Obama calling Klobuchar and Mayor Pete and telling them to drop out, and people like James Carville jumping up and down, while shouting that the party will be committing suicide if it chooses Sanders, both had some influence.
    .
    I don't think most Democrats disagree with much of Sander's agenda (defacto open borders, single payer heath care, bonkers fossil fuel policies, "forcing people to fundamentally change how they lead their lives", confiscatory taxes on high income… 80+% marginal rates, and direct confiscation of 'excessive' wealth at 3% to 5% a year of net worth, all while subverting the Constitution whenever needed). Most democrats simply do not want there to exist very wealthy people, whether that is from annual earnings, capital gains, or return on capital. They also want individuals and especially businesses to have little autonomy, and to operate always under strict politically dictated regulations (created by Democrats, of course).
    .
    But more than those things, they don't want Trump in the White House for a second term. With a very confused Biden as President, or with the woman he chooses taking his place, they won't get everything they want, but they will get a lot more of what they want than with Trump in office.

  478. mark bofill (Comment #181119): "Biden's going to win the primary. I was wrong.
    I overestimated the influence of the more extreme Left on the Democratic party as a whole, apparently. It's also possible I underestimated the moderating effect of black voters on the nomination process."
    .
    I too was wrong. Part of that was overlooking how solidly blacks backed Biden. And part was not realizing how dreadfully weak the rest of the Democrat field was.

    The Left had a massive influence. It drove actual moderates out of the race and pulled the rest way to the left. Biden supports most of Bernie's policies and essentially all the policies that Bernie might have been able to enact. And there is no question that Biden will be the tool of all the entrenched interests, both inside and outside the government.

  480. Wall Street better tread very carefully in the next year. They basically manufactured the 2008 financial crisis, and even though this crisis is not of their making they cannot be seen to be profiting from it or be taking huge bonuses while everyone else gets obliterated. Let me be clear, it doesn't matter what the correct justifications are or if they actually managed it well, they will be eviscerated by the Sander's crowd and * nobody * will defend them. This sector needs to be seen to be taking one for the team, and they aren't exactly good at that.

  481. They just opened drive thru testing at a doc in a box near me. Saw 10 cars in line and an hour later saw 20 in line with police monitoring. Only pre-approved people can be tested.
    .
    Drive thru testing is a really good idea, the car acts like a bio-hazard suit, ha ha.. According to a NYT writer who tested positive early he had to wait for hours in a room, was escorted into a testing room, and the medical personnel had to dispose of their protective equipment after every patient and clean the room. Basically only a couple tests per hour. They seem to be working out the systems slowly. They are doing 4 swabs, one set for coronavirus and the other for some other resp diseases like the flu, etc.

  482. Ours started yesterday morning. 3 day turn around, but had to limit to appointment due to demand. Using both the state and a private lab for the processing. Other hospitals in the region will be doing the same over the next week. Expect SW Ohio active cases to jump starting Thursday and running for a few weeks as the Testing availability increases.

  484. Earle (Comment #181130): "It's somewhat wishcasting, but I predict the rate of infection as portrayed in this fashion will be much closer to linear than the prior "expodential" rate."
    .
    Pure wishful thinking. That graph shows only about 20% of the cases so far confirmed. So far as I can tell, the data in that graph are increasing exponentially.

    How many people were infected on March 3? The number listed two days ago was 71, yesterday it was 85, and today it is 99. For March 9 it has gone from 70 to 135 since Monday and for March 12 from 4 to 45.

    With luck, the data presented that way will end up showing a peak within the last few days.

  485. The mortality rate in the US for coronavirus is now 1.38%, even a deaths went up by 30% in one day.

  486. Mike M,
    The next 10 to 20 days should better define the scope of the problem. If the growth in US cases is near exponential during that time, then we are in for a lot of long term problems. If "social distancing" steps already being practiced bring about a clear flattening of the curve, then it may not turn out so very badly. I am not suggesting that there will be no problems, but if the curve is flattening rather than growing exponentially, it would be a very good sign.

  487. MikeN,
    We are starting to get some idea of the worst-case outcomes.
    .
    The fatality rate among the young varies from apparently zero (under 10) and near zero (under ~20) to perhaps 0.5% in the 50's cohort and somewhat higher in the 60's cohort. The people at greatest risk (70+) appear to face a risk of death of 4% to 5% or so. So with no government action, and with only the 70+ crowd avoiding social contact until the risk falls, the ultimate downside looks like somewhere under 1% fatalities over a couple of years. That would be absolutely terrible of course (two to three million dead!), but not the end of the world as we know it….. we already have 2.4 millions deaths per year from other causes, mainly in the same age cohorts as are most vulnerable to coronavirus. I expect emerging treatments (antivirals, antibodies, chloroqine, and ultimately vaccines) will reduce that worst case number considerably.

  489. Is widespread testing more useful than restricted testing? Real question.

    If the testing were perfect, then the more testing the better. But I have seen a claim that the tests have high rates of both false positives and false negatives. More information is better than less information, but only if it is reliable. A lot of incorrect testing can make things worse.

    False negatives could increase the spread of the virus. People who are coughing and sneezing should stay home. But if they get a false negative test result and decide there is no need to isolate, then the test has enhanced the spread of the virus.

    False positives are potentially orders of magnitude more common than true positives. That would cause suffering for those with such a result, or near to such people, terror among the general population, and excess stress on the health care system.

    Restrictive testing should be sufficient to provide much of the information public health authorities need to track the epidemic and assess options.

    It seems to me that the biggest advantage of finding everyone who is sick would be to isolate such people and trace contacts. That is potentially of huge value if done with a high level of effectiveness. But that is not possible if 85% of those infected never develop symptoms, as has been claimed.

    Am I missing something?

  490. Tom Scharf (Comment #181125)
    March 18th, 2020 at 10:43 am
    Wall Street better tread very carefully in the next year. They basically manufactured the 2008 financial crisis, and even though this crisis is not of their making they cannot be seen to be profiting from it or be taking huge bonuses while everyone else gets obliterated.
    ____________

    Tom, I invested thousands of dollars in two index funds today, obviously hoping to profit from buying during a crises. I hope you don't think I'm evil.

    And I hope I don't end up thinking I was stupid.

  491. I think a massive outbreak is better for the long term in many aspects, versus successfully limiting the outbreak and then having to play whack a mole for hot spots endlessly. Once around 60% of the population gets the disease and develops immunity then it is much more difficult for the disease to progress, herd immunity. This model is terrible for number of deaths of course, it only finishes faster. I suppose the optimum is limiting the outbreak followed by a "fast" immunization of the population. One big hope is that the virus fades with hot weather. Florida is just starting the hot season, we shall see. There does seem to be some latitude correlation. Washington and Europe are about the same.
    .
    The FDA needs to get aggressive here, and they are very reluctant to do so.

  492. OK_Max,
    It's a guessing game right now. Good luck. I do think by next year that will end up being a wise decision, but maybe not next week.

  493. SteveF, I think the worst case was the Diamond Princess. 3700 passengers, 600 infected, 7 deaths. 60% of passengers were over 60.

    Flattening the curve lowers the impact on the health care system, but might just be spreading the same caseload over a longer period. UK is taking the approach that they can't stop people from getting infected, and they are keeping things open and looking at immunizing the herd so the virus is unable to spread after so many people have immunity.

  494. Huh.

    From Tom's link, in Florida there are 314 positive tests and 1225 negative.

    In New Mexico, 38 positive and 2326 negative.
    https://cv.nmhealth.org/

    Florida has done fewer tests in spite of having 10 times the population. And 20% positive in Florida compared to 1.5% in New Mexico. Neither seems plausible.

  495. Florida is older, and probably testing the most likely cases, while New Mexico is testing a wider profile and getting more negative tests. Florida has about ten times the population, and gotten 8 times as many positive tests.

  496. Earl,
    My prediction is the rate of increase in reported will not turn down until at least two weeks after our traditional Spring Break dispersal of the college students is over. Even without them traveling to Florida and so on, a whole bunch of kids left dorms, traveled from one state to another, are getting in contact with people in a new state yada… yada…

    To the extent that restaurants and bars are open, we are reducing some of this mixing at a critical time.

  497. The FDA, aaarggh. Let's just say I'm not predisposed to believe the FDA is capable to do much besides CYA and protect its bureaucracy from my professional experience. Instead of loosening restrictions, it added more of them here.
    .
    "The FDA first announced labs seeking to perform testing would have to submit a special application to get permission to start on Feb. 4. That initially deterred some hospitals and other lab operators—which normally aren’t required to submit any application—from developing tests, experts say."
    “We had considered developing a test but had been in communication with the CDC and FDA and had been told that the federal and state authorities would be able to handle everything,”
    .
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-washington-failed-to-build-a-robust-coronavirus-testing-system-11584552147
    .
    Perhaps Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes can save the day? Ha ha.

  498. Mike M. (Comment #181137)

    "It seems to me that the biggest advantage of finding everyone who is sick would be to isolate such people and trace contacts. That is potentially of huge value if done with a high level of effectiveness. But that is not possible if 85% of those infected never develop symptoms, as has been claimed."

    Am I missing something?
    __________

    Not that I know. Maybe those who don't develop symptoms are less likely to spread the virus because they don't cough and sneeze. On the other had, they probably are out and around more, thus exposing greater numbers to the virus.

  500. My estimate is that the US will have upwards of 50,000 cases in 10 days. 20% serious, 1.5% fatal.

    Bad time to go to the hospital with a heart attack. Shelter in place? Some unknown number will die in place.

  501. 1108 cars came to the new Tampa drive thru sites on first day. 605 were tested. Medical people only have to change gloves between tests. Individuals can expect to receive their results by phone in five to seven days after the tests. (This is a bit mysterious because the virus only lives on the swabs a few days I hear).
    .
    You can get tested if …
    .
    You have a fever or have developed a new cough or shortness of breath in the last 14 days and meet one of these additional requirements:
    * Personally have traveled internationally or on a cruise.
    * Personally traveled to or from California, Washington, Oregon or New York. These are areas of widespread community transmission.
    * Had personal close contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19.
    * Are 65 years or older with a serious chronic health condition, such as heart disease or cancer.
    * Are immunocompromised.

  502. Fox News reports: "At least 475 additional people died from the coronavirus in Italy Wednesday, marking a 19 percent spike within the last 24 hours, raising the nationwide death toll to at least 2,978, Sky News reported, citing the Italian Civil Protection Agency.

    It's the country's highest single-day spike in its death toll since the coronavirus outbreak began.

    There are at least 35,713 total cases in Italy, the country’s health ministry also announced Wednesday. There are 14,363 hospitalized patients with symptoms, with 2,257 in intensive care, while 12,090 are in home isolation."

    We are on the exact same curve as Italy, just two weeks behind.

  504. Hiya Lucia! How the heck are you?

    Did you see the pictures of the kids on Florida beaches? Crazeee…

  505. Thomas Fuller (Comment #181152): "We are on the exact same curve as Italy, just two weeks behind."
    .
    One big difference: Italy only got serious about social distancing about 2-4 days before we did.

  506. Sen. John Cornyn: "China is to blame because the culture where people eat bats & snakes & dogs & things like that, these viruses are transmitted from the animal to the people and that's why China has been the source of a lot of these viruses like SARS, like MERS, the Swine Flu."
    _______

    It's unfair for Sen. Cornyn to blame China for what some of it's citizens like to eat. The Chinese have freedom to choose what they eat. Sen. Cornyn doesn't seem like one who favors limiting that kind of freedom.

    I could be wrong, but I thought the swine flu originated in the U.S.

    Scientists are pretty sure wild animals (and some domesticated animals) carry viruses that can make the transition to humans, but unless we know for sure, why blame bats or people who eat bats.

    I'm not aware of any virus that started from eating dogs or snakes. Are there any?

    I have eaten possum, squirrel, alligator, frog's legs, and rattlesnake. I didn't much care for them.

  507. OK_Max (Comment #181157): "I could be wrong"
    .
    Well, that's refreshing. 😉
    .
    OK_Max: "but I thought the swine flu originated in the U.S."
    .
    The 2009 pandemic originated in Mexico.

  508. Thomas,
    Looks like a pretty traditionally wild spring break. But this year… well… virus is being transported by people's comings and goings. Our death rate is going up over the next few weeks. It's going to look like "social distancing" failed. But probably, what we are doing will be helpful relative to what would have happened.
    .
    No double blind comparison though. Oh. Well.

  509. Thomas Fuller,
    Many 20 year olds act as if they are immortal; always have. Always will. Fortunately for them, the Wuhan coronavirus is very unlikely to prove them wrong about their immortality.

  510. As of today, there are no reported cases in my Florida county (with 157,000 residents). That could change, because one of the adjacent counties has some cases.

  511. Define 'death rate going up'. So far the death rate is going down, calculated as
    #deaths in US to date/#infected in US to date. CDC's Wed report – CDC's Tue report is
    22 deaths in 2800 cases.

  513. OK Max: It's unfair for Sen. Cornyn to blame China for what some of it's citizens like to eat. The Chinese have freedom to choose what they eat."

    In this case, it is fair (but not wise) to blame China for the virus. Almost certainly the virus originated in a Wuhan wet market where animals were stacked on top of each other and urinated on top of each other as well as transferring blood and pus to each other. On top of that humans interacted with the animals in unsanitary conditions and most probably the virus went from a bat to a pangolin to humans, which is not the typical way that viruses usually escape. See this youtube video as explained by a Chinese doctor. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=chinese+wet+market+vox&view=detail&mid=F0FDB7471F5EC0E0589AF0FDB7471F5EC0E0589A&FORM=VIRE See :42 for strong evidence that virus originated at wet market. See 1:58 of video for animal to animal to human transmission. See 2:10 for explanation by Chinese expert as to how wet markets work.

    Although the virus originated in China, I think it is unwise to call it the Wuhan virus or Chinese virus. Every country has its own skeletons in the closet and we need to work with the Chinese to fight the virus. I think the financial problems caused by this virus will result in the closure of Chinese wet markets.

  514. JD Ohio,
    OK, let’s call it the pangolin coronavirus.
    Actually that is not appropriate; gene sequencing shows too much difference between pangolin coronavirus and the pandemic virus. The closest match has been a coronavirus in Chinese bat populations, but even that is not a very close match. The source remains unknown.

  515. RE Mike M. (Comment #181158)

    Sen. John Cornyn didn't say anything about PANGOLINS.

    COVID-19 may be from pangolins instead of bats. The source has not been positively identified.

    Sen. Cornyn should read the following article:

    11 (sometimes) deadly diseases that hopped across species
    https://www.livescience.com/12951-10-infectious-diseases-ebola-plague-influenza.html

    Here are a few quotes from this fascinating (to me) article:

    “The cross-species infection can originate on farms or markets, where conditions foster mixing of pathogens, giving them opportunities to swap genes and gear up to infect (and sometimes kill) previously foreign hosts. Or the transfer can occur from such seemingly benign activities as letting a performance monkey on some Indonesian street corner climb on your head.”

    “Diseases passed from animals to humans are called zoonoses. There are more than three dozen we can catch directly through touch and more than four dozen that result from bites. But disease-carrying parasites are not picky about hosts. Human diseases can decimate animal populations, too, from such well-meaning activities as ecotourism.”

    **The novel coronavirus that causes the disease COVID-19 was first identified at the end of December 2019 in Wuhan, China, where officials suspect the source was somehow linked to a seafood market there. Genetic analyses of the virus suggest it originated in bats. However, because no bats were sold at the seafood market at the outbreak's epicenter, scientists think an as-yet-unidentified animal acted as a go-between in transmitting the coronavirus to humans. This "intermediate" animal could be the pangolin, an endangered, ant-eating mammal, according to a handful of studies of the virus. Even so, the viruses that have been found in samples taken from illegally trafficked pangolins don't match the SARS-CoV-2 virus closely enough to prove the pangolin as this stepping stone, the journal Nature reported.**

    And it's not just exotic wild creatures that are a threat.

    LUCIA, BEWARE, your cat may be controlling your brain through the the bizarre parasite Toxoplasma gondii. Go to the link above for more.

  516. 'Work with the Chinese to fight the virus'
    China said there was no evidence of human to human transmission, and got WHO to issue a statement saying the same on Jan 14. Meanwhile, China was buying up masks and respirators for what they knew was coming.
    Trump started saying China virus after China accused the US military of creating it.
    Up until then, Trump was saying coronavirus while the media who are now attacking him were saying 'Wuhan coronavirus'.

  517. Re JD Ohio (Comment #181164)
    Re SteveF (Comment #181165)

    Sorry for my cross posting.

    Is it illegal to eat pangolins in China?

  518. OK Max quoting an article: "The novel coronavirus that causes the disease COVID-19 was first identified at the end of December 2019 in Wuhan, China, where officials suspect the source was somehow linked to a seafood market there." Would note that it is a wet market not a seafood market–items other than seafood were sold. Also, 27 out of the first 41 cases were connected to the wet market, making the odds of the wet market being the source of the virus very high.

    ……
    OK Max: "Is it illegal to eat pangolins in China?" Didn't look this up. However, whether it is legal or illegal, doesn't matter much because the law obviously wasn't being enforced where the pangolins were being sold openly in a public market. Many laws in China are not enforced, such as intellectual property laws.

  520. Re JD Ohio (Comment #181169)

    JD, I found that eating pangolins is against Chinese law. Pangolins are an endangered species and rarely reproduce in captivity. But as you say, Chinese break laws. Although not much of consolation the pandemic may prevent extinction. Demand for these animals has already diminished.

  521. Thomas Fuller,
    “ Who's showing up for Easter dinner?”
    .
    The spring break immortals, along with many others. Good to keep in mind many grandparents once thought themselves immortal as well.

  522. For those who saw my Soviet bioweapons comment a while back, Russia only has 147 cases for a population of 144M. Strange … ha ha. Of course India only has 176 for a population of 1.3B. India is a country where this thing could go crazy.
    .
    Testing continues to be a disaster, many reports of people with clear symptoms getting infuriating bureaucratic run around and cannot be tested, period. I think the Feds have maybe a week to fix this before it become terminal to Trump's reelection chances. This is a disgrace:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-testing-chaos-across-america-11584618703
    .
    NYT runs an article showing how the rich/elite have access to testing, not a good look.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/us/coronavirus-testing-elite.html
    .
    Testing access is primed to go nuclear.

  523. Clearwater refused to close its beaches, but enforced groups to 10 or less. Young people may be almost invulnerable to the disease, but they will be the vector to those that are most vulnerable.

  524. Tom Scharf (Comment #181185): "Testing continues to be a disaster, … Feds have maybe a week to fix this before it become terminal to Trump's reelection chances. …
    Testing access is primed to go nuclear."
    .
    Sadly, that is true, in spite of being false. Testing is done by the states. Mass testing probably does more harm than good. It is turning into a secondary infection that is more serious than the primary infection.

  525. MikeN (Comment #181162)
    **Define 'death rate going up'.**
    I mean the numerator in your equation is going up.
    .
    I think the ratio you post is called the "mortality rate". Yeah… the words death and mortality are related. But I mean the numerator in the mortality rate.
    .
    I think the denominator in the mortality rate will also increase. It might increase both because of increased infections AND increased detection. It will be difficult to untangle these.
    .
    But my prediction is: Kids on spring break will push the numerator up. They *might* increase the mortality rate IF hospitals get overwhelmed and people don't get treatment.

  526. I find it somewhat curious that there are those who argue that because the total number of deaths might (but might not) be somewhat less than deaths attributed to the flu that we should for some reason take the corona virus less seriously.

    CV deaths are in addition to other causes of death, not instead of. And if 100 million Americans get the virus, the number of deaths will be shocking, even if the mortality rate is less than that of influenza.

    And 100 million is a very real possibility.

  527. Trump Derangement Syndrome is clearly a progressive disease. Pun intended.

    Here is a very advanced case:
    https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/487735-juan-williams-trump-must-be-held-to-account-over-coronavirus

    It starts out:
    "What’s next?
    "Cancel the November election?
    "It could come to that, because despite the power of incumbency and a passionate political base, President Trump’s political prospects are looking shaky."
    .
    He then proceeds to criticize Trump's actions by ignoring his actions and misquoting Trump's words. Except for one thing:
    "Local officials in the absence of federal leadership took the lead by shutting down schools, major sports leagues and Broadway shows."
    As any well-informed person knows, the President (indeed, the entire federal government) has no power to do any of those things.
    So the proof that Trump has no regard for Constitutional limitations is that he is complying with Constitutional limitations.
    .
    Rant over.

  528. Thomas Fuller,
    The "up to" and "could be" convey almost zero information when there aren't any probabilities attached. Up to 6 billion may die tomorrow from an asteroid strike, start digging your bunker. What is your over/under for the death count by the end of the year in the US? (We probably won't ever know the actual infected count).
    .
    My official guess as of today is 5,000, but this could be 10x off and we are going to need more visibility on actual infection counts to clear it up. This is based on the relative success of some countries to stop the outbreaks (China says 0 new infections today).

  529. Lucia, that 'death rate' is already going up. It was 75 on Tue, 97 on Wed, and 150 today.
    The mortality rate has also gone up to 1.44%, as this was 53 deaths in about 3400 cases.

  530. On chloroquine, note the FDA's wording here today:
    .
    "That's a drug that the President has *** directed *** us to take a closer look at as to whether an expanded use approach to that could be done and to actually see if that benefits patients. And again, we want to do that in the setting of a clinical trial, a large, pragmatic clinical trial to actually gather that information"
    "over the next couple of weeks, we'll have more information that we're really pushing hard to try to accelerate… and that will be a bridge to other therapies that will take us three to six months to develop."
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/19/politics/trump-fda-anti-viral-treatments-coronavirus/index.html
    .
    Directed infers he told them to do it against their opinion. 3-6 months for an outbreak expected to peak in 45 days. The FDA believes its mandate is proof of "safe and effective" before deployment, understandable. However they are beyond inflexible to the point of unnecessarily rigid, and believe me these people cannot move fast. This can be a good thing normally, but if hospitals saturate and they are * forbidden * to even try this kind of stuff it just doesn't make sense. I don't trust the FDA's bureaucracy to do anything but cause problems here, somebody has to have the courage to make risky decisions.

  531. It was FDA and CDC that shut down testing of the first cases in Seattle, and the lab did it against their orders. After the state health officials were notified, CDC ordered the lab to stop testing.

  532. Mike M.,

    "Mass testing probably does more harm than good."

    Huh? That seems counterintuitive, not that we are going to be capable of mass testing for weeks.

    From the link below:

    "Now, the U.S. is testing far fewer patients than public-health and infectious-disease experts say is necessary and just a fraction as many as other countries that rolled out wide-reaching diagnostic programs. South Korea as of Tuesday was testing up to 20,000 patients a day, more than half the total of U.S. patients who have been tested since the outbreak began. "

    Tom Scharf,

    " I don't trust the FDA's bureaucracy to do anything but cause problems here, somebody has to have the courage to make risky decisions."

    I trust the FDA to do almost always the wrong thing. And if you think the FDA is bad, you should read today's article in the WSJ on how badly the CDC as well as the FDA screwed up. Technically, it's always Trump's fault based on Truman's "The Buck Stops Here". But if Trump was getting bad advice from the CDC management, which appears to be the case, there is at least a reason, if not an excuse.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-washington-failed-to-build-a-robust-coronavirus-testing-system-11584552147?mod=article_inline&mod=article_inline

    " America Needed Coronavirus Tests. The Government Failed.
    Decisions that limited testing for the pathogen blinded the U.S. to the outbreak’s scale. Here’s how it happened."

    "While the virus was quietly spreading within the U.S., the CDC had told state and local officials its “testing capacity is more than adequate to meet current testing demands,” according to a Feb. 26 agency email viewed by The Wall Street Journal, part of a cache of agency communications reviewed by the Journal that sheds light on the early response. The agency’s data show it tested fewer than 100 patients that day."

    "The government left other laboratories on the sidelines for crucial weeks."

    "CDC officials botched an initial test kit developed in an agency lab, retracting many tests. They resisted calls from state officials and medical providers to broaden testing, and health officials failed to coordinate with outside companies to ensure needed test-kit supplies, such as nasal swabs and chemical reagents, would be available, according to suppliers and health officials."

    "When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, also involved in the response, finally opened testing to more outside labs, a run on limited stocks of some supplies needed for the CDC-developed test quickly depleted stores, lab operators and suppliers said. Hospital and commercial lab operators said the government didn’t reach out to enlist their help until it was too late."

    As I said, do the wrong thing. We might as well have complete government run health care, but don't believe that would have improved the situation any.

    The Democrats will try to blame all of this on Trump and may well succeed, but I didn't hear any of them recommending what actually needed to be done at the time either.

  534. "I find it somewhat curious that there are those who argue that because the total number of deaths might (but might not) be somewhat less than deaths attributed to the flu that we should for some reason take the corona virus less seriously."
    ———
    Thomas Fuller,
    I don't know of anyone who proposes that we take the current pandemic less seriously. The point of realizing that we have substantial deaths each year due to the flu is to put into perspective what we can and can't prevent, and ugly as it may be what level of virus mortality we accept as part of everyday life.
    .
    Before you mount a righteous high horse to chastise me for speaking an ugly truth, I hope you have the integrity to take a moment out to reflect on how much time and concern you have personally devoted to eradicating the flu, even though we are all aware that many people die of it each year.

  535. On wide scale testing. If you aren't finding and quarantining the apparently large fraction of asymptomatic infected, you might as well not be testing at all.

  536. Maybe it's a little like gun violence in Chicago. A mass shooting incident claims a handful of lives in a place we don't expect and aren't used to seeing; it's national news and a national emergency. Yet every month in Chicago plenty of people die by gun violence. It's nothing to get worked up about? People are dying!
    Yup, apparently it's nothing to get worked up about.
    *shrug*
    https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-chicago-homicides-data-tracker-htmlstory.html

  537. DeWitt Payne,

    Feb. 25: A top U.S. health official said Tuesday the spread of coronavirus in the country appears to be inevitable, while warning that the disruptions could be “severe.”

    Nancy Messonnier, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, told reporters the agency expects to see more cases in the U.S.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/19/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-outbreak.html

    https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-02-28/democratic-candidates-criticize-trump-coronavirus-response

    "In 2018, the Trump administration fired the government’s entire pandemic response chain of command, including the White House management infrastructure. "

    …"In May 2018, Trump ordered the NSC’s entire global health security unit shut down, calling for reassignment of Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer and dissolution of his team inside the agency. The month before, then-White House National Security Advisor John Bolton pressured Ziemer’s DHS counterpart, Tom Bossert, to resign along with his team. Neither the NSC nor DHS epidemic teams have been replaced. The global health section of the CDC was so drastically cut in 2018 that much of its staff was laid off and the number of countries it was working in was reduced from 49 to merely 10. Meanwhile, throughout 2018, the U.S. Agency for International Development and its director, Mark Green, came repeatedly under fire from both the White House and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. And though Congress has so far managed to block Trump administration plans to cut the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps by 40 percent, the disease-fighting cadres have steadily eroded as retiring officers go unreplaced."

    Here’s what the president said in public remarks, interviews and tweets from Jan. 22 to March 10 -– one day before the World Health Organization declared the global outbreak a pandemic.

    Jan. 22: “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.” — Trump in a CNBC interview.

    Jan. 30: “We think we have it very well under control. We have very little problem in this country at this moment — five — and those people are all recuperating successfully. But we’re working very closely with China and other countries, and we think it’s going to have a very good ending for us … that I can assure you.” — Trump in a speech in Michigan.

    Feb. 10: “Now, the virus that we’re talking about having to do — you know, a lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat — as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April. We’re in great shape though. We have 12 cases — 11 cases, and many of them are in good shape now.” — Trump at the White House. (See our item “Will the New Coronavirus ‘Go Away’ in April?“)

    Feb. 14: “There’s a theory that, in April, when it gets warm — historically, that has been able to kill the virus. So we don’t know yet; we’re not sure yet. But that’s around the corner.” — Trump in speaking to National Border Patrol Council members.

    Feb. 23: “We have it very much under control in this country.” — Trump in speaking to reporters.

    Feb. 24: “The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!” — Trump in a tweet.

    Feb. 26: “So we’re at the low level. As they get better, we take them off the list, so that we’re going to be pretty soon at only five people. And we could be at just one or two people over the next short period of time. So we’ve had very good luck.” — Trump at a White House briefing.

    Feb. 26: “And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done.” — Trump at a press conference.

    Feb. 26: “I think every aspect of our society should be prepared. I don’t think it’s going to come to that, especially with the fact that we’re going down, not up. We’re going very substantially down, not up.” — Trump at a press conference, when asked if “U.S. schools should be preparing for a coronavirus spreading.”

    Feb. 27: “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” — Trump at a White House meeting with African American leaders.

  538. DeWitt Payne (Comment #181200): "On wide scale testing. If you aren't finding and quarantining the apparently large fraction of asymptomatic infected, you might as well not be testing at all."
    .
    Right. So what good is large scale testing? Real question.

    We can not test everyone. South Korea is testing about 10,000 people a day. At that rate, they will test their entire population in 14 years.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_South_Korea#Statistics
    South Korea has leveled off at about 100 new cases a day, about 1% of those being tested. The PCR test for influenza has a false positive rate above 1%. There are surely ways to assess the false positive rate and maybe they show it to be lower than that. But whatever the false positive rate is, it sets an upper bound on the utility of testing.

  539. Tom Fuller,
    For that matter, you provide evidence more or less continuously that you don't care nearly as much about coronavirus as you do [about] roasting Trump over coronavirus. [Apparently it's just a convenient vehicle for your politics.]

  540. Mike M.,

    "We can not test everyone. South Korea is testing about 10,000 people a day. At that rate, they will test their entire population in 14 years."

    But they're not trying to, or need to, test everyone. Testing is concentrated where there is an outbreak and a team investigates contacts for anyone who does test positive as well as informing those in the neighborhood. Again, if you're only testing those with bad symptoms, there will be an exponential increase in those infected and a lot of deaths.

    To put it another way, widespread testing here in Northeast TN would be nearly pointless. Widespread testing in NYC would be a really good idea.

    Thomas Fuller,

    It's not at all clear to me that more people at the CDC would have resulted in a better outcome. If any of those that were let go had a better idea of what to do, I would be surprised if the media hadn't found them. Since apparently they haven't, I doubt they exist. Also, it looks like top management, and that includes those in Civil Service, were clueless. That is most likely the reason Trump was also clueless.

    Along the lines of Trump being an idiot, however, he repeated, in a recent press conference when asked about suspending tariffs, the misconception that China is paying the tariffs. They aren't. Peter Navarro is evil.

  541. Actually, Mark, I am concerned about both the corona virus and our current president. I consider them equally malevolent, equally destructive and equally worthy of my efforts to combat.

  542. Thomas Fuller,

    Trump malevolent? So you're a mind reader now? Now Bernie Sanders, OTOH, there's malevolent and destructive.

  543. The only way I would have voted for Bernie is if he was going head to head against Trump in November. But flawed as he is, he would be a dramatic improvement over our current president.

  545. I imagine there are Democrats as heartless and stupid as this Republican Senator. I just cant' think of any off the top of my head…

    "Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) has called on people to have some “perspective” while the nation deals with the COVID-19 pandemic, noting that “no more than 3.4 percent” of the infected population is in danger of dying from the virus, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports. “I’m not denying what a nasty disease COVID-19 can be, and how it’s obviously devastating to somewhere between 1 and 3.4 percent of the population,” he told the paper. “But that means 97 to 99 percent will get through this and develop immunities and will be able to move beyond this."

    324 million x 3.4% = 11million

  546. DeWitt Payne (Comment #181205): "But they're not trying to, or need to, test everyone. Testing is concentrated where there is an outbreak and a team investigates contacts for anyone who does test positive as well as informing those in the neighborhood."
    .
    Yes, targeted testing can certainly be beneficial. But that is not drive through testing sites taking all comers, as they seem to be doing in South Korea and as people are clamoring for here.
    .
    DeWitt Payne: "Again, if you're only testing those with bad symptoms, there will be an exponential increase in those infected and a lot of deaths."
    .
    That is true if you are relying on identification and isolation to break the chain. But there are other ways to break the chain, like social distancing.

    It is silly to complain that we are not testing all the asymptomatic carriers when we have no way to identify who they might be.

  547. "I imagine there are Democrats as heartless and stupid as this Republican Senator. I just cant' think of any off the top of my head…"
    ——-
    Thomas,
    .
    See but that's my point. You're talking about the Chinese virus now for a bunch of reasons, only a few of which actually relate to the damage the virus will cause:
    1. You're talking about it because all the other homosapien chimps are talking about it, and that's what we do as hyper social animals.
    2. You're talking about it because you think it's an opportunity to advance your political views.
    3. Yes, I'm sure you're also genuinely concerned to some extent. Most everybody is.
    .
    You don't have the right to moralize about your political opposition trying to put the magnitude of the crisis into perspective for political reasons when [one of] your chief interest[s] in the first place appears to be exploiting the crisis for your own political reasons. That's hypocrisy. At least be a conscious hypocrite and acknowledge it.

  548. Let me put it another way. You are pretending that the reason for your opposition to that Republican Senator is because he said something 'heartless and cruel'. The fact of the matter is that you are playing politics as well, and frankly you wouldn't be here commenting *at all* [on this subject] if it wasn't for the opportunity to play politics. You're not fooling anybody. The virtuous mask and the hypocrisy behind it is offensive.

  549. The 'Chinese virus.' Yeah.

    Mark, do you know where the Spanish flu started?

    But yeah, go get those yellow bastards. It's all their fault.

  550. Thomas Fuller,

    "It's all their fault."

    Classic PC non-sequitur. We shouldn't be responsible for the behavior of idiots who think that ethnic Chinese in the US are to blame because the pandemic originated in China.

    Do you know why it was called the Spanish flu? It's yet another reason to proclaim Woodrow Wilson the worst President ever. Carter, Bush 43 and Obama aren't even on the same planet by comparison. And why the leaders, both political and military, of Britain and France should be in the lowest circle of Hell.

  551. LOL.
    I point out your hypocrisy and you insinuate I'm a racist.
    .
    Thanks for implicitly acknowledging the bankruptcy of your position Thomas.

  552. People trying to relabel the corona virus are just like those who rebranded global warming as climate change, climate disruption, etc.

    Blame China First! That means our moron in chief isn't responsible for the idiocies visited on the American public by his incompetent administration and his inability to manage anything at all.

    And who cares if a few yellowskins get beat up by MAGA worshippers? They prolly had it coming anyways.

  554. Thomas Fuller, those feb 26 quotes are all from the same interview. They are contradicting each other as presented, because they are taken out of context, as pointed out above.

    The 15 cases coming down to 0, means the fifteen cases themselves are recovering.

  555. “The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency,” Trump tweeted Jan. 24. “It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!”

    Just had a long and very good conversation by phone with President Xi of China. He is strong, sharp and powerfully focused on leading the counterattack on the Coronavirus. He feels they are doing very well, even building hospitals in a matter of only days. Nothing is easy, but…

    Donald J. Trump
    ✔
    @realDonaldTrump
    ….he will be successful, especially as the weather starts to warm & the virus hopefully becomes weaker, and then gone. Great discipline is taking place in China, as President Xi strongly leads what will be a very successful operation. We are working closely with China to help!"

    Oh, wait… what is this 'corona virus' of which our fearless leader speaks?

  556. Q: Are you concerned that China is covering up the full extent of coronavirus?
    TRUMP: No. China is working very hard. Late last night, I had a very good talk with President Xi, and we talked about — mostly about the coronavirus. They’re working really hard, and I think they are doing a very professional job.

  557. By coincidence, my wife’s prescription for 3 months supply of hydroxy chloroquine (for arthritis) was refilled today (after several days delay). Said the young lady at the pharmacy: “You are very lucky; this is on backorder, and we have no idea when more will become available.” Apparently doctors are already writing prescriptions for anti-malarial drugs in anticipation of a prophylactic effect against the coronavirus illness.

  558. Thomas Fuller,
    Yes, Trump is often foolish, and always a buffoon. His policies are a lot better for the country than what the deranged left supports. If you really believe Bernie would be better for the country than Trump, then I can only conclude you have cut yourself free from reality and are in TDS driven free-fall.

  559. I do so believe. Perhaps I have cut myself free from reality. I don't think so, but anything is possible.

    Bernie wants to raise the minimum wage. Trump wants to build a wall at the border. I think one of those two is good policy.

    Bernie wants Medicare for all. Trump wants to cut Social Security. I think one of those two is good policy. (I prefer Medicare for all who want it.)

    Bernie wants to make college free and forgive college debt (I disagree). Trump gave $1 trillion to the wealthiest among us. One of those policies is humane.

    Most of the policies advanced by Sanders have the support of a majority of Americans. I think he goes too far, but he is moving in the right direction. I think Trump is a moron who is always, 100%, doing what is in his best interests, not the country's.

  560. Thomas Fuller,
    “Mark, do you know where the Spanish flu started?”
    .
    Whoa. If a severe flu virus was first detected and clearly spread from Denver (or Boston, or Miami, or Dallas, etc) I have no doubt the shorthand would be the ‘Denver flu’, ‘Boston flu’, etc. Really, to smear people with accusations of racism for saying the ‘Wuhan coronavirus’ is both inaccurate and obnoxious. The damned virus was first detected and spread from Wuhan…. or do you prefer to deny reality to maintain your political correctness? Real question.

  561. In all probability the Spanish flu spread from Fort Funston in Kansas. We will never be 100% certain, but it seems that American soldiers training there caught the flu and took it to the front lines of WWI.

  562. Just like global warming morphed to climate change during the pause. You could legitimately make the argument that after all, the IPCC was never called the IPGW. But that was a thin cover story, usually made with a smirk.

    So it is with the Wuhan Woo-Woo. Trump called it the corona virus until he started catching flak for his moronic approach to the issue. Then it became the China Syndrome! Cue Jane Fonda…

  563. Thomas Fuller,
    I'm so sorry. I thought it was TDS. If I'd realized you were in cognitive decline, I'd have shown more respect.

  564. Thomas,
    Your claim of Trump wanting to cut Social Security benefits is purposely misleading, if not outright false. From USA Today: “…. the reductions are aimed at the part of Social Security program that provides benefits to about 8.5 million disabled workers – and not the monthly retirement benefits.”
    .
    I stood in line for an hour about a year ago at a SS office to help a relative resolve SS retirement related issues. I was shocked to find that nearly all the people standing in line (~80%) were not retirees at all, but young, apparently in good health, and receiving disability benefits. I do not doubt there is plenty of abuse of SS disability benefits. Trump’s proposals have absolutely nothing to do with retirement benefits. To suggest that Trump wants to simply “cut” SS is straight deception.

  565. In the fiscal 2018 budget, Trump's proposal called for disability program reforms, without much elaboration. However, the appendixes of the proposal laid out $72 billion in savings between 2018 and 2027, if implemented.

    In Trump's fiscal 2019 budget proposal, a total of $64 billion in Social Security outlay reductions are forecast between 2019 and 2028. Again, the president chose to focus on perceived inefficiencies with SSDI. A notable chunk of the savings are expected to be derived from limiting retroactive SSDI pay to six months from the current 12 months that approved long-term disabled workers are allowed to collect.

    Last year, when Trump released his fiscal 2020 budget, it contained proposals that would reduce Social Security payouts by $26 billion over the next decade. The president once again leaned on the idea of reducing retroactive pay for disabled workers to six months from 12 months as a core money-saving tactic.

    Then, as noted, in the fiscal 2021 budget proposal released earlier this month, Trump called for $24 billion in Social Security cuts over the next decade.

  566. Only half the cuts he has proposed target disability insurance.

    Tell me, do you want to eliminate that part of social security because some of the people you saw in one office aren't in wheelchairs with ventilators?

  567. Thomas Fuller,

    "In all probability the Spanish flu spread from Fort Funston in Kansas."

    Probably wrong again. For one thing, there is no consensus on the origin. However, according to an article in National Geographic in January, 2014, it originated in China in November, 1917 and was spread by 90,000+ Chinese workers imported to work behind the lines in Europe. Which was something that I don't remember seeing before.

    ""I would say that the takeaway message of all of this is to keep your eye on China" as a source of emerging diseases, Higgins says. He points to concerns about avian flu and the SARS virus, both arising from Asia in the last decade."

    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/1/140123-spanish-flu-1918-china-origins-pandemic-science-health/

    So I guess Higgins is a racist too.

  568. Thomas Fuller,
    Perhaps you have not seen the SSA’s own estimates of benefits fraud…. which reach a $trillion over a decade. Yes, my observation of apparently healthy, young people receiving benefits is anecdotal, though still surprising. No, I have no doubt there is plenty of fraud and abuse. As far as I can see, there have been NO proposals to reduce legitimate SS benefits, of any kind, but rather efforts to reduce the rate of fraud.

  569. DeWitt,
    “ So I guess Higgins is a racist too.”
    .
    It is always easier to shout “racist!” than address the substantive issues. SARS coronavirus came from civets in China. MERS coronavirus came from camels in the Middle East. To accuse people of racism because they speak accurately about where viruses came from is cheap, dishonest, crap.

  570. "SSA is responsible for issuing over $1 trillion in benefit payments,
    annually, to about 70 million people. " …"In its
    FY 2018 Agency Financial Report, SSA estimated it would make about $10.9 billion in improper payments in FY 2017, and incur an administrative cost of $0.07 for every overpayment dollar it
    collected." https://oig.ssa.gov/sites/default/files/audit/full/pdf/A-02-18-50307.pdf

    Do you guys just make stuff up for fun, or do you actually believe it?

  571. Steve F, that's one tenth the figure you cited for fraud.

    "Today the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means is holding a hearing to examine disturbing allegations that a group of firefighters, police officers and others in New York City may have fraudulently obtained Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. (2014)

    …"These stories of alleged abuse promote the false assumption that fraud is rampant in the SSDI program. Nothing could be farther from the truth. According to Social Security’s watchdogs, ”fraud” in Social Security Disability Insurance is extremely rare."

    …"Our nation’s Social Security system – including Disability Insurance – keeps millions of hardworking Americans like Kira and Carol out of poverty. Benefits average just $1,130 per month. Modest as these amounts are, benefits provide vital support, making it possible to secure stable housing and purchase food, life-sustaining medications, and other basic necessities."

    "It takes a lot more than just being out of work to quality for SSDI. Workers must have paid into the Social Security system for long enough to be covered in case of disability. Additionally, an applicant must provide extensive medical evidence of a severe disability, illness or injury. The disability standard is so strict that fewer than four in ten applicants are approved for disability benefits, even after all stages of appeal. Many are terminally ill — Social Security Disability Insurance beneficiaries are over three times more likely to die than others their age, and nearly one in five men and one in women die within five years of receiving benefits."

    …"
    Today the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means is holding a hearing to examine disturbing allegations that a group of firefighters, police officers and others in New York City may have fraudulently obtained Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits.

    As a long-time advocate for people with disabilities, I applaud the close scrutiny of these extremely troubling allegations by the Social Security Administration, New York City law enforcement, and the House of Representatives. Few things make me angrier than disability fraud, which jeopardizes the economic security of the millions of play-by-the rules Americans with disabilities. Any abuse of vital programs like Social Security Disability Insurance MUST be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

    These stories of alleged abuse promote the false assumption that fraud is rampant in the SSDI program. Nothing could be farther from the truth. According to Social Security’s watchdogs, ”fraud” in Social Security Disability Insurance is extremely rare. Despite the media attention to allegations of fraud, it is absolutely critical for the public to know the circumstances of the people who rely on SSDI.

    People like Kira, who lives with cerebral palsy, and whose Social Security Disability Insurance benefits mean the difference between eating and not eating. People like Carol, who worked as a rare documents archivist at the Library of Congress until she suffered a severe traumatic brain injury after being hit by a car while riding her bike to work. Thankfully, Social Security Disability Insurance has enabled Carol and her family to keep their home from foreclosure.

    Our nation’s Social Security system – including Disability Insurance – keeps millions of hardworking Americans like Kira and Carol out of poverty. Benefits average just $1,130 per month. Modest as these amounts are, benefits provide vital support, making it possible to secure stable housing and purchase food, life-sustaining medications, and other basic necessities.

    It takes a lot more than just being out of work to quality for SSDI. Workers must have paid into the Social Security system for long enough to be covered in case of disability. Additionally, an applicant must provide extensive medical evidence of a severe disability, illness or injury. The disability standard is so strict that fewer than four in ten applicants are approved for disability benefits, even after all stages of appeal. Many are terminally ill — Social Security Disability Insurance beneficiaries are over three times more likely to die than others their age, and nearly one in five men and one in women die within five years of receiving benefits

    During today’s hearing, you’ll likely hear rhetoric about the huge growth in the SSDI rolls. It’s true that SSDI is serving more people, but this growth is almost entirely due to changes in demographics. A new study puts this in stark numbers: increases over the past four decades are almost entirely (90 percent) due to population growth, the aging of the baby boom generation into the high-disability years, and the entry of women in the workforce in greater numbers in the 1970s and 80s so that more are now insured based on their own contributions. Together, these three factors account for 94% of growth from 1990 – 2008."

    Yeah, let's take a meat axe to that.

  572. Thomas Fuller,
    Maybe you could give a reference for those many long quotes. I like quotes, but I like to know where they came from. Possible political bias and all that you know.

  574. >Bernie wants to raise the minimum wage. Trump wants to build a wall at the border. I think one of those two is good policy.

    Bernie was against open borders, calling it a Koch brothers proposal. Building the wall raises the minimum wage by tightening the market for low skill labor.
    The Trump trade deal helps even more because the Mexican president AMLO is a socialist like Bernie and wants to boost the minimum wage. He was very quick to agree to a minimum wage of $16 an hour to be eligible for free trade autos.

  575. I'm not sure how much Social Security fraud there is. For example, I find this link:
    https://www.investopedia.com/articles/retirement/120516/social-security-fraud-what-it-costing-taxpayers.asp
    That says, "According to the most recent statistics available, between 2004 and 2017, the Social Security Administration (SSA) admits to improper payments totaling $1.3 trillion."
    I need to read more about it.
    [I seem to be reading that fraud is only one category of improper payment. Maybe that accounts for some of the discrepancy.]

  577. Thomas Fuller,
    Those quotes come from 2014, by Katy Neas, who “is chairperson of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities and senior vice president for Government Relations at Easter Seals.”
    .
    Maybe I am way too cynical, but an advocate for the disabled may not be the most credible, clear-thinking person to discuss fraud in disability claims.

  578. Did he forget and not call you? I told you the answer awhile ago.
    It's possible you could have won under UAH data, but I don't know how to get accurate numbers.

  580. Reposting
    More showing the current madness in our virus response
    .
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/breaking-exclusive-the-coronavirus-fatality-rate-reported-by-the-media-is-completely-inaccurate-the-actual-rate-is-less-than-the-flu-media-lying-again/
    .
    “ As of today, the actual fatality rate for those who were confirmed to have had the coronavirus is 3.84%. This is the number of fatalities from the virus divided by the number of individuals who were confirmed with the virus.”
    .
    “ The rate of the number of individuals who died from the flu to the number of individuals who had the flu is therefore .1% (22,000 / 36 million). This is an estimate.”
    .
    “ the rate of individuals who died from the flu to the number of individuals who were confirmed to have had the flu is around 10% (22,000/ 222,000)”

  581. Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine have been routinely used in treatment of severe cases of Covid-19 since February in South Korea & China

    This may help to explain why South Korea's mortality from Covid-19 runs at 0.5% while in Italy it's 4.7%…

    Multiple papers have been published recently recording the efficacy of these commonly available, cheap anti-malarials which have been approved for 70 years for both prevention & treatment of Covid-19 (and other coronavirus).

    Both drugs are zinc ionophores, facilitating cell uptake of zinc. In turn the zinc inhibits RNA replication thus limiting virus growth.

    Nature – Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41422-020-0282-0?fbclid=IwAR2JbbZU_Hl7uLjuOTDhrNnmczzyEFvnIhY8QHv9ghY5fYBvX0IsmnhD07w

    Bioscience Trends – Chloroquine phosphate has shown apparent efficacy in treatment of COVID-19 associated pneumonia in clinical studies
    https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bst/14/1/14_2020.01047/_article

    Stanford school of medicine – An effective treatment for coronavirus (COVID-19)
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vR1adodKPhWalV9djnerI2x_v1LGgGyhZZxpl0O5r-ZNyDdagqFq1rTCxXBqaeicfxgvypDOqKCZVyV/pub

  583. Gras Albert,
    A more interesting issue is if taking hydroxy chloroquine and chloroquine could keep people from getting the illness in the first place. I think sending a few million doses to northern Italy for a controlled study among those at significant risk would make sense.

  584. Ed Forbes (Comment #181249),

    That Washington Pundit piece is irresponsible. First, he seems to cite old estimates of the fatality rate for the Wuhan virus; the estimates have come down. More important is that in most cases there seems to be little point in testing people for the flu, so very few tests get done. By his stats, over 100% of flu cases result in hospitalization.

    There is an apples to potatoes comparison being made by official sources. The 0.1% death rate for the flue is compared to an estimate of all cases, whereas the 1% for Wuhan virus is tested cases. The later is also high because the virus seems to be hitting older people preferably and they are more at risk of death. IT might be that Wuhan is only about as deadly as the flu, or maybe a few times worse. We don't know.

    But you advance nothing by countering misleading stats with dishonest stats.

  585. SteveF

    Indeed, Bayer donated 3,000,000 tablets to the FDA this week and Trump, er, trumpeted that the FDA were expediting a trial.

    One clinical trial of patients in France with Covid-19 showed 75% disease free after 6 days of treatment and 100% disease free after 10 days.

    If that success rate replicated to the full population this entire pandemic could over in 14 days…

    Even with my tin foil hat on I can't see who gains from the current policy

  586. Over 40 years ago, in Sénégal, I used 100 mg of chloroquine a day to prevent malaria. I just had to ask the pharmacist and pay. I could not get it in Canada or the UK without a prescription.

  587. Gras Albert,
    Here is the actual paper: https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf
    .
    Note it was a small (40 patient) study that was a) not blind and b) not placebo controlled. That said, the results, when combined with multiple other studies (eg https://aac.asm.org/content/53/8/3416), strongly suggest that chloroquine and hydroxy chloroquine are effective against coronaviruses that infect humans in general, and this coronavirus in particular.
    .
    I read the proposed trial protocol. IMHO, it will take WAY too long to generate results, and worse, is completely inappropriate at this time. The immediate need is for a double blind placebo controlled study of patients who already have the virus. The proposed study, based on health care workers who *MAY* be at high risk from treating those with the virus, seems to me like putting the cart several miles in front of the horse. The premise of the study is that there will be no effective treatment for the disease, lots of very sick people in need of treatment, and so focuses on evaluating prophylaxis among health care workers. We need immediate confirmation of the apparent efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxy chloroquine against the actual disease. Evaluation of prophylaxis against contracting the disease is secondary and can wait. At a minimum, controlled studies of efficacy and prophylaxis should be undertaken in parallel.
    .
    A study of efficacy of these materials against the disease can be completed in a few weeks; waiting several months for results of the proposed prophylaxis study, which doesn't even answer the most important question, is so stupid that I am beginning to doubt the competency of everyone involved.

  588. P-E Harvey,
    In many countries you can purchase many medications without a prescription. In Brazil, for example, there appear to be restrictions mostly on drugs which are addictive, have potential for abuse, and medications which pose significant danger if taken by someone with common contraindications. You can purchase many common medications over the counter which you could never get in the USA without a prescription. I note that general practice medical doctors in Brazil earn between US$4,000 and US$5,000 per month, or about 1/3 to 1/4 of their US counterparts. These things are not coincidental.

  589. SteveF,
    Everybody who could afford it took chloroquine as a prophylactic. (Malaria sufferers also took it, if they could pay for it; this probably explains the large number of deaths from malaria). I had free access to a local military physician.

  590. https://www.jewishpress.com/news/us-news/teva-donating-6-million-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate-tablets-to-us-hospitals-to-fight-coronavirus/2020/03/20/
    .
    The company will immediately ship 6 million doses of hydroxy chloroquine, and 10 million doses by the end of March, to US phamaceutical distributors for use in US hospitals…. at no cost. The company is evaluating ways to increase global supply of this medication ASAP.
    .
    Looks like people will bypass the double blind, placebo controlled studies, and start off-label treatment of the sick with hydroxychloroquine immediately. 10 million doses will potentially treat 300,000+ cases.

  591. The premise of the study may be that there are already plenty of studies under way evaluating whether Chloroquine is a successful treatment and they don't want to waste time/resources doing another. Its use as a prophylactic would be a more involved study, as you point out, which isn't so easily carried out by others but still very useful information.

  592. DaveJR,
    "The premise of the study may be that there are already plenty of studies under way evaluating whether Chloroquine is a successful treatment and they don't want to waste time/resources doing another."
    .
    Well, if so, that is not what they wrote in the proposal.

  593. Mr. Cynical says the FDA would allow 1,000,000 to die from lack of a new and partially tested treatment to prevent 10 from accidentally dying from a wrong treatment, dose, or complications. This may seem a bit harsh but I invite you to examine the words from their leaders. It is all "do no harm" (aka take no risk). I truly hope I am wrong about this, but every statement from FDA spokespeople look like they are reading from the BAU manual.

  594. I am glad to see that Fuller finally passed out and stopped livestreaming MSNBC, ha ha.

  595. I have not been following the discussions here closely and thus do not know whether the possibility of the cure being worse than the disease for Covid-19 has been touched upon.

    I am personally very concerned that our leaders either cannot or chose not to weigh the benefits of their actions/reactions to the virus versus the rather obvious and becoming more obvious with time consequences of an economic meltdown. Our politicians have become more and more immune to the long term consequences of their actions as can be seen with the mounting public debt and unfunded programs. At this point in time there appears to be no limit on the extent of shutting the nation down or more importantly no serious discussion of its consequences. Most leaders I fear only see and are reacting to the immediate problem in the worst case scenarios and feel no responsibility for the economic effects of their reactions.

    Shutting down the economy has lots of immediate and longer term effects by way, for example, of business bankruptcies – and especially for small businesses- and unemployment. These effects will not go away any time soon after the Covid-19 crises passes. The Federal Reserve can print money and the governments can borrow cheaply but not without longer term consequences – even if our politicians do not want to either talk about or consider it.

    There must be models, just as there are models for predicting mortality rates for Covid-19, for determining deaths from the consequences of the reactions to Covid-19, but you do not hear anyone talking about those models.

  596. Kenneth,
    I think the imperative is: "First, get re-elected." So bad policies which appear more likely to lead to re-election will always be what gets done. I completely agree that the broad shutdown of all kinds of economic activity will cause real harm in the long term. I don't think politicians care very much about the long term. The standard political excuse is, of course, "I can't do good if I am not in office." The odor of BS is very strong with this.

  597. Tom Scharf,
    Of course. If an off-label treatment were to save a thousand lives, but kill 20 from side effects, you know exactly what the MSM megaphone would be blaring about. In 'war', you take risks, or else you probably lose.

  598. I think the politicians are now in a big game of topper on who can be the most aggressive in shut-downs. There is little downside politically at the moment for taking aggressive action. Because testing was bungled so much nobody knows what their political exposure is for a medical emergency due to a spike in infections. They are flying blind so the conservative choice is ironically to shut down everything. A bunch of seniors dying from lack of respirators when you didn't take early action will be the permanent end to a politician's career. Anyone who even hints that current actions are too extreme gets shamed into oblivion.

  599. To some extent, public officials are being panicked by worst case scenarios. The big fear seems to be overwhelming the medical system; that is a very real possibility. That will not just lead to a lot of deaths from the Wuhan virus, it will likely lead to a lot of other deaths as people are unable to get treatment.

    There is a strong possibility that a month long crackdown will seriously knock the legs out from the epidemic. Then the arrival of warmer weather will likely keep it under control until the fall.

    To some extent that just kicks the problem down the road. But 8 months buys a lot of time to make preparations; to learn a whole lot more about how the virus spreads and how to control it; to develop test, treatments and possibly a vaccine; and, perhaps most important, for the virus to evolve into a less dangerous form.

    Congress and the President are certainly worrying about the economic costs and how to mitigate them. Most important is to keep people thrown out of work and their employers from going under. Both are being addressed. I think that if that can be done, then the economy should bounce back pretty fast once the shutdown is over.

    Keynesian stimulus right now is just stupid. There might be a place for it if the economy does not bounce back when the shutdown is over. But an awful lot of people responsible for the economy know just one hymn and are determine to stick to it.

  600. Mike M “ IT might be that Wuhan is only about as deadly as the flu, or maybe a few times worse. We don't know.”

    And that is the entire point. Shutting down the economy on obvious inconclusive data is insane.

  601. Ed Forbes (Comment #181273): "And that is the entire point. Shutting down the economy on obvious inconclusive data is insane."
    .
    Wrong. Even if Wuhan is "only" as deadly as the flu, allowing it to spread uncontrolled would be a disaster. Only 10-15% of the population gets the flu in a given year; but a bad flu season very nearly overwhelms the medical system. Wuhan could well infect 50% or more. So we'd be looking at 3 times a bad flu season as the best case scenario, much worse than that as a worst case scenario.

    We act on inconclusive data all the time. Doing so is not insane. But ignoring risks is insane.
    .
    By the way, we are not "shutting down the economy", not even close. I have heard estimates of 10 million out of work because of the shutdown. That is about 7%.

  602. A semi-log fit to the number of deaths per day starting on March 14 using data from here ( https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ ) gives a very good linear fit (R^2 = 0.992) with a slope of 0.17384. There were 57 deaths on March 19 from covid-19. We can expect 85 deaths today, 128 deaths tomorrow, 190 deaths on 3/22, 284 deaths on 3/23, etc. In less than one week, we will exceed 1,000 deaths/day. That's pretty well baked in at this point.

    By the way, if the mortality rate were, in fact, 0.1% with an average time from infection to death of 17 days, that would imply 57,000 new infections on March 2 compared to a reported 85 people total and 25 new infections. While I think that the 85 reported cases was a wild underestimate, I don't think that 57,000 is reasonable either. My guess is that the actual mortality rate is between 0.5 and 5%. That would make the actual number of new infections on March 2 somewhere between 1,140 and 11,400. That's still a whole lot more than 85 total or the 25 new cases reported. Thanks again CDC and FDA /sarc.

    Assuming the curve hadn't bent as of March 14, then the number of new infections on that date was likely somewhere between 140,000 and 1.4 million compared to a reported 696. I guess we'll see.

  603. Thomas Fuller, you lost and it wasn't particularly close, 2.15C/century. I think the threshold was passed two years ago, though at the time the numbers were different and you were just likely to lose. With updates and reanalysis, the numbers kept going higher(as I said might happen here on this board when you asked about whether it's a good bet).
    At one point, the differences between 2010 and 2011 from 2000 and 2001 were .26 and .02
    Now they are .33 and .07.

    I can't find the monthly data for UAH, and am not sure if the data I have is comparable, but through 2016, you were near the bet line, maybe a little over.

  605. Shutting down the economy is drastic yes. However, until they are sure that the China Virus (CV) is not as contagious as they are afraid of, then drastic measures are needed in case it actually is that contagious. The drastic measures give you time to study, think, and understand what you are really facing and come up with effective strategies that allow you to keep everybody as safe as possible while still letting your economy hum along.

    Like his personality or not, Trump has been very good for business in the USA. The last thing he wants is to prolong this shutdown. This is why he is very hopeful, I think those are his words from today's press conference, about the various treatments being discussed. If those treatments are sufficient to definitively reduce the community risk down to that of the flu, then I would expect all of the federal guidelines to remove the most drastic guidance and fall back to wash your hands, stay home if you are sick, and so on.

    His political opponents will likely question any proposal he makes, no matter how correct it is or isn't, because they cannot allow him to take credit for a rapid recovery in the USA.

    To date, I think Ttump's decisions regarding the CV have actually been very good and as timely as he could make them. Whether he has communicated those decisions clearly or well, that's something else.

    just 2-bits from a lurker

  607. CDC latest update has mortality rate in US at 1.32%.
    Additional 51 deaths with 4800 new cases.

    Total deaths last 3 days 75 97 150 201
    Total cases 4200 7000 10400 15200

  608. MikeN,

    I'm sorry, but the CDC's calculation for the mortality rate is incorrect. It takes time to sicken and die. You need to know the actual number of new cases from about 17 days earlier for the denominator. The numbers we have are very poor estimates, likely an order of magnitude or two too low. As I pointed out above, current deaths are a much better estimator of new infections 17 days earlier than the data we have.

    If the mortality rate were 1.3%, than 51 deaths on 3/19 would mean 3,923 new infections on 3/2. With 4800 new cases on 3/19, and a mortality rate of 1.32% there would be only 63 deaths on 4/5. Don't hold your breath on that one.

  609. It’s not the federal guidelines that I object to. It’s the off the wall, mostly Democratic governors and mayors, responses I object to.
    .
    I live in the People’s Democratic Republic of California and the governor has effectively shut down the entire state as of today.

  611. DeWitt, my theory is that expanded testing will increase the denominator substantially.
    It is quite plausible that there were 4000 cases, or even 40,000 two weeks ago.

    The closest we have to a random trial is the NBA. So far it is 10 out of 120 players infected. Almost all of them are feeling fine and would never have been tested. Even Rudy Gobert was planning to play the game while feeling a little sick.
    At the NBA's infection rate, the denominator for the US is about 25 million. 250 deaths in 25 million is .001% mortality rate. If it is 1.3%, then in 17 days we will have 325,000 deaths.

  612. The semi-log model based on daily deaths from 3/14-3/19 predicts 234,000 deaths on 4/6/2020. However, I expect the curve will have bent somewhat by then, given the social distancing measures that have already been taken. Note, that's not based on a mortality rate at all. I use a range of mortality rates to estimate new infections 17 days earlier.

    I seriously doubt that NBA players are representative of the general population.

  613. DeWitt,

    If you apply your model to the six days from 3/9-3/14, you will get a very different result. It is silly to make an exponential extrapolation from such a limited amount of data.

  614. The latest on influenza illnesses in the US is available at:
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/

    As of March 20, there have been 231,654 confirmed cases (positive specimens) of Influenza A and Influenza B for the 2019-2020 flu season.

    Influenza-associated hospitalizations at that same URL show a rate this season of 65.1 per 100,000 population. If that rate is persistent across the entire US it would suggest approximately 214,000 influenza-related hospitalizations.

    The CDC also pegs the annual influenza-related deaths compared to hospitalizations at about 8% (see https://www.cdc.gov/flu/images/about/burden/Influenza-Chart-Infographic-high-res.jpg)

    That same image suggests the overall mortality from influenza is around 0.13%.

    Note that the number nationwide illnesses are estimates. Actual testing is minimal. Just over 1.1 million this season.

    Just some thoughts on context regarding mortality rates of confirmed cases versus mortality rates of presumed illnesses.

  615. DeWitt,
    "I seriously doubt that NBA players are representative of the general population."
    .
    I have noticed they are considerably taller, younger, and richer than your average person. 😉

  616. Mike M.,

    The daily numbers are too small from 3/9-3/14 to directly model. If you use total deaths and fit from 3/9-3/14 and then compare to 3/14-3/19, you will find that your model doesn't fit the data. Using 3/3-3/14, the slope is .0737, or less than half of the 3/9-3/14 data. So the predicted vs actual deaths are:

    date actual predicted
    3/14 57 59
    3/15 68 70
    3/16 86 83
    3/17 109 99
    3/18 150 117
    3/19 207 139

    I just calculated trend lines on the graph. I need to do the full fit to get the errors on the slopes. I'll get back to you on that

  617. Mike M.,

    OK, according to excel, the 95% confidence limits on 3/4-3/14 are 0.069346 to 0.07726. For the 3/14-3/19 log (total death), the slope limits are 0.095412-0.129396. There is no overlap. Also, the error bars on the early points are going to be huge. That's why I picked the later points. The F statistic for the 3/14-3/19 fit is 337. It's even larger for the 3/4-3/14 fit, in part because there are more points.

    We'll see how much today's data, available tomorrow, will change things.

  618. If I fit the log10 of daily deaths from 3/2-3/13, the slope is not significantly different from zero, the R^2 is 0.25 and the F statistic for the fit is 3.3. I think I can safely ignore that data.

    OTOH, daily deaths from 3/14-3/19, the uncertainty range of the slope is far from zero, R^2 is 0.992 and the fit F statistic is 507.

  619. DeWitt,

    You got me annoyed enough to do it myself. I used all the data in a weighted non-linear regression using sqrt(1+N_death) as the uncertainty estimate. I got a chi square of 22 with 20 points, so it fit as well as can be expected. My results, using Feb 29 as t = 0 are

    A = 0.14 ± 0.08 deaths/day at t=0
    k = 0.29 ± 0.04 /day growth rate

    I don't know how that compares to your results since I don't know your terminology.

    Converting to logs, the way we did as undergrads, is a bad way to fit exponentials, unless you have a constant percentage error.

    In the past Excel has always done the least squares error estimates wrong due to ignoring covariances.

    Of course, my method is also flawed due to ignoring correlations in the data.

  620. Mike M. (Comment #181272)
    "Keynesian stimulus right now is just stupid."
    ________

    You sound like a man who won't be eligible for the free money.

  621. Mike M. (Comment #181272): "Keynesian stimulus right now is just stupid."

    OK_Max (Comment #181297): "You sound like a man who won't be eligible for the free money."
    .
    I fail to see what one has to do with the other. I suppose you are one of those lefties who think that greed is the only human motivation.

    I do not know if I would eligible or not. If I am eligible, that would double my scorn for the idea.

    What is needed is to put money in the hands of people who are off work because of the epidemic. And to help business owners make sure that the jobs are still there when it is over.

  623. pauligon59 (Comment #181279)

    "To date, I think Trump's decisions regarding the CV have actually been very good and as timely as he could make them."
    ______________

    I wouldn't say "timely." Trump was pollyannish about coronavirus the first few months, which may have delayed our nation's response.

    **In late January, when a CNBC reporter asked if there were “worries about a pandemic” spreading from China, where it began in October, he replied, “No, not at all. We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.”**

    **While speaking about the first cases of COVID-19 reported in the U.S. at a White House news conference on Feb. 26, he claimed that "pretty soon" there could only be one or two people affected.  Trump said. “And we could be at just one or two people over the next short period of time. So we’ve had very good luck.**

    **The next day, at a White House meeting, he said, "It's going to disappear. One day — it's like a miracle – it will disappear." He has suggested, without firm scientific evidence, that warmer weather would stop the spread.**

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps-words-contradict-claim-viewed-coronavirus/story?id=69662788

  624. Mike M. (Comment #181298)
    March 20th, 2020 at 5:56 pm
    Mike M. (Comment #181272): "Keynesian stimulus right now is just stupid."

    OK_Max (Comment #181297): "You sound like a man who won't be eligible for the free money."

    I do not know if I would eligible or not. If I am eligible, that would double my scorn for the idea
    _______

    I am scornful of the idea because I won't be eligible.I am not as nice as you.

  625. The "free money" stimulus details I saw were:
    Single: Full check up to $75K income on 2018 tax return, $0 at $99K.
    Couple: Full check up to $150K income on 2018 tax return, $0 at $198K.

  626. Mike M.,

    Speaking of not understanding terminology, I'm not sure how you calculate daily deaths. Is it previous day's deaths plus 0.14 + n * 0.29, where n is the number of days since day 0? Or is it just previous day's deaths + n*0.29 or something else?

    With a bit more than 5 hours left in the day, there have already been 55 deaths in the US today.

  628. More on the FDA's (and to a lesser extent CDC) unheroic response to testing. They directed people in Seattle multiple times to stop testing and forbid them from testing thousands of samples already collected. They were forbidden from saying they found coronavirus because of the release forms of the patients tested. The docs decided it was unethical to not say anything and informed the health department anyway. They were then bluntly told to stop testing by the FDA. This was an existing flu study that wanted to quickly test for background presence of the coronavirus.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-delays.html
    .
    The FDA eventually backed down somewhat and there are real issues with privacy and certifying clinics, but the FDA is rather unhelpful in a time of crisis.

  629. I believe that most epidemic rates of new cases follow an exponential curve initially and then peak and fall off as might be expected by a bell curve approximation. The critical issue for predicting the potential total cases would be where the curve peaks. I do not think that the early rates can be used to predict where that peak will occur. Another consideration would be in understanding the differing conditions in the clusters of outbreaks of the disease. I suspect that there is not sufficient basic information about the spread of Covid-19 to make a good model without interjecting assumptions where knowledge is lacking.

    There are lots of data from various nations of the rates of confirmed new cases. Confirmed cases are not necessarily a measure of total cases.

    https://www.visualcapitalist.com/infection-trajectory-flattening-the-covid19-curve/

  630. I wish we'd do random testing of some sample subset of the population so we could estimate how widespread infection actually is.

  631. marc bofill,

    Suppose there are 100K infected nationwide (the real number is probably less). That is one in every 3,300 individuals. To generate statistically reliable numbers, you would have to test 20+ times that number: more than 66,000. Even if there were that many tests available, it would be a very expensive study, and one that would take so long to complete that the numbers would be out of date before you had them in front of you. More efficient to test only people with fever and URT symptoms; that at least would be practical.

  632. Steve,
    Yeah. I get that the numbers involved make it infeasible. The fact that such a study would be out of date long before it was done hadn't occurred to me, but yep there's that as well.
    .
    There is some speculation that chloroquine not only protects against the virus, but helps people get over the virus more quickly (as in, some people treated with it test negative for the virus after six (6) days). Jeff Id's place:
    https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2020/03/19/cured/
    .
    I know there are probably a hundred things wrong with this, but. Would it have been a better course of action to spend that trillion on getting hydroxy-chloroquine out to more or less everybody as quickly as possible, rather than cutting everybody a $1200 check?
    .
    Maybe production couldn't be ramped up that quickly. Maybe the damage caused by people who have psoriasis (or other problems for which chloroquine should be avoided) would be greater than the damage caused by not doing so. Other unintended consequences, who knows.
    .
    Still, it just about kills me to think that we've flushed our economy down the toilet and it might not have been strictly necessary.

  633. We probably have enough information about the mortality rate and time to death to estimate the rate as of two weeks ago as DeWitt has done. What is unknown is how effective controlling the rate has been over the past two weeks. Once the death rate starts to decline it means the infection rate has been declining for the last two weeks.
    .
    Chances are that infection rates will decline, restrictions will be loosened, infection rates will then increase, restrictions increased, repeat. Until enough of the population is infected or immunized.
    .
    LA County said they weren't even going to try to test people anymore unless the result somehow modified the clinical treatment, which it won't in most cases. The drive through testing here has hardly any lines now, but I think that is more likely due to not being able to test many people. 2,870 people were tested and 2,113 were not allowed to be tested this week. Most of those tests are pending. You still need symptoms + (travel or exposure or, etc)

  634. marc bofill,
    “ Still, it just about kills me to think that we've flushed our economy down the toilet and it might not have been strictly necessary.”
    .
    Sure, the current policies, if they continue for more than a month will be extremely destructive, and I suspect much of the economic damage will ultimately be determined to have been unnecessary.
    .
    WRT the chloroquine and hydroxy chloroquine: Yes, there is plenty of evidence that these are going to be effective, both as a treatment and as a prophylactic. But the same risk-aversion that in Washington leads to the economically damaging policies we see being implemented today inhibits the kind of rapid testing/verification of efficacy for these compounds that the situation absolutely demands. The FORMAL Federally sponsored study that has been proposed (long term study of health care workers) is, IMO, a steaming pile of horse dung. And that is a generous description. It is wholly inappropriate at this time.
    .
    Fortunately, among the rest of the health care community (those less politically motivated than people based in Washington DC) widespread off-label treatment is already underway, and we will know within a few weeks if the chloroquine drugs actually work as a treatment. Preliminary positive evidence is strong, but only widespread use will confirm this. Between Bayer and Tevia, about 12 million doses of hydroxy chloroquine have already been donated to US hospitals…. and that has nothing to with with a sudden rise in malaria in the States. Though sanity seems absent in Washington, that is, fortunately, not the case everywhere.
    .
    These are simple drugs, and their production could be ramped up quickly.

  635. NYC: “Outpatient testing must not be encouraged, promoted or advertised,” the Health Department said in an advisory to health care providers that advised facilities “to immediately stop testing non-hospitalized patients” for the virus absent specific circumstances that made it medically necessary."

  637. JD Ohio,
    Thanks. That very new paper presents overwhelming evidence of efficacy for chloroquine.
    .
    I guess the only question now is if the closely related compound hydroxy chloroquine will be equally effective. In the States, hydroxy chloroquine is a very widely prescribed compound, and has low side effect potential. Chloroquine has more side effects, and is less immediately available. But they are so close in structure that the hydroxylated version will almost certainly be effective.

  638. Re Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #181313)

    A second wave of COVID-19 could result in a second curve (or bimodal shape). Some Asian countries fear a return of the virus from travelers entering their countries. A seasonal return next winter also is possible if the new infections decline this coming summer as a result of warmer weather. The influence of seasonal change on COVID-19 is not yet clear, but If colder weather is a driver, it's unlikely a vaccine will be a available in time to prevent it when winter returns later this year.

    The first wave of the Spanish Flu, which occurred in spring, wasn't as devastating as the second the following winter. I don't know whether the return of this virus was entirely a result of colder weather, but it likely was a cause.

  639. mark bofill (Comment #181314): "I wish we'd do random testing of some sample subset of the population so we could estimate how widespread infection actually is."
    .
    In principle, data of that type should be available. Hundreds of thousands of tests have been done. If there is a record of whether the subjects were symptomatic or not, in close contact with people with positive tests, etc., then we ought to be able to get a rough idea of how prevalent infection is.

    Unfortunately, many states are no longer reporting negative test results. Hopefully, somebody has those results.

    The most recent day of tests in New Mexico had 8 positive tests out of 1117 total.
    .
    Edit: various state results here: https://covidtracking.com/data/

  640. Based on the efficacy in JD’s referred paper, looks like the pandemic can be crushed with antimalarial drugs (and maybe more sophisticated anti-virals). Will that happen? We will see. I am sufficiently optimistic to suggest the stock market presents a buying opportunity.

  641. I believe Trump was talking about chloroquine a few days ago. Fauci was probably eye rolling at the ridiculous notion.

  643. Mike M.,

    "What is needed is to put money in the hands of people who are off work because of the epidemic. And to help business owners make sure that the jobs are still there when it is over."

    Hear, Hear!

    My favorite pizza place is in a local mall. It's about the only store that is still open. At least one of the two anchor stores, Penneys, is closed and the other, Belk, is probably closed as well as the multiplex movie place. The pizza place was still doing some business, mostly takeout, but probably not for much longer.

    We're staring a depression in the face without immediate massive government intervention. Unemployment insurance sites are crashing because of overload. Restaurants employ as many people as manufacturing. Without help, restaurants are going to close and probably not be able to open back up. The employees almost certainly don't have any savings and have a lot of debt. That likely also applies to a lot of other small businesses.

    Without a debt moratorium for the unemployed, people are going to lose their houses and cars. Biden, or whoever the Democratic nominee is, will win by a landslide and deservedly so. Trump will be the new Hoover. That may be pessimistic, but I don't think by much.

  644. In today's press conference, Fauci (I think) said that there had been at least 195,000 tests that had been reported and there certainly many more than that because a lot of testing labs aren't required to report their results to the feds. Of the 195,000, about 10% were positive.

    Tests with a fast turnaround are going to be important if you want to use anti-viral drugs. Probably like Tamiflu and influenza, for best effect, treatment ought to be started in the first 48 hours after symptoms are first noted. Note how that makes NYC's testing policy, as reported by Tom Scharf above, less than helpful.

  645. Re JD Ohio (Comment #181320)

    JD, thank you for the link Rud Istvan's summary of the two coronavirus therapies, Chloroquine and Remdesivir. I now have a better understanding of these drugs. I am presenting selected quotes from Istvan's summary here.

    CHLOROQUINE

    “Chloroquine changes the cell ‘lock’ so the viral ‘key’ doesn’t work. Does not undo damage from infected cells, nor prevent an infected person from shedding existing viable virus, but does stop the spread in an infected person’s body—a promising therapeutic for those testing positive.”

    Chloroquine probably works, as AW previously posted. It would solve this pandemic’s key issue, progression to viral pneumonia requiring ICU ventilation.

    “Since safety is well known (the main side affect is retinopathy [vision problems] in 25% of patients over 50 that resolves [slowly] after discontinuation), the main FDA legal issue (FDCA Act of 1906 as amended) issue is to determine dosing and duration for this new indication.”

    “Bayer announced it donated 3 million 250mg chloroquine phosphate pills to the US to get started.”

    “But chloroquine still has the same Wuhan issue illustrated by its previous use for malaria–evolving resistance. RNA viruses like Wuhan coronavirus mutate rapidly (explained in my first post on this topic).”

    "Chloroquine may well be effective now, but if Wuhan coronavirus becomes endemic (now likely given its spread in Africa and Southeast Asia), then it is not a long-term solution like a vaccine. But it will probably buy the precious time to get a vaccine."

    REMDESIVIR

    “Remdesivir may be a longer-term therapeutic solution, because it tricks the conserved RNA polymerase. But its cost and efficacy remain to be determined.”
    “This is a novel antiviral from Gilead that has a somewhat checkered past. It was originally developed for Ebola, where in African trials a few years ago it was shown reasonably safe but not very effective. It did, however, show efficacy against SARS and MERS in vitro. And, importantly, the NEJM reported a positive case outcome in Seattle patient zero under a compassionate use exception.”

    “Aside from price (Gilead is infamous for its Hep C cure that ‘only’ costs about $100,000 per treated patient), and scaled up availability (none yet, same issue that killed my 3 of 4 EUA for a persistent hand sanitizer in the 2009 swine flu pandemic), there are questions about dosing and treatment timing.”

    “Those clinical questions are why China is conducting a double blind (drug/placebo) trial on ~790 patients in Beijing and Gilead is conducting an unblinded smaller trial in the US, starting in Nebraska with Diamond Princess patients. The first results from both will be available sometime in April.”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/20/wuhan-coronavirus-therapies-scientific-background/

  646. Dewitt,
    When I was a kid in El Salvador, we took quinine pills as preventative when we went to certain beaches on the coast. No, I don't know the chemical formulation.
    .
    My little sister spat hers out and got sick. The rest of us did not. Her life was touch and go for a while, but she pulled through– my Mom at her side for hours on end.
    .
    If the drug is abudant and cheap, people will take it BEFORE they get test results back.

  647. Lucia,
    The quinine related drugs (including chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine) are indeed cheap and common… but in the States, you still need a prescription. Else wise, people would already be taking it. I will not be surprised if a black market develops.

  648. SteveF,
    I could probably contact Ana Sylvia (childhood friend) to mail some up from El Salvador… maybe I should. She's probably got some in the medicine cabinet!!
    .
    I want it just in case… especially for Mom. Ana would send it.

  649. Lucia,
    Do it. If it works, there will likely be far more demand in the States than available supply. If it doesn’t work, all you have lost is a few dollars. Remember that the published Chinese results are for chloroquine, not hydroxychloroquine. Doses are typically 200 mg active drug twice a day (typically 300 mg of the sulfate or phosphate salt, ~200 mg active drug). A starting double dose is often used to bring blood levels up quickly, then the 2X a day dose.

  650. DeWitt Payne (Comment #181327)
    March 21st, 2020 at 3:12 pm

    Without a debt moratorium for the unemployed, people are going to lose their houses and cars. Biden, or whoever the Democratic nominee is, will win by a landslide and deservedly so. **Trump will be the new Hoover.**
    __________________

    Back in the1930's Hoover convinced Americans that saving is better than borrowing. But many Americans today foolishly prefer to borrow instead of save. If Trump would sacrifice his chances for re-election by getting Americans to wise up, I might change my opinion of him.

  651. SteveF (Comment #181331)
    March 21st, 2020 at 5:20 pm
    Lucia,
    The quinine related drugs (including chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine) are indeed cheap and common… but in the States, you still need a prescription.
    _______

    Prescription requirement could mean risks.

  652. OK_Max,
    Read up on these drugs. There are a few (rare) side effects, but they are in the range of Tylenol and ibuprofen in terms of risk in short term use. Long term use (multiple years), especially for people with other eye problems, increases the risk of retinal damage, but that is extremely unlikely for a short course of dosing. People with liver and kidney deficiencies (unable to effectively clear the drugs) have to take reduced doses to avoid too high a blood concentration. In most of Latin America, I believe these are over the counter. The prescription requirement, as with many common medications, seems to me mainly a physicians income protection issue.

  653. SteveF,
    I asked Ana. There's been a run in El Salvador. . . (There's no point in worrying about the distinction. Those getting what they can get what they can…)

  654. OK_Max
    **Prescription requirement could mean risks.**
    Sure. And it can mean the US system is HUGELY risk averse to a ridiculous degree.

  655. Lucia,
    No surprise there. I guess I am lucky…. my wife has some 170 doses of 200 mg active from a recently re-filled prescription. Years ago when she planned travel to a country with risk of malaria, her primary care doctor would routinely give her a 30 day prescription, with instructions to start taking the drug 3 days before travel. The local pharmacies are now out of stock.

  656. SteveF,
    **The local pharmacies are now out of stock.**
    Which in El Salvador means if you live in the hills/low mountains, don't go to the beach. …somewhat more mosquitos in the gulf than in the capital. But I bet there are enough everywhere.

    We took them in advance when we went to *certain* places on the coast.

  657. **DeWitt Payne (Comment #181278) 
March 20th, 2020 at 12:22 pm
    … By the way, if you look at the semi-log total deaths plot here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ , the curve is bending up, not down. My analysis uses the most recent six points.**
    .
    Spring break is here….

    **OK_Max (Comment #181300) 
March 20th, 2020 at 6:36 pm
    .
    **I wouldn't say "timely." Trump was pollyannish about coronavirus the first few months, which may have delayed our nation's response. **
    .
    He was. But I don’t think that delayed anything important. The people who can call for quarantine are governors. I don’t think there was one single governor who based his decision on Trumps tweets.
    Ordinarily (as in when the president is “NOT TRUMP”, people listen to the presidents assessment. ) But the mass of people in the population don’t think Trump has insight on THIS sort of thing. Even few of his supporters do. If anything his detractors went out and bought toilet paper the minute Trump said something to suggest this was a hoax or in anyway not a problem. If anything Trumps constant often ridiculous tweets increased media coverage, and probably made more people decide to reduce travel, start hunkering.
    .
    This was probably NOT his goal. He wanted the opposite. But…whatever.
    .

    WRT to things Trump actually DID, he actually reacted like someone taking the virus seriously. He moved to prevent travel from foreign countries. Like it or not, the president doesn’t have the power to prevent people (usually long time employees) at the FDA from screwing up (which it appears they may have). But he has power to do things like shut down borders, prevent INTERNATIONAL travel and so on.

  658. **Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #181313) 
March 21st, 2020 at 9:15 am
    I believe that most epidemic rates of new cases follow an exponential curve initially and then peak and fall off as might be expected by a bell curve approximation. **
    .
    You got me looking at R code… thinking of a “toy” model. . . But tomorrow is a BIT tutoring day.

  659. SteveF (Comment #181336)
    OK_Max,

    "Read up on these drugs. There are a few (rare) side effects, but they are in the range of Tylenol and ibuprofen in terms of risk in short term use…."
    _________

    Steve, no offense intended, but I take only prescription drugs prescribed by a health professional who knows my medical history and the drugs I am already taking.

    Chloroquine or something similar may have been the anti-malaria drug I took with me on a trip to Southeast Asia years ago. But I still would check with my doctor before taking it now.

  660. Re lucia (Comment #181341)

    **The people who can call for quarantine are governors. I don’t think there was one single governor who based his decision on Trumps tweets.**

    lucia, let me introduce Oklahoma’s Governor Kevin Stitt, who was slow to follow Trump’s awakening:

    https://kfor.com/news/local/ok-governor-okc-mayor-face-backlash-after-posting-photos-in-crowded-restaurants-amid-coronavirus-concerns/

    Here's Trump's reaction to questions about Governor Stitt's behavior:

    https://kfor.com/news/local/president-trump-responds-to-gov-stitt-social-distancing-social-media-backlash/
    ____

    **But the mass of people in the population don’t think Trump has insight on THIS sort of thing. Even few of his supporters do. If anything his detractors went out and bought toilet paper the minute Trump said something to suggest this was a hoax or in anyway not a problem.**

    I hadn't thought about it that way. Makes me wonder if Trump's statements are contributing to the bear market. I hope the market recovers when the crises is over, so I wish he would stop saying it will.

  661. OK_Max,
    “ Steve, no offense intended, but I take only prescription drugs prescribed by a health professional who knows my medical history and the drugs I am already taking.”
    .
    No offense taken. It is clear you give ‘experts’ of all stripes considerable deference. But there are other people who are a bit more skeptical; I think it comes from seeing experts draw horribly wrong conclusions and do great damage. Maybe it *would* be better to die from coronavirus 19 than take a low risk medication that was not prescribed by a health care professional. I wonder though if you think heath care professionals can read the lists of potential side effects, contra-indications, and drug interactions more accurately than you can. In any case, please always do what heath care professionals tell you to do.

  662. OK_Max: "Prescription requirement could mean risks."

    lucia (Comment #181338): "Sure. And it can mean the US system is HUGELY risk averse to a ridiculous degree."
    .
    Also, if chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were not prescription, then the people who actually need those drugs would have zero chance of getting their meds. Unless they are rich.

  663. Mike M,
    If they were over the counter, some enterprising company would be supplying. BTW, the applications where those drugs are used (outside malaria) are not short term life-or-death.

  664. Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #181313): "I believe that most epidemic rates of new cases follow an exponential curve initially and then peak and fall off"
    .
    In a well-mixed population with no prior innate or acquired immunity, the peak occurs when the fraction of the population infected or recovered equals 1-(1/R0), where R0 is the basic reproduction number. So for R0 = 2, the fraction would be 50% and when R0 = 3, the fraction is 2/3. I think such estimates are the basis of claims that eventually 60-70% of the population will be infected.

    Those calculations are also used to determine the level of immunization needed to provide herd immunity. So if R0=20 (measles) at least 95% of the population would have to be immunized.

  665. SteveF (Comment #181350) "If they were over the counter, some enterprising company would be supplying."
    .
    In an idealized economic model, yes. In the real world, not so much. Go look at the toilet paper aisle in your local supermarket. At fixing that only requires ramping up distribution, not creating a highly quality controlled chemical plant.

  666. OK_Max
    I'm not sure what your point is. I said governors don't listen to Trump nor do they leave decisions to the Federal government.
    .
    You then came up with an example of a Governor who did the opposite of what Federal guidelines say. When Trump heard the story of what the Governor did, Trump said the Governor should follow the Federal guidelines.
    .
    I would think that supports my point. Governors do what Governors want to do. They don't listen to Trump!
    .

  667. MikeM,
    ** if chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were not prescription**
    I bet they can't now anyway. I bet lots of doctors got phone calls. Some of them wrote prescriptions. That's enough to wipe out supplies.

  668. Mike M,
    These are simple drugs, and there are many companies than could produce them. It is true the the FDA would certainly step in to make sure the market couldn’t respond to demand. I wonder if ‘interfering with market economy’ is in their charter. Of course someone like Trump could direct the FDA to relent.

  669. MikeM,
    I doubt making more chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine will require making a new chemical plant. Since the explosion in demand is sudden, I bet the company that makes that and likely other drugs will just switch some production lines to making those two currently in need drugs.
    .
    *Eventually* other companies will make it– probably in an existing plant. That will take time, and if the drugs are under patent, then it will take a long time.

  670. Lucia,
    “I bet they can't now anyway.”
    .
    You win that bet. A 10 days ago the young lady who handed my wife her hydroxy chloroquine refill said “You are so lucky, this is on backorder, and we have no idea when we can get more….. it is like gold.”
    .
    In all cases, regulation interferes with balancing supply and demand. Whether that interference is justified is the only question. My experience is that it is only rarely justified.
    .
    These drugs are not under patent.

  671. From the website fiercepharma.com:
    “On Friday, NIAID director Anthony Fauci said there's no meaningful evidence to date on chloroquine and COVID-19. Any evidence so far is "anecdotal," he added.”
    .
    Yup, always making sure nothing gets done fast. In this case, I have read the available published studies, and Fauci is absolutely full of sh!t. It is not anecdotal. There is very strong, though preliminary, evidence these compounds are effective. The evidence is strong enough that these medications are already *recommended* treatment protocol in Korea. It is also strong enough for lots of doctors in the USA and elsewhere to already be prescribing it for this off-label use.
    .
    Multiple existing suppliers have already announced production increases, and three different pharma houses have *donated* more than 10 million doses to US hospitals via existing distribution companies. Fauci needs to get out of the way.

  672. Mike M. (Comment #181351)
    MikeM, I was talking about empirical data which would be influenced by R0, the basic reproduction number. R0 in turn would be influenced by the nature of the Covid-19 virus, which could change with mutations, and be influenced further by factors such as the degree of precautions taken in social distancing and antiseptic measures.

    I suspect that the experts in this area of infectious diseases at this point in time do not understand in detail the causes of the differences in the infection rate derived from the statistics coming out of the reporting nations. I would hope we can learn something from this experience and especially as it relates to translating less than certain scientific knowledge into policies both from private and public parties such that under and overkill can be avoided.

    I believe there are some analogies between the current crises and climate change, climate science and mitigation polices.

  673. lucia (Comment #181354): "I bet they can't now anyway. I bet lots of doctors got phone calls. Some of them wrote prescriptions. That's enough to wipe out supplies."
    .
    Yes, but the run on those drugs has been a fraction of what it would have been in they were over the counter. People do have to get a doctor to write a prescription, right there that slows things down. Not all doctors will write such a prescription. And people can not hoard. A single person can not walk into a drug store and take their entire supply.

    Plus, the shortage can be at least somewhat alleviated by getting word out to doctors to show restraint in writing prescriptions.

    If it were not a prescription drug, the situation would be much worse.

  674. With respect to toilet paper (and diapers), I read that there is no absolute shortage of it. It's just the spikes of panic buying are wiping out the retail outlets temporarily.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/20/coronavirus-international-paper-ceo-says-there-is-enough-diapers.html
    .
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2020/03/20/heres-why-the-toilet-paper-shortage-is-only-temporary/#6eb959b72672
    .
    As Mike says, a problem with ramping up distribution.
    .
    The market does not instantaneously solve all problems. It eventually/ over time solves a lot of problems though.

  675. Lucia,
    .
    Got a strange question for you. Have any of your cats ever suffered from panniculitis?
    .
    https://vcahospitals.com/know-your-pet/panniculitis
    I rescued a kitten last fall that's been living fairly peacefully with my dogs until recently. A couple of weeks back he got into a battle with the dogs while we were away and got bitten seriously enough that I had to take him to the emergency vet. The bite is healing nicely, but he appears to have a lump in the fatty layer under his skin on his underside / belly now that he didn't have before the fight. I'm guessing panniculitis.
    .
    I can't seem to get a bead on whether or not the cat needs immediate treatment for this by reading online. I suspect he can wait for an appointment and therefore I'd hate to burn the time and money on another emergency vet appointment, but. Don't want the little bugger to die on me…
    .
    [Edit: I'll add, the cat shows no signs of distress and seems to be going back to his normal active routines as he heals.]

  676. I am wondering if knowledge of the potential effectiveness of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in combating the effects of Covid-19 is available to Anthony Fauci or perhaps if he is a strict adherent to government regulations.

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/dr-anthony-fauci-i-dont-want-to-embarrass-trump?ref=scroll

    "As recently as this past Friday, Dr. Fauci had to publicly tamp down expectations for the anti-malarial drug that Trump has been touting as a miracle cure for COVID-19."

    I heard Fauci refer to the evidence for the effectiveness of chloroquine compounds as anecdotal and appeared to be putting hope in its use down. I heard a doctor on Fox News (a former politician whose name escapes me) concur with Fauci.

  677. Never mind. It's clearly not an emergency thing, I'll just make him an appointment. I panicked there abit..

  678. Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #181364): "I am wondering if knowledge of the potential effectiveness of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in combating the effects of Covid-19 is available to Anthony Fauci or perhaps if he is a strict adherent to government regulations."
    .
    More likely just a strict adherent to "if it is not published in a peer review journal that I respect, then it is just an unfounded rumor".

  680. Personally, I would expect cautious optimism from such experts over the findings together with the promise to deliver the facts. However, dismissing the results could be a deliberate effort to prevent optimism, which might lead to what the experts deem to be less than desirable behavior. Or it could simply be expert arrogance/TDS. The trials are getting done whether these experts like it or not so hopefully we will have an answer.

  681. Government bureaucracies are typically hugely risk averse. You can see it in the statements by the NIH, CDC, FDA, etc. If they are uncertain about estimates of the outbreak they say * nothing * but information free / unactionable statements. Their estimates of infections not tested? Estimates on whether certain drugs might help? Probability of hospital overruns? Effectiveness of social distancing techniques?
    .
    Since when is a person an * expert * if they provide little to no information at all? I don't need an expert to explain the raw counts. One assumes the best of them do provide these estimates internally, but I doubt most of them even do that. Fear of being wrong is huge problem in times like this. Hobbyists and charlatans then fill the void.

  682. "People will die (unless Trump acts)" De Blasio is now in full attempted deflection mode as he sits on a powder keg loudly blaming Trump and the feds for everything wrong with NYC. This is classic political desperation, blame the first level of government above you held by your opponents. His early refusal to close schools exposes his hypocrisy.
    .
    Strangely I haven't heard any Democrats asked about decriminalizing the borders and giving illegals free healthcare lately, ha ha. Perhaps the current crisis is relevant to the folly of that proposed policy.

  683. Tom Scharf,
    The difficulty is that experts who need to guide the public can't be changing stories every few hours. The situation is somewhat fluid.
    .
    In reality, LOTS of people started hunkering down. *I* instituted a "full pantry" policy weeks before the runs on toilet paper started.
    .
    The main planks were: Make sure we have two weeks supply of stuff that can be easily stored. Get extra peanut butter. I usually buy those 12 packs of TP, make sure I buy a new one when I am down to 6 extra rolls, not when the pantry is empty. (When the pantry is empty there are still rolls in the bathrooms.)
    .
    The main difficulty was getting Jim on board. He's got a very strong inclination to only by we run out. I could get him to buy "extra" when things were on sale. *I* bought bags of apples where as we usually buy 4 at a time.

  684. There was a press conference — Friday? — where Trump suggested that chloroquinine has shown great promise, and said he was optimistic about its potential. Fauci came forward with the caveat that the study was small and not conclusive, we would have to wait to see if it was effective. He also said that doctors have to make the best choices for their patients.

    The post-conference CNN talking head — an MD, I think — said he had never seen a senior medical officer having to correct the [implied "idiotic"] preceding pronouncement. Ah well, it's CNN…

    My opinion is that Fauci has a huge (and well-deserved) reputation; if he says it's the correct treatment then everyone will jump on it, so he wants to have 100% confidence, not just 90-95%. But he is happy to have MDs try it out.

  685. lucia (Comment #181367): "My friend works for a pharmacy in El Salvador. SteveF's wifes pharmacy ran out before El Salvador did."
    .
    If anything, the fact they ran out in El Salvador proves my point. El Salvador has 3 confirmed cases of the Wuhan virus, the first one was on March 18.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_El_Salvador
    People in El Salvador are poor. They don't have money to waste on something that might not work against something they probably won't catch.
    Does El Salvador have malaria? I'd guess yes. In which case they probably have large stocks of anti-malaria drugs compared to the U.S.
    Yet they ran out anyway.

  686. The experts can say "here is what I am certain about, here is what I am uncertain about, here are my estimates, here are my recommendations, these may change soon as new information arrives". Instead we get "I'm not certain, I have no information for you".
    .
    The fallibility of expertise (aka the BS meter) is what all intelligent and experienced people already know to be the case. We have become "experts on alleged expertise". You can never be wrong if you say nothing.
    .
    Case in point "don't buy masks, they are not useful, we need them for medical personnel where they are magically useful". Experts dealing with the public want to project infallibility and worry about conflicted messaging, projecting chaos, and being wrong. They have a legitimate fear of this as the media is merciless in exposing these things. The social / career punishment for being wrong is too high IMO.

  687. MikeM
    **If anything, the fact they ran out in El Salvador proves my point. El Salvador has 3 confirmed cases of the Wuhan virus, the first one was on March 18.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_El_Salvador
    People in El Salvador are poor. They don't have money to waste on something that might not work against something they probably won't catch.**
    .
    People in El Salvador aren't THAT poor. The "waste" money on lots of things. We used to take it when we wet to the beach. Like when I was a kid, people in huts with aluminum roofs "wasted" money on tvs. You could see the antennas.
    .

    **Does El Salvador have malaria? I'd guess yes. In which case they probably have large stocks of anti-malaria drugs compared to the U.S.
    Yet they ran out anyway.**

    Yep. But they ran out AFTER we did.

  688. Tom,
    Yeah… Obviously, the "it's a critical need item" and "they aren't useful" are dissonant and people will notice that.
    .
    Of course, having said that, n95 masks are generally going to be useless when used by people who don't know what they are doing, who might not wash their hands, who will reuse them yada, yada….

  689. I read N95 have 3 micron holes, the virus is 1 micron. Apparently they reduce the chances of infection about 5x. N95's are always better but they now say N95 is only required for intubations due to supply. The right information is to disclose the correct and incorrect ways for the public to fit the masks of course. The last information I heard is don't use them unless you are sick or taking care of a sick person. A surgical mask on a sick person will at least trap a lot of the coughing debris. It's all fuzzy on how often you should change them, or if reusing them is better than nothing.
    .
    NYT today: "In part, a widespread buying of masks by anxious citizens limited commercial supply. Experts say masks and respirators are not effective for protecting the general public, but are crucial for health care workers.
    If you bought masks and have them at home, donate them to a hospital immediately. You will be safer if your doctors are safer."
    .
    Hmmmmm…experts!…BS meter indeed. Tell that to your teenager working the register at the grocery store in NYC. How about "We failed to plan and now need your help, please".

  690. SteveF (Comment #181347)

    **No offense taken. It is clear you give ‘experts’ of all stripes considerable deference.**

    Thank you, Steve. I go by what my doctor, dentist, lawyer, and CPA advise. Based on experience, I trust them. I used to have an auto mechanic I trusted. He retired, and I have yet to find another one.

  691. Mike M,
    “ If it were not a prescription drug, the situation would be much worse.”
    .
    For a short period, maybe yes, although I am not sure how much worse than “just not available” it could be. No shortage could last for long. I am sure the hospitals that are receiving the 10+million free doses WILL be hoarding.
    .
    Suppose there were evidence that a common over the counter drug (eg aspirin) were effective against the coronavirus 19. I don’t see how that would be a *worse* supply situation than we have with hydroxychloroquine. It would mean people would self treat, and that may be the real issue motivating Fauci’s horse sh!t promouncements of anecdotal evidence.

  692. HaroldW (Comment #181372)
    March 22nd, 2020 at 10:43 am

    "But he (Fauci) is happy to have MDs try it out."

    Harold, I missed that part. I hope the MDs did not.

    Was that a nuanced message? I thought from facial expression and body language that Fauci was pooh poohing the Trump statement. I think someone here posted something about a Fauci eye roll.

    Fauci has a deserved reputation for doing great scientific work, but that does not mean he will always make the correct judgments in cases like the current crises. He comes across to me as a bit fuddy duddy, but that might just be me.

  693. Tom Scharf,
    The virus is ~0.1 micron (I have measured the size of many similar virus samples, but not coronavirus 19). The masks stop big droplets from sneezes and coughs which carry the virus, not the individual virus particles. The good news is I very much doubt single viruses could ever be aerosolized unless you designed a piece of equipment to do just that.

  694. OK_Max (Comment #181378)

    "I go by what my doctor, dentist, lawyer, and CPA advise. Based on experience, I trust them."

    OK, I was hoping from you at least a "trust, but verify". Personal experience is probably what verifies your trust in these particular individuals, but I would assume would not provide a pass for all doctors, dentists, lawyers and CPAs simply by way of their professional status.

  695. Kenneth,
    “ He comes across to me as a bit fuddy duddy, but that might just be me.”
    .
    Not just you. He is a bureaucrat, so he starts with two strikes against. He insults the intelligence of everyone who has actually read the published (preliminary) studies with his ‘anecdotal’ remark; that is strike 3 for this umpire. YMMV.

  696. Fauci's statement was that there is not enough clinical testing to reach a definitive conclusion. Then when Trump made his statement, he followed up with, yeah it's possible, I don't mean to rule anything out.

  697. HaroldW,
    “ He also said that doctors have to make the best choices for their patients.”
    .
    One would hope so. That explains the run on hydroxy chloroquine at US pharmacies. The bigger point is that doctors at all those hospitals which are receiving the 10+ million donated doses will for certain be giving hydroxy chloroquine to patients with the coronavirus illness. I just wish Fauci was a *lot* more honest about the situation (Note I am giving him the benefit of the doubt: not really profoundly stupid, just dishonest).

  698. MikeN,
    Perhaps Fauci could talk to the medical doctors in Korea who are routinely using the drug for Coronavirus 19 cases. Perhaps not.

  699. lucia (Comment #181353)
    March 22nd, 2020 at 6:56 am
    OK_Max
    "I'm not sure what your point is. I said governors don't listen to Trump nor do they leave decisions to the Federal government."
    ______

    Oklahoma's Governor Stitt (R) was endorsed by Trump and promised to work with him. Both initially thought the coronavirus was nothing to be alarmed about. After Trump decided the virus is a serious threat, so did Stitt. It just took him longer to decide.

    I believe Stitt, as Governor of Oklahoma, would be inclined to listen to Trump who is very popular in the State, but I do not know to what extent his views on the coronavirus are shaped by what Trump says.

  700. Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #181382)

    " Personal experience is probably what verifies your trust in these particular individuals, but I would assume would not provide a pass for all doctors, dentists, lawyers and CPAs simply by way of their professional status."
    ______

    If I thought they are all the same, I would choose based on distance from my house and fees. But I know they aren't all the same, so I select based on research. I always try to get the best.

  702. OK_Max….
    So… IOT The governor acted on his own beliefs. He did not react to Trumps tweets. So nothing in this incident indicates a governor was acting based on tweets. In fact: he acted DIFFERENTLY from Trump when he wanted to do so.

  703. Fauci this morning:
    "there isn't, fundamentally, a difference" between his view and President Donald Trump's when it comes to combatting coronavirus, saying Trump just approaches fighting the pandemic from a "hope, layperson standpoint" while he approaches it from a scientific one."
    .
    "I, on the other side, have said I'm not disagreeing with the fact anecdotally they might work, but my job is to prove definitively from a scientific standpoint that they do work," Fauci, who serves on the White House coronavirus task force, said Sunday. "So I was taking a purely medical, scientific standpoint and the President was trying to bring hope to the people."
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/22/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus-treatments/index.html

  704. Tom Scharf,
    When the Chloroquine drugs become standard treatment and save a lot of lives…. without Fauci's stamp of "scientific" approval… he is not going to look good. If I were him, I'd start walking back the "anecdotal" remarks pretty quickly. I doubt he will.

  705. The plural of anecdote is data. Blind trials are standard for good reason, but that doesn't mean other data is not data.
    .
    We'll soon see.
    .
    The thing is, you ALSO don't want people to get false hope.

  706. Lucia,
    "The plural of anecdote is data."
    .
    Terribly clever. Is that your original, or did it come from someone else?
    .
    Sorry, I should have checked first: the aphorism comes from Raymond Edwin Wolfinger (29 June 1931 – 6 February 2015), political scientist.

  709. New York City is rapidly turning into Italy. Almost half the new deaths ( 58/117) and over half the new cases ( 5418/9373 ) for 3/22 in the US were in New York. That's about the same as the number of new cases in Italy. But Italy may be peaking in terms of new cases and New York is just getting started, relatively speaking, and their hospitals aren't overwhelmed quite yet. I'm worried about my sister who lives in Manhattan.

  710. DeWitt,
    I hope your sister doesn’t contract the disease. The city does appear close to panic, and the hospitals could be overwhelmed.
    .
    I always try to avoid New York City, even when just driving from New Jersey to Connecticut.

  713. This past week crude oil price (West Texas) fell to match the inflation adjusted price it was in 1967. Same with at-the-pump gasoline prices in states that have not placed many more taxes on gasoline: about US$0.26 per gallon in 1967 dollars. Coronavirus 19 is having many very big impacts.

  714. lucia,

    "Do they have shelter in palce in NY?"

    Sort of. It's also not clear that Cuomo's order is legal, but I don't think it would make much sense to challenge it in court.

    https://ny.curbed.com/2020/3/20/21187022/coronavirus-new-york-shutdown-shelter-in-place

    The TN governor just ordered restaurants to close dining rooms and go to a delivery and/or take-out only business model. I was hoping to get in one more pizza lunch, but it isn't going to happen.

  718. Mike M,
    I'm not sure. Many are using "shelter at home". Illinois has guidelines stating what's up.
    .
    I don't think the word smithing matters that much. The phrase is rarely used and even if "expert communicators" know the distinction, the public does not.

  719. Latest CDC numbers have 400 deaths out of 33,400 cases for a mortality rate of 1.20%.

    Total deaths last 7 days __75___97__150___201__400*
    Total cases __________4200 7000 10400 15200 33400*

    There appears to be an inverse correlation between infections and delegates won by Tulsi Gabbard. Also with Bloomberg primary wins and maybe delegates as well.

  721. lucia (Comment #181438): "I don't think the word smithing matters that much. The phrase is rarely used and even if "expert communicators" know the distinction, the public does not."
    .
    It won't matter until there is a disaster that requires an actual shelter-in-place order. Then confusion will result, possibly costing lives.

  722. Mike M.
    Those going to the Hamptons are both (a) selfish and (b) idiots.
    .
    If true (sounds likely true) the illness rate in the Hamptons is going to POP. Glad I ain't there.

  723. The male / female coronavirus ratio > 1.0 seems to be holding up. This is a bit mysterious. Sympathy for the patriarchy is at exactly 0.0 currently, ha ha. Perhaps it is smoking or related to the fact that men die earlier for lots of reasons.

  726. Wow, you really would have to be a jerk to travel when you know you already have the virus. Wait, I have been in NYC many times; it really is not surprising at all.

  727. From Forbes:
    "New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Sunday that drug trials to test coronavirus treatments will begin in the state Tuesday, after President Trump on Thursday said the Food and Drug Administration approved one of the drugs for clinical trials, as New York becomes the epicenter for the pandemic in the U.S.

    During a Sunday press briefing, Cuomo said 750,000 doses of chloroquine, 70,000 doses of hydroxychloroquine and 10,000 doses of Zithromax were acquired by New York state for the trial."
    .
    These will apparently be trials on actual patients, a lot more sensible under the present circumstances than the previously approved health-care worker's study.
    .
    So just doing what the Chinese and Koreans say they have been doing for a while. Maybe this trial will convince Fauci…. but if it is not double blind, maybe not. Maybe that is a good nickname Trump could use: 'Anthony Double Blind Fauci'. He has been conspicuously absent from a couple of briefings… no surprise there.

  730. Wiki also has detailed State trends

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Washington_(state)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Illinois

    I found the Illinois one simply by replacing "Washington_state) in the URL with "Illinois".

    I suspect it might work for other states as well.

    Also, the Worldometer site has running data for the states.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

    From my experience, most of the states trickle in during the day and the site does some modeling. Some states (Washington and PA e.g.) are once and done.

    Wiki has country pages as well, and you can track individual regions with countries in some cases.

    (Hope at least 3 urls are still allowed.)

  734. The governor of FL said a few weeks ago there were 20 flights a day from NY to FL, it was 190 flights today. He said anyone flying in from NY will now have a mandatory 14 day self-quarantine (feel free to drive down though). One guy flew to south Florida from NY having already tested positive.
    .
    Part of this is misdirection, he also says he has no plans to order a full state lock down (and is being predictably criticized by Democratic mayors) and is pointing to non-compliance in NY as one reason why. FL has always had a heavy NY connection, but also has a lot of travel in and out of the state from everywhere. He says "we are not locking down the state for 9 months". He is treating different areas of the state differently depending on the outbreak in that area.

  735. But there are problems with the COVID tracking site. It says that states with and 'A' grade are providing complete data on positive and negative tests. But in some cases, right under the 'A', they have notes about the incompleteness of the data. Also, it looks like their method is to take screen shots of various web pages at regular intervals, then maybe go back and sort out what was for which day. The last couple days for New Mexico are not right, but the earlier ones are OK.
    ———–

    It is ridiculous that complete data is not available at the CDC web site. Either they are not collecting it (shameful, to put it mildly) or they are not sharing it.

  736. DeWitt (hard nosed Caltech scientist) Payne,
    What do you think of todays’ CDC data? Is the curve bending? To me it looks like it may be.

  738. SteveF (Comment #181469): "What do you think of todays’ CDC data? Is the curve bending? To me it looks like it may be."
    .
    What CDC data might that be? I have not been able to find much of use at their site.

  739. Mike M,
    It *is* a terribly confusing site, with apparently (wildly) conflicting data presented in parallel. They ooshow a graphic of ‘confirmed cases vs date of diagnosis”. I suspect it is nonsense, but with zero explanation offered, it is impossible to say for sure.

  741. Steve F,

    "Is the curve bending?"

    Insufficient data. The numbers are fairly noisy. I would say that Italy's curve is bending, but it's not bending very fast. Look at the log plot of total cases here:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

    Now compare that to the US:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

    And there are at least another 10,000 new cases reported in the US today. The log plot still looks fairly linear to me.

  743. The data here:
    https://covidtracking.com/us-daily/
    look like it might be starting to bend. Or it could still be exponential. I think that in South Korea the curve started to bend after about 10 days of social distancing and then it started to change fast. So we shall see.

  744. Steve F.,

    My sister decided to start serious social distancing on March 12 after going to a play on March 11. If they had locked down New York then, we might be seeing the curve bending now. But that would have taken foresight and leadership, which are sorely lacking at all levels, especially in the NYC government.

    The advantage for the rest of us of having the example of New York is that it's a lot easier to convince people that the problem requires fairly drastic measures. It was too easy to ignore China and then Italy because they're not us.

  745. It's actually date of onset of the disease, which could be many days prior to diagnosis.

    I am happy to see the curve as portrayed consistent with my optimistic prediction. It didn't of course follow my prediction, which was that growth would be linear.

    It wasn't linear. I was wrong.

    If one takes the CDC literally, this is the chart of cases where the date of onset has been reported. For today's update, the n=4038 is 12% of the total number of cases reported.

    That the numbers seem to be all over the place should come as no surprise, since there are many physical and biological explanations. In addition there are an incredible number of jurisdictions reporting numbers and there likely isn't a standard as to what gets reported.

    The CDC has a formalized reporting process for influenza: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm

    I don't claim to be a junior epidemiologist, but it doesn't look like a program designed to monitor a national existential epidemic. It looks like a program designed by a committee. It certainly doesn't seem to be the model to use for reporting COVID-19 infections.

  746. My brother just shared a hair-on-fire modelling link:

    https://covidactnow.org/

    It looks to be an amalgam of the Imperial College paper and some half-assed guesses about hospital bed availability and utilization.

    https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

    I'm not sure my guesses would be any better, but its base prediction is counter-factual with regard to existing measures already in place.

    Edit to add: The jury is still out as to whether this model is useful.

  747. Earle,

    It looks to me that they just scaled the same model results to each state's population. The numbers look to be off significantly already. In TN, their model predicts 400 some odd hospitalizations on 3/23. There are only 615 total cases reported as of today. I seriously doubt that 2/3 of those cases are hospitalized but I could be wrong.

  749. Earle,
    Also too pessimistic for FL. Model suggests 1000 hospitalizations by now; actual number is 233.

  750. Hoarding Of Hydroxychloroquine

    “A family of old antimalarial drugs — including one that some patients rely on to treat their lupus or rheumatoid arthritis — is becoming harder to get in the United States, pharmacists say, partly because of remarks President Trump has made, highlighting the drugs as a potential treatment for COVID-19.”

    "Based on reports we see from the states, pharmacists have a fairly good idea that what they're seeing is prescribers prescribing for themselves and their families and stockpiling these medications rather than prescribing for patients," says Carmen Catizone, the executive director of the NABP.

    “The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy says six states, so far, have taken steps to limit inappropriate prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine and preserve supplies for patients who take the medicine as approved. Those states are Texas, Louisiana, Ohio, North Carolina, Nevada and Idaho.”

    “If doctors are hoarding, some colleagues say that's unethical. Michael Barnett, a primary care physician and assistant professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, says that even if the drug turns out, from the clinical studies now in progress, to be effective against COVID-19, it must be saved for those most in need.”

    "Having sort of a free-for-all in terms of prescribing for oneself and just deciding that 'I'm going to grab some while I can' is the kind of mentality that can really undermine our efforts to actually have a concerted public health campaign against this disease," Barnett says.”

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/23/820228658/why-hoarding-of-hydroxychloroquine-needs-to-stop

    BecauseI have no symptoms of CIVID-19 and no knowledge of direct exposure to an infected person, I haven’t asked my doctor to prescribe hydroxychloroquine for me just in case it might do any good if I did get CIVID-19. If I do become infected, and hydroxychloroquine could help me, I hope the supply has not been
    depleted by hoarders.

  751. lucia (Comment #181484)
    March 23rd, 2020 at 9:24 pm
    You know… I'm not sure the word for this is "anectdote"

    https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/French-researcher-in-Marseille-posts-successful-Covid-19-coronavirus-drug-trial-results

    It's not a proof the stuff works. But it sounds like an early trial. That's "data", not "anecdote".
    _______

    lucia, that's encouraging news, but there's also this:

    "MARCH 22, 2020 — Could the old generic malaria drug hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil, Sanofi-Aventis, among others), which is also used for the treatment of rheumatic disease, be an essential treatment for COVID-19?

    This hypothesis, put forward by some, including Professor Didier Raoult of the IHU Méditerranée Infection in Marseille, was dismissed by other eminent infectious disease specialists and dismissed as fake news recently by the Ministry of Health.

    Yet it resurfaced yesterday with the presentation on YouTube by Prof Raoult of positive results in a non-randomised, unblinded trial of 24 patients."

    https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=229156

    Are the two articles about the same thing?

  752. OK_Max,
    The first report is about the French study (I read the published study last week; in contains tables and graphs of the test results, which were based on whether or not there was detectable virus in the nose and mouth of patients who had the disease). The second report is about criticism of the French study by people who (like Fauci) insist only a large, double-blind, placebo controlled study can possibly be valid….. anything else is ‘anecdotal’.
    .
    I read the study. It could have been completely falsified, though nobody has suggested that. It could be a very strong placebo effect; people giving subjective evaluations of wellness are always susceptible to the placebo effect, but I doubt the virons are. Most likely, the study simply shows what it appears to show: the coronavirus 19 is inhibited by hydroxy chloroquine, and more strongly inhibited by a combination of hydroxychloroquine and a certain common antibiotic. Based on the size of the study, the first conclusion is almost certainly correct (greater than 95%, but probably not greater than 99%). The second conclusion is less certain because of the very small number of patients who received both drugs (90%?). Finally, note that the French doctor who did the small clinical study did not dream up this protocol… he was following exactly what the Chinese say they do to treat coronavirus illness.
    .
    IMO, people like Fauci are not appropriate for controlling the immediate spread of the illness and the immediate need to treat some very sick people. If I were Trump, I’d ask Fauci to get involved with evaluation of vaccines, when they become available. Right now Fauci seems to me a fish out of water.

  753. The hospital here will use HCQ. I guess most places are just going to run with it. I'll see if I can find out why they decided to use it ie official recommendation, presidential optimism etc.

  757. Every now and then, when reading the Babylon Bee, I have to remind myself that they are making it up.
    .
    Unfortunately, this story is real. A couple in Arizona decided to self medicate with chloroquine to protect themselves from the Wuhan virus. Neither was sick. Now one is dead and the other is in critic al condition.

    They noticed that one of their fish tank chemicals contained chloroquine phosphate. So they decided to take some.

    They were in their 60's, so I suppose they don't even qualify for a Darwin Award.

    https://www.foxnews.com/health/arizona-man-dies-after-taking-drug-chloroquine-coronavirus

  758. Mike M,
    "They noticed that one of their fish tank chemicals contained chloroquine phosphate. So they decided to take some."
    .
    What could possibly go wrong?
    .
    The travesty here is not the couple's obvious stupidity, but the headline, which is utterly misleading. The lesson is: don't eat fish tank chemicals…… duh.

  759. Looking back at the citation in SteveF's post (#181494), I notice a Feb 13 date. So why was this not the default treatment in US? Or at least a common one? I don't recall this being mentioned in any press conference in February as cases began to mount.

  760. Looking at the worldometers.info page for the US, of the 10,168 new cases yesterday 6,015 were in New York and New Jersey.

    But for those two states the US would be showing a tapering off of cases.

    Hmmm. How does one get the #NukeItFromOrbit hashtag trending?

  761. It is a bit bizarre that the usual suspects in the media have placed an effective ban on anything that might be encouraging news, or shame anyone who might be optimistic. Certainly trafficking in false hope is inappropriate but uncertain hope is not. There is a dearth on any news on what the CDC, FDA, NIH, etc are doing to help solve this problem besides counting victims. Where are all the vaccine trials at, why can't they be sped up? Etc.
    .
    Orange man bad, world is ending, close down society, we told you so. What used to be we only have 20 years AGW hysteria is now we only have two weeks hysteria. At least with the coronavirus they can't make partisan predictions they never have to own up to later.
    .
    High density cities that require public transportation and a high rate of interaction to get things done aren't ideal for this outbreak to say the least.

  762. OK_Max,
    Yep. My guess was MD's writing prescriptions for themselves and families just in case. None of them individually consider themselves to be hoarding.
    .
    Even doctors who will prescribe for themselves and family to store might refuse to prescribe for you unless you have symptoms. Among other things (1) They don't want to be sued if you have a bad reaction (2) They don't trust you to use it "correctly" under the circumstance but do trust themselves, (3) It's just not in their interest to give it to you and they don't love you enough.

    🙂

  763. Earle (Comment #181500): "But for those two states the US would be showing a tapering off of cases."
    .
    Perhaps. I certainly hope so. Here are new cases for each of the last 7 days, excluding NY and NJ, data from COVID tracking project:
    3,639
    3,286
    2,474
    2,217
    1,907
    1,166
    865
    Enough noise that it will take a few more days to tell.
    ———

    Tom Scharf (Comment #181501): "High density cities that require public transportation and a high rate of interaction to get things done aren't ideal for this outbreak to say the least."
    .
    Indeed, But I think Tom meant 'for controlling this outbreak'.

  764. HaroldW,
    "So why was this not the default treatment in US? Or at least a common one? "
    .
    Good questions, even though apparently rhetorical. I personally figure it is a combination of bureaucratic glaciation, risk aversion, arrogance, and profound stupidity on the part of Federal health care authorities (CDC, FDA). Better, they think, to let patients simply die than risk an off-label treatment which is being widely used with apparent success in another country. If these compounds are demonstrated to work well in clinical practice, the CDC and FDA are going to have much to answer for after the coronavirus 19 pandemic passes.

  765. HaroldW
    Reasons why those aren't default treatment in US:

    1. Our normal system has a MUCH more stringent and time consuming approval process. This has good aspects and bad ones.

    2. Corona mounted LATER here. (Note: some doctor did read what's going on in China and Korea. Some will be using the drug. Certainly now some are.)

  766. SteveF –
    I didn't intend those questions to be rhetorical. Really wondering why they weren't widely mentioned by medical authorities here in US.

    Aside from improving the medical outcomes, it might have avoided all the economic chaos of forced shutdowns, and the destructive effects of the bill to try to compensate for that chaos.

  767. Lucia,
    "It's just not in their interest to give it to you and they don't love you enough."
    .
    Some doctors in hospitals definitely *are* treating off-label with hydroxy chloroquine and chloroquine, and that use will be expanding via clinical trials in the coming weeks.
    .
    But yes, like the rest of us, MD's are humans, and their interests very often *do* diverge from those of their customers…. as do the interests of used car salesmen, real estate agents, lawyers, politicians, technical consultants, and….. well….. lots of people. I carefully consider divergence of interests in every transaction, negotiation, partnership, and contract.

  768. SteveF
    ** If these compounds are demonstrated to work well in clinical practice, the CDC and FDA are going to have much to answer for after the coronavirus 19 pandemic passes.**
    Yep. And our system will change protocols.
    .
    If the French doctors data aren't fake, then deaths of very sick people went from ~50% to 0%. It's a very small sample, (6 and 6 or 12 and 12? I'd have to look again.) So you can't exclude random chance.
    .
    BUT it supports the idea that the Chinese and Koreans are TELLING THE TRUTH that this is a useful treatment. And the drug worked in vitro. AND there were animal models guiding the choice.
    .
    Side effects tend to be modest, especially for short term use. (Itchy skin is not a big deal compared to death.)

  769. HaroldW,
    "Really wondering why they weren't widely mentioned by medical authorities here in US."
    .
    You need look no further than Fauci's declaration that the available data is nothing but anecdotal, so not suitable to act upon. But as Lucia, noted above, it is obvious some medical doctors were quite aware of the use in other countries and have acted on that information. Some have taken on personal liability for off-label treatment of sick patients. My hat is off to them.

  770. Lucia,
    "And our system will change protocols."
    .
    I sure would hope so, but I am far from sanguine about that. There is the whole "Yes, we made a terrible mistake" part at the beginning of the process that politicians and bureaucrats seldom ever get past…. heck that *normal* people seldom get past.

  771. Max_OK
    **was dismissed by other eminent infectious disease specialists and dismissed as fake news recently by the Ministry of Health.**
    We'll we'd have to hear their definition of "fake news". Do they mean:
    1) That Raoult Marseille didn't report this at all, but the story is circulating he did? (There is a video.)
    2) That person claiming to be is not Rault?
    3) Rault made up his data?
    4) They don't think this type of experiment proves anything?

    If they mean (4) it's not "fake news". It IS news. They may not like the interpretation, but NEWS isn't "something experts agree with and/or like".
    .
    If they mean 1-3, they should say THAT'S what they mean.
    .
    If someone is reporting that it's fake news THEY should say what THEY mean by "fake news".
    .
    FWIW: I have no idea if Raoult is who he is reported to be, whether he faked his data yada, yada. But mostly, the criticism I've heard are
    (a) He is who he says he is.
    (b) HE is "unconventional" (which is why he would do this.)
    (c) Lots of people in the established medical field don't like him or how he behaves, but they agree he is a research MD who knows his chops.
    (d) People who discount this are mostly discounting it because the experiment might not be as controlled as most would like, yada, yada..
    .
    That would not make the report "fake news". (d) would mean people are justified in being cautious in saying we've found a cure. It's possible that the "news" is "true news", but the result will vanish when more data are acquired. The latter is why people like to be cautious about announcing something like "it worked".
    .
    Having said that, I don't think anyone should be criticized for feeling a little optimistic. There is nothing wrong with feeling a little optimistic– provided you keep washing your hands, continue staying at home and so on. (And… don't eat fish tank cleaner.)

  772. Tom Scahrf,
    "There is a dearth on any news on what the CDC, FDA, NIH, etc are doing to help solve this problem besides counting victims."
    .
    I suspect they see their jobs right now as mainly 1) getting people to stay at home, 2) reporting the number of cases and number of deaths, 3) talking up terrifying projections of cases and deaths to help accomplish number 1 above.

  773. I doubt use of the new drugs is dismissed, but the medical culture is ingrained with a "do no harm" ethos that is decades and decades in the making. The FDA's primary job is to protect us from snake oil salesmen and it does this job very well.
    .
    The FDA doesn't necessarily approve of products, it approves the marketing claims a product can make. You can feel pretty confident that all the pharmaceuticals and medical devices in use have been pretty extensively tested. The term IEC 60601 makes anyone who ever brought a medical device to market break out in a sweat and run away screaming.
    .
    So should they change for an extraordinary crisis? Is this crisis actually extraordinary? They can't just ignore their own stringent laws, and it's pretty apparent they are completely incapable of reacting in a NYC time frame for an evolving new virus.
    .
    Some patients who get off label use for treatment are going to die anyway. You think a NYC malpractice lawyer isn't going to sue that doctor because we had an outbreak? Doctors don't want to hurt people with an unproven treatment and then get sued for the effort. The incentives aren't correct here. The government can probably remove liability for the emergency use of this treatment.
    .
    The media should be hounding the medical establishment to test these drugs and get real data in a NYC time frame. Oh, it's going to be 3-6 months to test this treatment. What, no further questions by the media? They protect academia without question.

  774. Tom Scharf,
    "The incentives aren't correct here. The government can probably remove liability for the emergency use of this treatment."
    .
    Yes, the incentives are completely wrong, and that is the best suggestion I've heard in a while. You would still need informed consent, yada, yada. But the FDA certainly could immediately approve off-label emergency use to make winning future lawsuits just about impossible.

  775. Several months ago my doctor prescribed Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate for Arthritis, 200mg twice daily. Lucky me.

    The virus is more serious for the elderly, of whom, a great percentage have at least some arthritis. I don't see how a script. could be legitimately denied to anyone saying they are taking it for Arthritis even if their intent is protection from the virus.

    I just hope there isn't a shortage when I have to order some again in a couple weeks.

  777. Bob
    **https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/therapeutic-options.html**

    CDC post this based on clinicians anectdotal reports. 🙂
    **********
    There are no currently available data from Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) to inform clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although optimal dosing and duration of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 are unknown, some U.S. clinicians have reported anecdotally different hydroxychloroquine dosing such as: 400mg BID on day one, then daily for 5 days; 400 mg BID on day one, then 200mg BID for 4 days; 600 mg BID on day one, then 400mg daily on days 2-5.
    ***************

    One big drug company is ramping up production. But their stuff isn't set to arrive until May. 🙁

  778. Another company:
    https://www.jpost.com/HEALTH-SCIENCE/Teva-donates-potential-coronavirus-treatment-to-hospitals-across-the-US-621688
    ********
    Teva, the giant Israeli pharmaceutical company, has announced that it will donate more than six million doses of hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets through wholesalers to hospitals across the United States, starting March 31. Over 10 million tablets are expected to be shipped within a month. ********
    There could be a shortage in a few weeks. But… you should be able to get a refill soon after.

  779. Re SteveF (Comment #181492)

    Thank you Steve. Time will tell, but in the meantime, if the drug might help those in need, taking it seems to makes sense. It's known to safe, except in rare cases.

  780. This morning I read, I don't remember where, about a doctor in NY state having great success treating over 300 people with Hydroxychloroquine along with a Zinc supplement. Not a controlled study, but no deaths, no hospitalizations. This looks better all the time.

    Of course this may just have been some sort of a promotion pushed by big Zinc.

  781. Re lucia (Comment #181511)

    lucia, thank you for your reply.

    The article was sketchy, and the reference to "fake news" was confusing.

    **There is nothing wrong with feeling a little optimistic– provided you keep washing your hands, continue staying at home and so on. (And… don't eat fish tank cleaner.)**

    I take all the recommended precautions and believe we will eventually beat this virus. Unlike the way the precautions have affected so many, they haven't changed my daily routine much, as almost all of my activities are at home or nearby. I am, however, getting a bit depressed over it (didn't feel that way too weeks ago).

  782. DaveJR,
    "The hospital here will use HCQ."
    .
    Where is "here"? In the States or outside the States?

  784. Cuomo is playing the ventilator card today to deflect attention from his very late reaction to the crisis in New York. So it isn't his fault that people are dying, it's the Orange Man's fault. I'm reminded of the failure to order a timely evacuation of New Orleans for Katrina. It wasn't the Mayor or the Governor's fault, it was FEMA.

    Italy has now had three straight days without setting a new high for daily deaths.

  785. Bob Koss,
    "https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2015/06/129936/zinc-body-may-contribute-kidney-stones
    .
    This is the main potential problem with zinc supplements. Of course, if only taken for a short time the kidney stone risk is probably very low. BTW, all those millions of doses of hydroxy chlorquine which have been promised are going to *hospitals* for treating coronavirus 19, not to pharmacies for treating arthritis. So if you need a refill in a short time, you may be out of luck….. pharmacies appear already cleaned out by medical doctors prescribing for themselves and their families.

  786. New study at Oxford suggests as few as 1 person in 1000 who are infected gets symptoms sever enough to require treatment:
    https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd8-11ea-89df-41bea055720b?segmentId=b385c2ad-87ed-d8ff-aaec-0f8435cd42d9
    .
    This looks pretty shaky to me. The cruise liner data indicates much higher rates of need for treatment, even among younger people.
    .
    However, the group says they are starting an antibody screening study, measuring both presence of antibodies to coronavirus 19 and antibody concentration in randomly selected people in the UK. They say this will prove or disprove their model very quickly.

  787. Latest CDC numbers have mortality rate of 1.23%.

    Total deaths last 8 days __75___97__150___201__400*__544
    Total cases __________4200 7000 10400 15200 33400* 44183

  788. MikeN,
    The problem is that most asymptomatic people are never counted, so the rate is likely much lower, though exactly how much is unknown.

  789. The COVID tracking project website shows 9437 new cases today compared with 10,276 yesterday due to a big drop in New York.
    https://covidtracking.com/us-daily/
    There are all sorts of caveats. New York seems to have had a drop in negative tests as well. So maybe they had a hang up in doing tests or maybe the numbers are not final. The web site says: "Each day's total is as of 4pm ET that day, so data that comes in from states after that cut-off will show in the next day's total."

  791. Lucia,

    Just spent a few fruitless minutes looking around. Getting a little punchy in my declining years. Not nearly as bad as Biden tho'. If I happen to spot it, I'll post it.

    Here's an article about some of our upstanding physicians.
    https://www.propublica.org/article/doctors-are-hoarding-unproven-coronavirus-medicine-by-writing-prescriptions-for-themselves-and-their-families

    Put in my refill in today about 10-12 days earlier than usual. I get it mailed from the VA hospital pharmacy. Got my fingers crossed.

  792. I have a couple of questions to pose to the readers here. One is matter of social distancing and the other concerning precedents being set by the recent Covid-19 crises.

    I have noticed over the last week that as I do my routine walks in the neighborhood that as the week progressed I have observed that the percentage of walkers/runners approaching me who will enter the street or wait a distance up a driveway or walk onto the parkway has increased from a few percent to now almost 100 percent. I have read that passing someone while walking provides a very remote chance for being infected by Covid-19. The social distancing of 6 feet is meant to be applied when individuals are in close proximity for minutes at a time. I was wondering what people here have witnessed and heard about appropriate social distancing.

    My second question concerns what is the expected influence on future policy based on the current crises with regards to the extreme measures put in place and the possible outcomes of this crisis. If the health related damage of the current crisis is limited to something near that of annual influenza outbreaks will that mean that we need extreme measure in the future to limit the damage of those outbreaks given the precedent set currently? Or do the policy makers become more hesitant in applying extreme measures based on uncertain data? If the outcome of the current crises creates much higher infection and death rates than normal influenza outbreaks will the future policy be to take even more extreme measures when even a hint of a pandemic occurs?

    My hope would be that we will learn from this experience and find ways of limiting the health damage without ruining the health of the economy. Politicians tend to overreact to crises, not consider the unintended consequences of their "cures" and bull their way through it. Therefore, the learning process would have to come from outside government and be independent of government. The problem as I see it is finding independent individuals and organizations to look into this matter.

  793. I just heard an interview with Bill De Blasio. He seemed to have three main points:
    (1) The social distancing and extensive economic shutdown will have only a modest effect on the epidemic.
    (2) Therefore, the shutdown will have to be maintained for several months, no matter the economic consequences.
    (3) What will really need is to see the military in the streets; people will find that comforting.
    .
    I don't get it. Or actually, I am very much afraid that I do get it.
    .
    But maybe it is just that De Blasio is an idiot. He is, but idiots usually have smart people pulling their strings.

  794. Kenneth,

    From what I have read, the chances of transmitting the virus in open air is minimal, as long as people are not packed together.

    As I understand it, the point of the current extreme measures is not so much the potential total number of cases or deaths. It is the potentially overwhelming surge of critically ill people.

    My hope is that the current measures will knock the legs out from under the epidemic in 3-4 weeks and then the weather will keep it from getting its feet back until the fall. By then we should know a lot more about how serious it really is, how to treat it, and be a lot more prepared to deal with it.

  795. Kenneth,
    I have not so far noted any real changes in behavior save fore 😉 one: I see more foursomes on the golf course with three or four golf carts.
    .
    Mike M,
    As far as I can tell DeBlasio is not just an idiot, although that is clear. He is a straight-out socialist. His desire for military on the streets of New York is perfectly consistent with his leftist/totalitarian tendencies. He is Bernie Sanders, but younger and stupider…. and in a position to do much damage.

  796. Tom and Steve,
    "But the FDA certainly could immediately approve off-label emergency use to make winning future lawsuits just about impossible."
    —————-
    And so it is:
    "“Doctors can prescribe that medication, which as you know is a perfectly legal and approved malaria medication," Pence told Dr. Oz, "but doctors can now prescribe chloroquine for that off-label purpose of dealing with the symptoms of coronavirus. We are making that clear across the country.""
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/pence-fda-hydroxychloroquine-off-label-coronavirus

  797. Texas' lieutenant governor suggests grandparents are willing to die for US economy
    Adrianna Rodriguez
    USA TODAY

    "The lieutenant governor of Texas argued in an interview on Fox News Monday night that the United States should go back to work, saying grandparents like him don’t want to sacrifice the country’s economy during the coronavirus crisis."

    "Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, 69, made the comments on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight” after President Donald Trump said he wanted to reopen the country for business in weeks, not months."
    ________

    Despite the headline, I don’t know if Lt. Governor Patrick means he is willing to help the economy by expiring from CIV-19 or getting it and recovering. Whether from CIV-19 or other causes, older people expiring has the advantage of helping Social Security meet its obligations and giving grandkids their inheritance sooner. But I'm not sure it will help the economy to have lots of sick elderly people recover. They may be even weaker and require even more costly care. I suppose it depends on what is meant by "the economy."

    One of my friend’s disabled elderly mother is in a place that charges about $100,000 a year for her care. It is a nice place. Is that money reflected in national income accounting, and if so, should it be?

  798. I was at a grocery store a few days ago, and they were having checkout people wipe down the conveyor belt and payment keypad after each purpose.

    Today they weren't doing it.

  799. Nevada Governor has signed an executive order banning chloroquine for COVID, saying it would reduce supply for legitimate uses.

  800. Re my Comment #181538)

    Please disregard "CIV-19." Lt. Governor Patrick was talking about COVID-19.

    Also disregard my "Is that money reflected in national income accounting, and if so, should it be?"

  801. OK_Max,

    I disregarded everything you said in Comment #181538. It was not a fair characterization of what Patrick said.

  802. MikeN,
    “Nevada Governor has signed an executive order banning chloroquine for COVID, saying it would reduce supply for legitimate uses.”
    .
    Let’s see: balance worsened arthritis against deaths…. interesting thought process by the governor; the guy is obviously a fool. ‘Legitimate’ is normally pretty well covered by “saving lives”; but apparently not for progressive governors.

  803. OK_Max,
    I trust you didn’t actually listen to the interview of the lt. governor from Texas, and got that tripe from a ‘progressive’ characterization of his statements by USAToday. Had you actually listened to what he said, you would have known he said nothing at all like what you suggested above. OTOH, if you actually watched the interview, then you are delusional.

  804. Kenneth,
    Around here, we all all giving each other a wide berth when walking. I will continue to do so even though I agree with you that the chance of passing virus while walking is low. It may be unnecessary, but it's a social courtesy that reduces anxiety.
    .
    I don't know answers to any of the questions you have about what policy makers will do in the future. I imagine some of it will depends on economic factors. Some will depend on what epidemeology models suggest would have happened– but the current models lack very important data owing to lack of tests.

    We don't know how many people have been infected. We don't know what faction develop symptoms. We don't know what fraction die etc. We are uncertain about the mode of transmission (can aerosol tranmission happen.)

    In the US, the only close to reliable numbers we have are deaths.

    I do think people are going to start re-thinking our attitude toward masks. *Equally important* are attitude toward decreeig "there is no evidence" in medical matters. There IS *some* evidence masks reduce your chance of being infected. Consequetly, there is ALSO evidence it can reduce your chance of transmitting both because you are not infected and when you are infected. (It catches sneezes.)
    .
    The evidence tends to be what the FDA approval process calls "anecdotal". But it's not what people call "anecdotal" outside medicine. They just seem to use that to mean "not something we take seriously in the approval process for medical treatment." (I don't have big gripes with their process. But all of the following things are different:

    1 'no evidence that would be taken seriously in an FDA approval process.
    2 no quatitative evidence of any sort. (Like French study which might be flawed, or Chinese survey on chloroquinie.These can be samples of opportunity and so generally can't be double blind, will be flawed in their protocol in many ways.)
    .
    They also sometimes don't seem to distinguish between these two
    3 no evidence at all because no one has done a study or tried to formally compile data.
    4 no evidence even though we looked very carefully, many times, and it just doesn't seem to work.
    .
    These are all very different. But the American medical establishment is trained to only take 1 as "evidence". (Given our history of snake oil sales, I sort of get this. But it doesn't make it literally true that that's the only "evidence".)

  805. Lucia,
    "Given our history of snake oil sales, I sort of get this."
    .
    Sure, but here's the weird thing: Snake oil is constantly offered to the public with zero evidence of efficacy. The regulations allow endless deception of the public with false claims about costly "treatments" (herbal, 'natural', and otherwise), while tightly controlling any material which actually *can* do something. I find it very strange.

  806. An article from Reason:

    https://reason.com/2020/03/23/we-will-regret-not-taking-the-economic-effects-of-mass-quarantine-more-seriously/

    I didn't see the actual article, but supposedly a group of physicians recommended that everybody stay home for two weeks. Everybody?? How about power plant operators? If power plants are shut down, a lot of people will die. Since you can't realistically make everybody stay home for two weeks, then there should be a reasoned discussion about what we should actually do.

    The cruise ship 'experiments' give the lie to the projections that 70% of the population will be infected.

    "… one on the Diamond Princess cruise ship. Out of 3,711 people on board, 712 were infected and eight died. In his view, this unintended experiment in coronavirus spread will help researchers estimate the number of fatalities that would occur in a fully infected population…."

    On a separate topic, the idea promulgated in the media that chloroquine phosphate is toxic but chloroquine sulfate isn't is idiotic. There is a human antimalarial drug on the market, Avloclor, whose active ingredient is chloroquine phosphate. My guess would be that the fish tank cleaner that the couple in AZ took, contained far more chloroquine phosphate than 250mg. So they likely overdosed.

    Acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, will kill you very dead if you take too much. It was banned in the UK a while back because a lot of people were using it to commit suicide.

  807. DeWitt Payne (Comment #181547): "supposedly a group of physicians recommended that everybody stay home for two weeks".
    .
    I did not see that in the article. More and more voices are raising the need for balance. And Trump is taking the economic con sequences seriously. Of course, that has the usual suspects are frothing at the mouth.

  808. Mike M.,

    Sorry, I got my references mixed up. I wasn't referring to the Reason article when I mentioned the recommendation for what I assumed to mean a total national quarantine.

    But yes, it's always the Orange Man's fault.

  809. DeWitt,
    Two of the things we can always count on from our technically incompetent press are constant technical misinformation and no reporting of information which would allow you to actually figure out the truth.
    .
    Last night my wife (also a chemist) said "That's nuts, the phosphate salt is a common form in human medication!". But after 30 minutes of searching on line, she was not able to find the name of the cleaner, its actual composition, or *anything else* of value in figuring out what actually killed the guy.
    .
    My guess is either 1) they fatally overdosed, 2) the cleaner contained other compounds in addition to chloroquine phosphate which actually killed him.
    .
    Of course the press coverage will never provide that information… all people will ever hear from the MSM is "Bad Orange Man killed this guy!" What killed the guy was terminal stupidity, not Trump..
    .
    I did find one reference to the use of this material:
    http://agrilife.org/fisheries/files/2013/09/SRAC-Publication-No.-4705-Amyloodinium-ocellatum-an-Important-Parasite-of-Cultured-Marine-Fish.pdf
    .
    So they probably *did* take chlorquine phosphate, but maybe along with a bunch of other stuff. The does rate for a fish tank is 10 mg/liter. If someone has a 40 gallon tank, that would be about 150 liters, and the dose for the tank about 1.5 grams, not nearly enough to kill you.

  810. A year from now we should have good data on how well each social distancing step worked and how soon they can be relaxed. It's a good thing for different communities to try different things to sort this out. The next pandemic will have a much firmer basis in fact on when to do shutdowns and when not too.
    .
    That doesn't relieve the fact that a deaths vs economy trade-off has to be made just like we do with the flu, road design, and a whole host of other things. The tut-tutters and "people will die" shamers out there will not be helpful. Death panels are a necessary fact of life.
    .
    Our county has a stay at home order starting tomorrow, but has a big loophole on non-essential businesses. I saw lots of old foursomes on the golf course with only 2 carts over the past week. This is a bad idea IMO.

  812. FYI, sneezing is not a coronavirus symptom. This is one point that differentiates it from cold and allergies. This might be a very unconvincing argument to any stranger you sneeze on though. If you are coughing in public you should be wearing a mask I would suggest.
    .
    You basically stay at home until chest pain is continuous, trouble breathing, unresponsive, or blue lips. Then you go to the hospital and hope you win the respirator lottery.

  813. SteveF,
    Yes. As long as it's "herbal" or something, and the LABEL doesn't make claims, the claims can be widely circulated. I have tea that is supposed to keep me from getting fat (and help acne and…) I'm pretty sure it's mostly chamomile. Different fruits are constantly being promoted as "miracles", which works until they become more widely disseminated and people learn that… no… drinking 12 cups of pomegranite juice doesn't cure everything.
    .
    Vitamin C is overhyped. (Yes we need it.)
    .
    Some of these thing do end up tested by someone who doesn't market them, so some of the claims have some basis. But the person selling it doesn't actually say anything. But the claim is "out there".
    .
    So we do have lots of snake oil out there.

  814. SteveF, I would think the most likely killer is the cleaning agent in the fish tank cleaner, some sort of bleach. Is this the chloroquine phosphate?
    There is no reason to think they limited themselves to the amount to clean a fish tank.
    1.5g is 6 times the normal dose.

    I wonder if this was the phosphate ingredient in dishwashing detergent until Seattle banned them and the companies pulled it nationwide.

  815. Current CDC mortality rate is 1.35%, up from 1.23%.

    Total deaths last 9 days _75 ___97 _150 __201 __400* __544 __737
    Total cases __________4200 7000 10400 15200 33400* 44183 54453

  816. Lucia,
    So maybe, just maybe, the numbskulls at FDA could expend 1% of their time bringing legal action to shut down snake oil scam artists. Nah, that would be far too constructive a use of taxpayer money, and far too much to hope for.

  817. SteveF (Comment #181544)

    OK_Max,
    I trust you didn’t actually listen to the interview of the lt. governor from Texas, and got that tripe from a ‘progressive’ characterization of his statements by USAToday. Had you actually listened to what he said, you would have known he said nothing at all like what you suggested above. OTOH, if you actually watched the interview, then you are delusional.
    ________

    Nope, didn't listen to it before commenting, but have now at

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/24/texas_lt_gov_dan_patrick_a_lot_of_grandparents_would_be_willing_to_die_to_stop_a_second_great_depression.html

    After listening to Lt. Gov. Patrick I'm not sure why you so strongly object to the way his comments were characterized by the USAToday report "Texas' lieutenant governor suggests grandparents are willing to die for US economy."

    While Lt. Gov. Patrick didn't say (a) willing to die from coronavirus, he did say (b) willing to take the chance.

    I don't see how you can have "b" without "a."

    Anyway, how would you have characterized his comments ?

  819. MikeN (Comment #181557): "I would think the most likely killer is the cleaning agent in the fish tank cleaner, some sort of bleach. Is this the chloroquine phosphate?"
    .
    I am pretty sure it was not a "fish tank cleaner". Chloroquine phosphate is added to fish tanks to kill certain parasites; i.e., it is fish tank medicine. It is the same stuff as the human medicine except that the factory making it is not licensed to make stuff for human consumption.

    Perhaps there was some other additive or contaminant. But my guess is that the Arizona couple just got the dose wrong and OD'd. Happens all the time when people self-medicate with opioids.

  820. MikeN,
    Bleach? No, chloroquine phosphate is most certainly not bleach, nor related to bleach, and is used specifically to kill parasites which attack fish. Dishwashing detergent? Algicide? Mercury? Silver? Who knows, we have zero information on the composition or amount of the product the idiots decided to eat.

  821. SteveF,
    Yep. No info. It says chlroquinine phosphate was *an ingredient*. It may have been one of several, or it may have been the only ingredient. I can't tell from articles I read.

  822. When one gets in the car and drives any distance, that person is willing to take the chance of accident and associated risk of death to achieve the objective making vehicular traffic necessary.

    I am willing to face the chance of death every time I get in the car and drive to work. It does not immediately follow that I am willing to die to bring cash to my wife.

  823. Earle,
    Balancing risks and benefits is done all the time, just never for new and poorly defined risks.
    .
    At some point common sense will begin to prevail.

  824. The PubChem document under toxicity lists effects at a dose as low as 20mg/kg. For a 75kg person, that would be a 1.5g dose.

    https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Chloroquine

    I found a product that lists chloroquine as it's active ingredient:

    New Life Spectrum Ick Shield Powder

    https://www.championlighting.com/new_life_spectrum_ich_shield_powder_50g.html

    Not surprisingly, it's listed as out of stock. Note also the not for human consumption warning. Based on the recommended dose of 8 ppm for an aquarium, I would say that this is fairly pure chloroquine diphosphate. However, there may be small amounts of other compounds produced in the synthesis process that would not be allowed in a product for human consumption because they might be more toxic.

    The other thing is that we don't know how old the product was that the AZ couple took or how it was stored. It could have decomposed into a toxic substance over time. I would bet, though, that lots of people are taking this stuff and not getting sick and dying.

  825. Steve F.,

    As I read in an article recently, one can manage risk but not uncertainty.

  826. DeWitt,
    Nitpick: I think you mean di(chloroquine) phosphate. I am pretty sure chloroquine forms only a single cation charge via the amine group taking on one H+ ion.

  828. Nevada governor's office says inpatient prescription use of chloroquine is allowed, that they are trying to prevent hoarding.

  829. SteveF,

    The free base, mono- and diphosphate are listed on the web. I would think that either the mono or the diphosphate could be used as a drug. The dose would be based on the free base equivalent in the formulation. The fish stuff is probably the monophosphate, IMO.

  830. MikeN,
    “Nevada governor's office says inpatient prescription use of chloroquine is allowed,”
    .
    So probably lots doctors called and said “What!?! You want these old people to die?”, and so he stepped back from his native idiocy. His native tendency remains, of course, idiocy.

  831. Earle (Comment #181565)
    March 25th, 2020 at 2:18 pm
    When one gets in the car and drives any distance, that person is willing to take the chance of accident and associated risk of death to achieve the objective making vehicular traffic necessary.

    I am willing to face the chance of death every time I get in the car and drive to work. It does not immediately follow that I am willing to die to bring cash to my wife.
    _________

    You face risk of death by driving, but regard it an acceptable degree of risk. At times when conditions are exceptionally hazardous (e.g. icy roads), you may decide the degree of risk is unacceptable and choose to not drive.

    I believe Lt. Gov. Patrick's message to grandparents was tantamount to suggesting if they loved their grandchildren they would drive on icy roads. By resuming their usual day to day activities, despite the risk of coronavirus ( like the risk of icy roads) they would help their grandchildren by helping the economy. The cost to the grandparents in sickness and deaths supposedly would be more than offset by the benefits to their grandchildren. IMO, that's hard to say.

    I don't know why Lt. Gov. Patrick chose to talk about grandparents. Many are retirees whose contribution to the economy is consumption rather than production. I doubt retirees are consuming a lot less as a result of fear of the coronavirus. They have already bought more than usual in order to stock up.

    Because Patrick's comments were about grandparents, some of his critics accused him of suggesting the elderly are the most expendable population group during a crises. Maybe they are, but saying it won't get many votes from old people.

  832. SteveF,

    From a chemistry point of view, IIRC, only the first proton from phosphoric acid has a pKa low enough to protonate an organic primary or secondary amine. So di(chloroquine) phosphate is not going to be a stable chemical compound.

  833. DeWitt,
    Looks like the second hydrogen is donated between pH 6 and pH 8.5. Aliphatic amines have a pH in water somewhere near pH 9, so I expect one phosphoric acid with two hydroxychloroquine molecules would probably form an almost 100% ionized compound. But you are correct, a single phosphate per hydroxychloroquine would be a completely ionized material.

  834. Chloroquine properties here: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/2719
    It says pKa = 10.1. But there are both secondary and tertiary nitrogens, so it could be doubly protonated to give the diphosphate. That seems to be the usual salt.

    Section 9.4 Formulations/Preparations says "available as tablets containing either 250 or 500 mg of diphosphate".

    Chloquine phosphate here: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Chloroquine%20phosphate#section=2D-Structure
    It is the diphosphate.

  836. I read an article in the WSJ this AM that points to a 1962 law that required the FDA to not only test the safety of a drug but also its effectiveness. The article states that ineffective drugs were a small part of the total drugs prior to the passing of Kefauver-Harris amendments. The article authors state their case as there being fewer ineffective drugs but also far fewer effective ones. The article states that doctors currently search by trial and error to find the most effective drug for their patients. If the process were that a safe drug could be approved and used, it would be available for doctors to try on their patients as far as effectiveness and provide much more data on the drug then FDA testing would provide for effectiveness.

    On the issue of the FDA's effectiveness in controlling for safe manufacturing of drugs and acting in a timely matter on evidence, I had an experience recently with evidence that generic drugs manufactured in foreign nations (and in this case primarily in India) were not following the FDA prescribed processes (and in fact they were faking it) and allowing potentially carcinogenic impurities into their drugs reaching those with prescriptions for these drugs.

    https://peterattiamd.com/katherineeban/

    Right now I believe the FDA does little random sampling of drugs but rather uses manufacturing facility inspection and certification. In my mind and as someone who in my career worked in various managerial areas of manufacturing and R and D I would think that for an operation like drugs made in batches and where problems would most likely effect the whole batch random sampling would be a critical operation. It also appears that the FDA was slow to react to evidence of manufacturing problems brought forth by private parties.

    I communicated my concerns about the FDA with my US representative, Sean Casten, and two senators, Tammy Duckworth and Dick Durbin. I tried contact by way of the email available at their web sites and after no reactions I used letters sent to them in the US mail. I never received a reply from Casten as I think he was too busy doing town hall sessions. Duckworth replied with a generic response that would have fit any question/concern. Durbin's office replied and evidently missed the point of my concern with a government agency, i.e. the FDA and instead commented on concerns with the drug industry in general and never mentioned the FDA's role in the process.

    It will take some heavy persuasion to change the current establishment's views on government regulatory agencies and how they operate.

  837. Kenneth,

    I believe I've mentioned this here before, but I'll say it again. Anyone who knowingly buys a generic drug manufactured in India or China is crazy. I've heard horror stories about manufacturing facilities in China and India. That our FDA doesn't seem to care much about this is frightening.

    Most (?) pharmaceutical companies in the US will contract with facilities in India and China to manufacture drugs or intermediate chemicals, so it's their fault as well.

  838. I still haven't seen a sufficient explanation for why the vaccine process cannot be sped up. This seems to be a third rail question that is simply dismissed. This is the typical answer:
    .
    https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2020/03/coronavirus-social-distancing-over-back-to-normal/608752/
    "Vaccines take so long to make because they are difficult to perfect. There are a series of methodical trials done to make sure they don’t harm healthy people, to make sure they generate the desired antibodies, and to make sure those antibodies actually defend against the disease. These aren’t overcautious bureaucratic safeguards; if researchers are making something that’s going to be pumped into the arms of hundreds of millions, probably billions, of people, they want to make sure it’s just right."
    .
    Methodical is not the word I want to hear with the economy shut down and a global pandemic in place, and yes, I suspect it is * exactly * overcautious bureaucratic safeguards that are slowing things down. Please show me that is not the case, I don't trust this answer. If they harm 0.01% of the population but save 0.1% of the population…

  839. Tom Scharf (Comment #181601): "I don't trust this answer. If they harm 0.01% of the population but save 0.1% of the population".
    .
    But what if the vaccine harms 0.1% of the population and saves 0.01% of the population?

  841. I don't know where it was, but somewhere I saw some company boasting that, given the virus genome, it could produce a vaccine candidate in 20 days using plants. Of course, producing a candidate is just the first step. As Mike points out, the consequences from a relatively low rate of reaction could be at least as disastrous as the virus itself given the number of people potentially receiving it.

  842. MikeN,
    "CDC mortalilty rate is now up to 1.45%. 994 out of 68440."
    .
    They can (and will) publish whatever BS numbers they want. Dead people are easy to count. The actual number of infections is extremely difficult to count, and without widespread testing of the asymptomatic population to make reasonable estimates, just about impossible. The CDC numbers just don't mean much right now. Maybe someday they will.
    .
    That said, if you are over 60 and *especially* if over 70 with existing serious health issues, you should be extremely careful to avoid contact with anyone who could potentially carry the virus….. which, with the lack of extensive testing, means avoiding contact with just about everyone.
    .
    My guess is that the actual fatality rate (based on accurate infection rates) will be well under 1%, and more likely under 0.5%. Time will tell. That is little comfort to the families of the dead, of course.

  843. MikeN,

    Dividing total deaths by the total number of current cases has almost nothing to do with the actual mortality rate. I can make things look much worse by using the numbers of dead and recovered. At the worldometer site, the number of US dead is currently 1209 and the number of recovered is 1864. So the total of cleared cases is 3073 with a mortality rate of 1209/3073 = 0.393 or 39.3%. Of course that's the upper limit since we don't know the actual number of recovered because that would include asymptomatic cases that were never tested.

    Globally, it's 23,976 deaths and 123,380 recovered for a rate of 16.3%. In South Korea, it's 3% and falling because only 1% of their current cases are serious. Betcha they're using chloroquine and/or other drugs. Globally, 5% of cases are serious/critical and 2.5% in the US.

    And we're number one in total cases now too.

Comments are closed.