Friday, May 29, 2020

Please enjoy today’s P&D.




Coronavirus Update For May 29, 2020

By Rich Kozlovich

I've posted much to show this "pandemic" is mostly media driven hysteria, and in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, society has gone insane with this stuff. Therefore, I've decided to post the mortality rates regularly.

The COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU) keeps a running total of deaths and proven infections.  As of 5:35 AM on May 28, 2020 here are the coronavirus rates of infection and the rates of mortality based on a worldwide population of 7,800,000,000 and an American population of 330,000,000 using this internet calculator.

Here are the results:
Please note the substantial difference between the infection and mortality rates of coronavirus and past virus attacks.
  • In 1968 the Hong Kong flu killed over 1,000,000 people worldwide. The mortality rate was 0.3%! America lost 100,000 that year, and morality rate was 0.05%.
  • In 1957-58 the Asian flu killed up to 2,000,000 people with a mortality rate 0.068%. America lost 116,000 people. The mortality rate was 0.07%. 
No one sought to shut down the nation then when the infection and mortality rates were higher. Why are we now?

Candance Owens: ‘Every 4 Years the Black Community Takes the Media Bait,’ Believes It Has to Destroy Itself

By Craig Bannister | May 28, 2020

“Every four years the black community takes the media bait” and believes it has to riot and destroy itself, conservative commentator and Blexit Leader Candice Owens said Wednesday night as riots raged in Minneapolis, Minnesota over the death of a local Black man, George Floyd, who died in police custody.

Replying on Twitter to an on-the-scene video of looters posted by local station Fox 9, titled, “This is awful out here. No police. Looting continues,” Owens warned that such riots devastate Black communities:.............In response to another Fox 9 video titled, “Target is getting cleaned out,” Owens blamed the riots on the community’s cowardly “so-called ‘leaders’” who bought into the media’s narrative by “choosing outrage over rational thought..........“The media will attempt to turn us all into circus monkeys if we don’t raise our emotional IQ,” Owens warns, replying ot a Daily Caller video of Black Lives Matter protesters attacking police in Los Angeles, California:........To Read More....

Only some black lives matter to other blacks, apparently

May 28, 2020 By Ethel C. Fenig

People of color/African-Americans/blacks — and other people of goodwill of all backgrounds — are justifiably angry and appalled by the death in Minneapolis of George Floyd, who was black, by a police officer who is white, and the shooting death of a black man running down a street, Ahmaud Arbery, in an Atlanta suburb, allegedly by a white father and son.

 But there has been a curious lack of outcry at the ongoing shootings and deaths of blacks by...other blacks — for instance, over the past Memorial Day weekend in Chicago, hometown of former President Barack H. Obama (D), and the next two days........... 

Alas, as with most of the shootings and unnatural deaths in Chicago, the holiday weekend slaughter was "just another black man murdered in the city of Chicago" again.  And again. And again...nonstop.

Ten died.............. To Read More

Someone finally brings clarity to the Obamagate narrative

May 28, 2020 By Andrea Widburg

One of the problems with Obamagate is that it’s incredibly complicated. It began under the Obama administration, involved the alphabet agencies (the CIA, the FBI, and the DOJ), as well as President Obama, the National Security Advisor, the Director of National Intelligence, the FISA court, and overseas intelligence agencies.

The wrongdoing included false affidavits, spying on innocent people, including the president-elect, unmasking, and set-ups, such as perjury traps and spies inveigling people into ambiguous statements that could be used against them. It then escalated to an attempt to overthrow the Trump presidency through a two-year-long investigation that destroyed several people’s lives, even though the Special Counsel’s office knew from Day One that neither Trump nor his team had done anything wrong.

And what I stated above is just the super simple, short version. Meanwhile, on the other side, for three years, all that the left had to do was holler “Russia! Russia! Russia! Collusion! Ukraine! Putin!” and everyone fell in line................

Today, though, I read Charles Lipson’s essay at Real Clear Politics,  What the ‘Obamagate’ Scandals Mean and Why They Matter,” which is the most streamlined, organized, and persuasive explanation about Obamagate I’ve seen to date.........To Read More....


The Patriotic Threat – Obama’s Hatred for General Mike Flynn

By May 26th, 2020

In the eyes of the key senior leadership of the Obama administration, Michael Flynn posed and still does a real and viable existential threat to the presidency and the legacy of Barack Hussein Obama. 
 
It was after the Russia Collusion ordeal story surfaced, in May 2017, when most of us learned that Barack Obama had warned President-elect Trump, without explanation, against hiring Michael Flynn.  It was Nov. 10, 2016, just two days after Donald Trump won the 2016 Election. From that meeting, Trump told staff aide Hope Hicks that he was bewildered by the Obama’s warning. Of all the important things Obama could have discussed with him, the outgoing commander in chief wanted to talk about Michael Flynn.

Of course, this raised many questions as to why Obama was so focused on Flynn. As we are well aware now, two weeks ago the Justice Department filed to withdraw charges against the retired three-star general Mike Flynn, for making false statements to the FBI in a January 24th 2017, interview regarding a phone call with a Russian diplomat..............

Why? Because Obama saw Flynn as the signal biggest threat to his legacy which was rooted in a number of Flynn’s positions on Obama national security policies from radical Islamic Terrorism, Benghazi, weapons transfers to Syrian rebels, to the massive abuses of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, the single gravest concern for Obama was Flynn’s inside knowledge of Obama’s July 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran⏤the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). ...........To Read More.....

Abject Fear and Mass Hypnosis: The Power of COVID-19

By May 27th, 2020 

Will the COVID-19 virus kill you?

That seems to be the concern at the top of everyone’s list, at least at the top of list of the “everyone’s” that are so afraid of the virus that they are virtually paralyzed with fear and unable to function outside of the boundaries of their homes.

To set the record straight as I wade into these waters, let me be clear…. COVID-19 does have the potential to kill people who are infected with it. This reality has over 100,000 exhibits of evidence in the deaths of those poor souls who have succumbed to the effects of the virus. I get it. 

But will this virus kill all of those who get it? The answer here seems to be just as clear; the answer is NO. In fact, the overwhelming majority of people who contract the virus will not die, this is supported by evidence as well in the 98% recovery rate we can find in any real study. So why the hysteria?

The answer to this piece of the puzzle is a little harder to see right out front, you have to look, but not just with your eyes, you have to look with your intellect and your experience to see the truth here. 
The fact that we have a breakdown across the USA into the Red State/ Blue State camps as it relates to reopening our economy and rejoining the world is the first clue we need to examine. If you live in a blue state, most likely you are on lockdown. Your governor is telling you that death is just outside your door⏤wear your mask, stay in, stay home⏤your job and your business be damned! 
On the other hand, those living in a red state are being told to start their lives up again, be careful, be cautious, but it’s okay to start moving forward. Go to work, open the restaurants, the bars, and the recreation places.

Why the difference in the two camps, Red and Blue?........To Read More....

Cuomo’s Coronavirus Personae All Fail the Statesmanship Test

However much past policy decisions were taken in good faith, they must now be reversed for the sake of human life. To dodge political accountability by invoking science is not leadership, it is cowardice.

By

Anyone who has dipped into Andrew Cuomo’s daily coronavirus press briefings knows that the New York governor relishes his variegated personae. There is the ethnic Cuomo, who, we have learned repeatedly, enjoyed spaghetti and meatball Sunday dinners in his Queens childhood home. Then we have Cuomo the family man, now belatedly bonding with his daughters as they shelter together in place, as we have also repeatedly learned............

Then there is Cuomo, the righteous champion of human life, berating the Trump Administration for not immediately sending New York State 30,000 ventilators. “You pick the 26,000 people who are going to die!” he exclaimed heatedly on April 23. (As it turned out, New York never used the thousands of ventilators it had already stockpiled and it sent its many surplus machines to other states, where the ventilators also sat unused.)....... .To Read More....

Cuomo blames everyone but himself for nursing home fiasco of his own making -- and has got some doozies

May 28, 2020 By Monica Showalter

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, that New York Democrat so vaunted in the media he was once touted as a replacement candidate for wretched Joe Biden, is on the hot seat these days for his wretched performance in the coronavirus crisis. He's become reviled for his outrageous decision to force New York's nursing homes to accept COVID-19 patients by executive order, killing off 5,000 of the state's most vulnerable people.

He should be crawling under a rock in shame, now that word's gotten out.  Instead, he's blaming everyone but himself. The latest?

The nursing homes which were forced to obey his orders to accept "medically stable" COVID-19 patients, right there alongside their elderly and frail-health residents..............

"The obligation is on the nursing home, to say, 'I can't take a COVID-positive person. I'm too crowded, I'm too busy, I don't have enough PPE,' whatever the answer is. it doesn't even matter. It's ... If they say 'I-can't take the person,' they can't take the person. So... that's ... how it works."

So once again he's blaming the nursing homes for following his outrageous mandate, something that they did under threat of having their licenses pulled..............To Read More....

The Twisted Tyranny of Andrew Cuomo

By May 21st, 2020

When COVID-19 hit the U.S., one of the first things we learned about it was that it was most dangerous for the elderly. In fact, the first cluster of infections and deaths in the U.S. occurred at the Life Care long-term nursing facility in Kirkland, Washington, where there was an outbreak of the virus. The first in the U.S. Several residents had already died before the virus was recognized, and dozens of other residents and staff were showing symptoms. 

From the beginning, we knew it was more dangerous for the elderly, who were warned to be especially careful. So why did New York Governor Andrew Cuomo think it was a good idea to require New York nursing homes to accept patients known to have COVID-19? 

On March 25, Cuomo issued an executive order that mandated NY state nursing homes and assisted living facilities to take in active COVID-19 patients, even though these facilities did not have the capability of protecting their residents from the disease. As a result, at least one third of all the COVID-19 deaths in New York occurred in nursing homes. 

Cuomo made this decision despite the fact that a week earlier, President Trump had authorized the deployment to Manhattan of the 1000-bed hospital ship USNS Comfort, the largest hospital ship in the world. The Comfort, with its 1,200 person crew and medical staff, was meant to provide 1,000 more beds to help what Cuomo suggested would be the crush of patients that the city would not be able handle on its own. The President also helped New York City set up a second emergency treatment center at the Javits Center in Manhattan. 

But neither of these facilities were ever filled to capacity. Not even close. When the Comfort left New York at the end of April, it had treated only 182 patients, less than 20% of its capacity. Likewise, the field hospital at the Javits Convention Center was set up to receive 2,500 non-COVID-19 patients in order to lighten the expected load of coronavirus patients in NYC’s hospitals. But it never saw the masses of patients that Cuomo insisted were coming. When non-coronavirus patients didn’t show up, the Javits Center was retrofitted to a COVID-19 hospital, at considerable expense for the conversion. But the highest number of patients ever treated there was never more than 500. 

The amount of waste that Cuomo’s inflated estimates and hysterical demands to the President created was inexcusable in the middle of a pandemic in which every hospital bed, every ventilator, every nurse and doctor was in great demand and seriously overworked. 

Yet despite his panicked and highly exaggerated demands for medical support, and the President’s timely response, and despite the fact that most of these requested beds were empty, Cuomo had no qualms about forcing nursing homes, which housed the most vulnerable members of New York’s population, to take in active COVID-19 patients and risk the lives of every one of them. He called it “their “basic fiduciary obligation,” which is absolute rubbish.............To Read More....

Thursday, May 28, 2020

Coronavirus Update For May 28, 2020

By Rich Kozlovich

I've posted much to show this "pandemic" is mostly media driven hysteria, and in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, society has gone insane with this stuff. Therefore, I've decided to post the mortality rates regularly.

The COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU) keeps a running total of deaths and proven infections.  As of 2:25 AM on May 26, 2020 here are the coronavirus rates of infection and the rates of mortality based on a worldwide population of 7,800,000,000 and an American population of 330,000,000 using this internet calculator.

Here are the results:
Please note the substantial difference between the infection and mortality rates of coronavirus and past virus attacks.
  • In 1968 the Hong Kong flu killed over 1,000,000 people worldwide. The mortality rate was 0.3%! America lost 100,000 that year, and morality rate was 0.05%.
  • In 1957-58 the Asian flu killed up to 2,000,000 people with a mortality rate 0.068%. America lost 116,000 people. The mortality rate was 0.07%. 
No one sought to shut down the nation then when the infection and mortality rates were higher. Why are we now?

Plot Against Flynn Aimed To Cripple Trump's Moves In The Middle East

By BENNY AVNI, Special to the Sun | May 27, 2020

As Attorney General Barr and General Michael Flynn battle in court to rescind the general's guilty plea, a deeper look deserves to be taken at the phone conversations that underlay the controversy. The calls were, in part, meant to protect the incoming administration from an effort to cripple the Mideast policy on which Mr. Trump campaigned for office............. To Read More.....

Margaret Thatcher’s Message to Washington’s Big Spenders


Margaret Thatcher was the British version of Ronald Reagan, a leader who resuscitated a nation by rolling back the size and scope of government.  She also is famous for one of the most accurate observations ever made about fiscal policy.


Her warning proved prophetic when the Soviet Bloc collapsed. Her wise words also could be applied to what happened about a decade ago in Greece. And what’s about to happen in Italy. But let’s not forget that the United States isn’t immune to the problem of excessive government. The Wall Street Journal has a sobering editorial on the pro-spending sentiment that dominates the nation’s capital.
…in Washington the politicians are debating how to spend another few trillion dollars in the name of virus relief. …Mrs. Pelosi’s House bill promises another $3 trillion for her various constituencies on top of the $2.7 trillion or so Congress has already spent on the pandemic. The goal is income redistribution… This political strategy may work since Republicans, as usual, are divided and defensive. …Mr. Trump…seems torn about what to support and is thinking only as far as November. This is a recipe for another deal on Democratic terms… Sooner or later the pandemic will end. The question is what kind of economy will be left. A second Cares Act would leave a legacy of vastly larger government that would mean slower growth and take years to overcome.
Yes, the spending binge will mean slower growth. But I’m even more worried about what will happen in the future. Here are three things to keep in mind.
  • Largely because of Bush, Obama, and Trump, the federal budget has tripled since 1980 (Reagan and Clinton were comparatively frugal). Keep in mind that the increase in the accompanying chart shows the growth in spending after adjusting for inflation.


  • However, politicians are spending more money. A lot more.  As shown in the accompanying chart, this has caused a huge spike in per-capita outlays. And the crowd in Washington wants to make the red portion much bigger.
Given all this bad news, does Thatcher’s warning about running out “of other people’s money” apply to the United States?

As bad as the numbers are, my two cents is that the U.S. won’t suffer a fiscal crisis anytime soon. As I noted at the end of this interview, Washington can probably continue with business-as-usual fiscal policy for several more decades (Adam Smith observed that it usually takes a lot of bad policy over a long period of time to cause economic ruin).

But that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to travel down that path.

Here’s an analogy. Smoking three packs of cigarettes a day presumably won’t kill someone within the first 10 years, but it’s definitely not a recipe for long-run health and vitality. Sooner or later, there will be consequences.

A mature and sensible people (like the Swiss) take steps to avoid the fiscal version of those bad consequences.

For what it’s worth, similar reforms have been proposed for the United States. Unfortunately, too many American politicians and consumed by self-interest and don’t think past the next election.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

My Coronavirus Picks For May 27, 2020

 Cooking the books, misrepresentation of the facts, corruption of science and more.

By Rich Kozlovich

In the meanwhile, people are going out of business and when it's all over we're going to look at the reality of this "pandemic" and say, "was that all there was!". In the end I certainly hope society will realize it wasn't science, it wasn't about saving lives. It was about politics, and a total disregard forthe people of this nation. 

Coronavirus Update For May 27, 2020

By Rich Kozlovich

I've posted much to show this "pandemic" is mostly media driven hysteria, and in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, society has gone insane with this stuff. Therefore, I've decided to post the mortality rates regularly.

The COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU) keeps a running total of deaths and proven infections.  As of 2:25 AM on May 26, 2020 here are the coronavirus rates of infection and the rates of mortality based on a worldwide population of 7,800,000,000 and an American population of 330,000,000 using this internet calculator.

Here are the results:
Please note the substantial difference between the infection and mortality rates of coronavirus and past virus attacks.
  • In 1968 the Hong Kong flu killed over 1,000,000 people worldwide. The mortality rate was 0.3%! America lost 100,000 that year, and morality rate was 0.05%.
  • In 1957-58 the Asian flu killed up to 2,000,000 people with a mortality rate 0.068%. America lost 116,000 people. The mortality rate was 0.07%. 
No one sought to shut down the nation then when the infection and mortality rates were higher. Why are we now?

Many US states have seen LOWER infection rates after ending lockdowns that are are now destroying millions of livelihoods

By Tim Stickings For Mailonline 22 May 2020

Coronavirus lockdowns have 'destroyed millions of livelihoods' but failed to alter the course of the pandemic -- given many US states have seen lower infection rates after easing restrictions, a JP Morgan study has claimed.

The statistical analysis has raised questions about the effectiveness of the lockdowns put in place across much of the United States two months ago to stop the spread of COVID-19.

It suggests that the lockdown measures have not only resulted in economic devastation but could have also resulted in more COVID-19 deaths.

The strict stay-at-home measures put in place by the governors of most states in mid-March has so far seen nearly 39 million American lose their jobs and forced businesses to close.

There are now more than 1.6 million infections in the US and over 95,000 deaths.

'Unlike rigorous testing of potential new drugs, lockdowns were administered with little consideration that they might not only cause economic devastation but potentially more deaths than COVID-19 itself,' author Marko Kolanovic, a trained physicist and a strategist for JP Morgan, said. 

The report also includes a chart showing that 'the vast majority of countries had decreased infection rates' after lockdowns were lifted.

The JP Morgan report says that restarting the US economy may not lead to a second surge in infections that health experts have feared given the falling infections rates seen since lockdown measures were lifted in parts of the country.

Infection rates have continued to decline even once a lag period for new infections to become visible is factored in, according to the report. 

The R rate is the average number of people who will become infected by one person with the virus. Researchers and health experts have said a rate below 1.0 is a key indicator that the spread of the virus has been maintained.

Reproduction rate data from Rt.live on Friday showed that all but two states had lowered the rate of infection.

According to that data, Minnesota's R rate was 1.01 and North Dakota's was at 1.02.

The report also includes a chart showing that 'the vast majority of countries had decreased infection rates' after lockdowns were lifted. The chart, however, doesn't specify which country is which.

All 50 states have at least partially reopened this week by relaxing restrictions on businesses and social distancing in varying degrees across the country.

Kolanovic said governments had been spooked by 'flawed scientific papers' into imposing lockdowns that were 'inefficient or late' and had little effect.

'While we often hear that lockdowns are driven by scientific models, and that there is an exact relationship between the level of economic activity and the spread of [the] virus - this is not supported by the data,' the report says.

'Indeed, virtually everywhere infection rates have declined after re-opening even after allowing for an appropriate measurement lag.

'This means that the pandemic and COVID-19 likely have (their) own dynamics unrelated to often inconsistent lockdown measures that were being implemented.'

Those dynamics may be influenced by increased hand-washing and even weather patterns but seemingly not by full-scale lockdowns, the report suggests. 

'The fact that re-opening did not change the course of the pandemic is consistent with studies showing that initiation of full lockdowns did not alter the course of the pandemic either,' it says.

The JP Morgan analysis linked the decision to impose lockdowns to 'flawed scientific papers' predicting millions of deaths in the West. 

'This on its own was odd, given that in China there were only several thousand deaths, and the mortality rate outside of Wuhan was very low,' the report says.

'In the absence of conclusive data, these lockdowns were justified initially. Nonetheless, many of these efforts were inefficient or late.' 

Kolanovic says that lockdowns had remained in place even as 'our knowledge of the virus and lack of effectiveness of total lockdowns evolved'.

'Despite the conditions for re-opening being mostly met across the US, it is not yet happening in the largest economic regions for example California and New York,' he said.

'While our knowledge of the virus and lack of effectiveness of total lockdowns evolved, lockdowns remained in place and focus shifted to contact tracing, contemplating second wave of outbreaks and ideas about designing better education, political and economic systems.

'At the same time, millions of livelihoods were being destroyed by these lockdowns.'

The US and other countries in lockdown are having to blow huge holes in their budgets to counter the economic standstill that is forcing millions of people into unemployment.

The report cites 'worrying populism' as an obstacle to re-opening the economy, for example in the US where senators passed an anti-China measure this week. 

It warns that economic activity in the US is 'now largely following partisan lines' as Republican and Democratic governors adopt different strategies for their states.

As well as casting doubt on the wisdom of imposing lockdowns in the first place, the report suggests that economies could now be re-opened more quickly.

In other parts of the world, Denmark is among the countries that has started re-opening its economy without seeing a new surge in virus cases.

Zoos, museums and cinemas have re-opened early in Denmark with many children now back at school after scientists said the R rate had continued to fall.

Germany has also been confident enough to scale back the lockdown after the R rate mostly stayed below 1.0 following an initial lifting of restrictions.

However, chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly urged caution and warned that a second wave of virus cases could leave hospitals overwhelmed.

The UK government has similarly warned that some restrictions could be re-imposed if there is a 'sudden and concerning' rise in new cases.

Sweden has never imposed a lockdown, and its per-capita death rate is better than Britain's - although worse than that of its Scandinavian neighbours. 

SOURCE 

The key tool to a safe opening is not social distancing

By Lyman Stone May 18, 2020  SOURCE

 This article was originally published on May 18, 2020 in The Washington Post as part of the “On Common Ground” series, a partnership between The Post and the Niskanen Center. Here is the full series.

Around the world, covid-19 lockdowns are ending — in some cases before the virus has been defeated, meaning that the risk of a second wave of infection is high.

But it is not inevitable. Many places, including South Korea and Hong Kong, have avoided lockdowns entirely and are now returning to something like normal conditions. Even when Hong Kong, where I live, got a second wave, we never went into lockdown, and now new cases are at nearly zero.

The key tool in these places’ safe reopening is not social distancing. Rather, it is contact isolation.

This policy, employed to various degrees in China, Israel and elsewhere, is a modern rendition of a strategy dating back to biblical and medieval approaches to leprosy and plague. Contact isolation is more effective than lockdowns and also less economically disruptive.

This is how it works: Most adults are permitted to return to work and routine activities, though masks, for now, should continue to be required. Anytime someone tests positive — regardless of symptoms — their close contacts are identified. The person with the positive test result and all of those contacts are then required to move temporarily into a government-run, hygienic, isolated environment — probably in a hotel or similar setting — until they can be ruled out as infectious. This process may involve testing if tests are available, or spending two or three weeks in isolation if the tests are not. For anyone who tests positive, the tracing program would extend to their close contacts, and so on.

In Hong Kong, many people get out of isolation in just a few days, thanks to the availability of tests. Daily tests per capita in America today are higher than in most countries with contact isolation programs, so it is likely that a similar pattern would occur among Americans.

This strategy is highly effective at breaking the chain of transmission, not least because contacts are presumptively isolated. Thus, contact isolation does not depend on mass testing but, rather, reduces the load on the testing infrastructure.

This system also encourages compliance because the centralized facilities would provide isolated individuals with all their basic needs (plus daily supervision so they would get treatment if they become sick). Food and medication can be delivered, WiFi would be free, and governments should provide financial compensation for lost work time. And, since covid-19 is much less dangerous to kids, families could choose for their children to be quarantined with them or separately, whichever they prefer. All of this would require legislation by state governments, but none of it is infeasible.

Alas, contact isolation sounds scary to many people. It conjures images of internment, stigmatization or family separation. But the truth is that the curtailment of our liberties would be minuscule compared with the society-wide lockdowns Americans have been enduring.

Contact isolation should be mandatory, but individuals who resist should simply be ticketed an amount sufficient to motivate compliance — not hauled off at gunpoint! Failure to pay tickets would trigger the kind of legal procedures we have for serious traffic violations. Some people would refuse, but the threat of fines and the promise of compensatory wages would work for most.

Notably, contact isolation does not require near-total compliance to be effective. Israel has pushed the spread of covid-19 to low levels with very modest amounts of centralized quarantining (just three main sites), alongside a stringent program for tracking carriers.

It’s hard to estimate how much isolation would be enough, but some basic math may be illustrative. Before social distancing measures, a person infected by covid-19 in America could be expected to infect an average of 1.5 to 2 other people. But that’s just an average: A “superspreader” might infect 100 other people, while many infected people might not infect anyone else, so tracking data indicates that more than half of coronavirus transmission is driven by fewer than half of infectious people. Even if this skew is quite moderate, average new infections per case fall to 0.7 to 1 (the level at which the disease will gradually vanish on its own, and the current level in most states) by isolating just 20 to 40 percent of infectious people.

With a few other measures, such as mask requirements — and given the fact that as summer begins, schools definitely won’t reopen soon — I estimate that contact isolation could enable the near-total reopening of businesses and moderate-size assemblies within six weeks. The better the isolation program, the sooner, and the fewer other measures will be needed.

How to make all this happen? Of course, federal and state governments would have to appropriate the necessary funds. Further, state and local authorities would need a manual for how to conduct contact isolation operations. That could be produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which already operates 20 centralized quarantine facilities.

Any big new initiative like the one proposed here will likely encounter a lot of skepticism. Policymakers could overcome that by stressing how narrowly targeted and temporary these measures are — and how effective they can be. Contact isolation is a pathway to social reopening. We can be safe together again.

Lockdown was a waste of time and could kill more than it saved, claims Nobel laureate scientist at Stanford University


The coronavirus lockdown could have caused more deaths than it saved, a Nobel laureate scientist has claimed. Michael Levitt, a Stanford University professor who correctly predicted the initial scale of the pandemic, suggested the decision to keep people indoors was motivated by 'panic' rather than the best science. Professor Levitt also said the modelling that caused the government to bring in the lockdown - carried out by Professor Neil Ferguson - over-estimated the death toll by '10 or 12 times'.

His claims echo those in a JP Morgan report that said lockdowns failed to alter the course of the pandemic but have instead 'destroyed millions of livelihoods'.   Author Marko Kolanovic, a trained physicist and a strategist for JP Morgan, said governments had been spooked by 'flawed scientific papers' into imposing lockdowns which were 'inefficient or late' and had little effect.......To Read More....

The CDC confirms remarkably low coronavirus death rate. Where is the media?

Daniel Horowitz

Most people are more likely to wind up six feet under because of almost anything else under the sun other than COVID-19.

The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.

Until now, we have been ridiculed for thinking the death rate was that low, as opposed to the 3.4% estimate of the World Health Organization, which helped drive the panic and the lockdowns. Now the CDC is agreeing to the lower rate in plain ink.

Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomatic cases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.

More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000.............. We destroyed our entire country and suspended democracy all for a lie, and these people perpetrated the unscientific degree of panic. Will they ever admit the grave consequences of their error?..............To Read More..... 

Howard Zucker’s Scarlet Letter


William Walter Kay BA LL B
 
On March 25, 2020 New York State’s Health Department issued the urgent Advisory: Hospital Discharges and Admissions to Nursing Homes. Nursing Home (NH) Administrators, Directors of Nursing, and Hospital Discharge Planners needed to “carefully review this guidance.” 

To “clarify expectations” regarding nursing home acceptance of residents returning from hospital and nursing home acceptance of new admissions, the Advisory orders:
“…NHs must comply with the expedited receipt of residents from hospitals to NHs.”
Hospital Administrators are given discretion over assessing patient fitness for transit and over choosing which patients to send. Thereafter:
No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the NH solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of Covid-19. NHs are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for Covid-19 prior to admission or re-admission.”
Withering denunciations of this Advisory appeared instantly. A March 29, 2020 joint statement (Society for Post-Acute and Long-term Care Medicine; American Health Care Association; and National Center for Assisted Living) references the then ongoing Covid-19 outbreak at a Washington nursing home which killed 40 and sent half the residents to emergency wards. 

The joint statement also relays CDC data indicating that, within geriatric facilities, Covid-19’s case-to-fatality rate exceeds 15%.

The statement further cites a March 27, 2020 CDC finding that 57% of Covid-19-positive nursing home residents remained asymptomatic for up to a week. During this incubatory period such residents: “have potential for substantial viral shedding.” 

The authors rejected the re-purposing of New York’s nursing homes into frontline quarantines. New York nursing homes were already encountering critical shortages, or complete depletions, of personal protective equipment (PPE). Staffing shortages were exacerbated by Covid-19 outbreaks among workers and by school closures which threw many into childcare crises. Poorly trained workers were doing shifts at multiple homes. 

NHs run out of old, crowded buildings with narrow corridors and antiquated ventilation are incapable of infection control. Having struggled financially for decades, many homes were in no position to suddenly become hospital overflow wards. 

The pretext for the hospital-to-NH transfers was a ginned-up shortage of hospital space. In any event, sending Covid-19 patients away from hospitals to free-up hospital space for Covid-19 patients is illogical. Moreover, planting contagious patients into crowded seniors’ homes could only sow a bumper crop of Covid-19 cases. The statement’s authors conclude that the March 25 Advisory: “will only add to the surge in Covid-19 patients that require hospital care.”  

The remedy these healthcare specialists proposed has been endorsed by China’s Xi and by America’s Commander-in-Chief, namely: large field hospitals.

On Trump’s order the Army set-up a 2,910-bed hospital in New York’s Javits Center. Trump also docked the 1,000-bed USNS Comfort in New York. Both facilities were operational late March to May 1. Both were shunned by NY Health. The Javits Center saw under 1,000 patients and never had more than 500 occupied beds. Comfort saw 182 patients. 

Between March 25 and the Advisory’s May 10 reversal 4,500 New York Covid-19 cases were transferred from hospitals to nursing homes. Trump’s field hospital plan could have intercepted and quarantined all transfers.

Cuomo’s team fanned the myth of overwhelmed hospitals in late March; and they ghosted alternative quarantine venues throughout April. With eyes wide open they dispatched a hundred or so Covid-19 cases per day into nursing homes. During this 45-day process Covid-19-positive nursing home staff worked at multiple nursing homes without PPE. 

Although he will be lynched for this atrocity, the brick-headed, celebrity-tipsy Cuomo is not our arch-villain; that spot is taken by 60-year-old Bronx-native, Howard Zucker

The romance of the Plague Doctor swept young Howard from his initial path, anesthesiology. Once the highest ranking American in W.H.O., Zucker participated in emergency responses to SARS, anthrax, Aids, Ebola, Zika, measles, and legionella. Zucker’s sophistry-laden Tedx plea for government control of the internet references H1N1 and Norovirus. Regarding the latter he quips:
The rapid spread of Norovirus on a cruise ship is a constant reminder of the dangers of being held captive to a virus.

Zucker helped develop the Medical Reserve Corps. Zucker teaches Bio-Security Law at Georgetown U. As New York State’s Health Commissioner Zucker: “oversees the entire health care workforce as well as health care facilities, including hospitals, long-term care and nursing homes.”

When did Zucker start bio-bombing nursing homes? His Advisory’s “clarify expectations” phrase implies some nursing homes must have resisted Covid-19 transfers pre-March 25. Hospital-to-NH Covid-19 transfers likely began March 18ish; scaling-up post-March 25. (New York State’s Covid-19 death count rose from 46 on March 19 to 284 by March 24.) 

Frankenstein reared his monstrous head mid-April as nursing home body-counts soared past expectations. Hitherto NY Health authorities inflated death tallies and kept mum on nursing homes. Now they scramble to shrink their nursing home body-count. 

At 11:46 AM, April 15, all 613 New York nursing home operators received an email ordering them to phone into a 1 PM conference call with Zucker. No paper trail this time. (A 2-minute recording survives). Operators were told to scour their files and prepare separate lists of tested, and presumed, Covid-19 fatalities along with data regarding average fatalities. Operators were to exclude from their lists any deceased resident not physically in the nursing home at the time of death. 

Under Zucker’s system a long-time nursing home resident could contract Covid-19 at that nursing home and die within hours of being rushed to hospital – and not be counted as a nursing home Covid-19 fatality. New York is the only jurisdiction resorting to such desperate legerdemain. Zucker’s team is also free to doctor earlier, untested nursing home deaths into something other than Covid-19 fatalities.  

The official NY nursing home death tally of 5,900 is a naked fraud. Local journalists have given voice to nursing home staff who swear recent deaths in their homes are several times higher than what appears in government reports. 

New York’s official nursing home death tally is 20% of New York’s total (29,009) Covid-19 death tally. This is the best nursing home fatality rate in the world. Imagine a place with a hundred individual nursing homes each reporting more Covid-19 deaths than the City of San Francisco turning out to be the paragon of geriatric hygiene.  

In 14 US and several European jurisdictions nursing home residents make-up over 50% of Covid-19 fatalities. Several jurisdictions have NH-to-total fatality rates of 80% including entire countries, like Canada. In Quebec, which imposed policies similar to New York’s, almost 90% of Covid-19 fatalities are nursing home residents. When the truth comes out New York’s Covid-19 nursing home fatalities will settle at a believable 70-to-90% of total fatalities. 

New York State’s nursing home body-count must already exceed 20,000.

On March 15, 2020 New York nursing homes housed 101,518 New Yorkers. Ten weeks later a fifth of those folk lay dead. There will be absolute hell to pay when the citizens of Gotham awaken to this crime.
See Also
Local New York Area Investigative Reporting