Monday, March 30, 2020

Trump says keeping US Covid-19 deaths to 100,000 would be a ‘very good job’

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/trump-says-keeping-us-covid-19-deaths-to-100000-would-be-a-very-good-job


Speaking in the White House Rose Garden, the US president claimed that, if his administration keeps the death toll to 100,000, it will have done “a very good job” – a startling shift from his optimistic predictions of a few days ago when he said he hoped to restart the economy by Easter.

China had 3000 deaths Italy 12k  and Trump claims 100k deaths is "a very good job"! ?

22 comments :

  1. China is lying about all their statistics. A recent Japanese medical team investigating how their case load numbers flattened discovered, for example, that the Chinese simply stopped testing and then announced to the world "See, no new cases!"
    Italy has a much smaller population than the US. Try comparing it per capita.
    China got their plague under control using methods that would be unacceptable in the US, such as cordoning off entire cities with the military. As a price of being a free society the US is going to have more casualties.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kalonymus HaQatanMarch 31, 2020 at 1:01 AM

    Poor choice of words - trump is an uneducated menuval
    China - 3000 deaths is a fake number, the communist government is hiding the true figures.

    In UK, which has 1/5 the population of US the estimates were between 20,000 and 100000 deaths. the minimum is not "good" it is the lesser of two evils.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The President is not in competition with China nor with Italy. His starting point is that if there were no mitigation efforts, models show maybe two million people die in the U.S. If there is mitigation, the number can be held under a quarter of a million deaths in the U.S.

    ReplyDelete
  4. and therefore Trump did a good job?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Kalonymus HaQatanMarch 31, 2020 at 1:50 PM

    Look at statistics https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/death-rate
    In 2019 there was approx 2.64 million deaths from all causes.
    If this goes up to 2.75m, of course it's terrible, but is it a big change statistically?

    ReplyDelete
  6. not sure how many people view things statistically as simply a number!

    My statistics professor in grad school says the best way to define statistical significance is not .01 or .05 but whether you would invest money. in other words was it meaningful - so according to that definition it is significant statistically

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why is always about Trump with you? A quick Google search shows that Democrat leaders also downplayed the virus in the early days of the spread and attacked Trump for talking about travel bans. Until the Senate got its act together the American failure to respond puts blame on both sides of the aisle.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Kalonymus HaQatanMarch 31, 2020 at 4:07 PM

    It is significant, what I should have said is that even without this virus, there would be an expected 2.6 million deaths in USA, and we would hardly mention them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You seem to forget who the president is - it was his job and he claims he knew all along

    and he continued along with the Republicans and Fox News long after it was obvious that the alarm was more than a "hoax"

    ReplyDelete
  10. please supply some links!

    while nyc mayor did have such an attitude it was much more common on Republican officials Fox News and common citizen than among Democrats and the mainstream media

    ReplyDelete
  11. Public health is a state function in US, not federal.

    President Trump banned flights to from China back in January, over the objections of Dr Fauci, who was following WHO directives favoring international travel, being part of UN.

    ReplyDelete
  12. source for your claim that federal government is not responsible?

    ReplyDelete
  13. source that Fauci objected because of WHO directives?

    ReplyDelete
  14. NOT TRUE!

    https://www.cdc.gov/publichealthgateway/publichealthservices/pdf/usph101.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  15. The mission of public health was specified as “fulfilling society's
    interest in assuring conditions in which people can be healthy” (IOM,
    1988: 7). The government's role in fulfilling this mission was described
    in terms of three core functions of public health practice: assessment
    of health status and health needs, policy development, and assurance
    that necessary services are provided. States were considered to have
    primary public responsibility for health, but it was considered
    essential that residents of every community have access to public health
    protections through a local component of the public health system. The
    public health obligations of the federal government included informing
    the nation about public health policy issues, aiding states and
    localities in carrying out their public health functions in a
    coordinated manner, and setting national health goals and standards. The
    report also contained recommendations for a review of the statutory
    basis for public health, the establishment of the governmental public
    health infrastructure as the clear organizational hub for public health
    activities, better linkages to other government agencies with
    health-related responsibilities, and strategies to strengthen the
    capacities of public health agencies to perform the core functions. A
    complete listing of the recommendations from that report can be found in
    Appendix C.

    ReplyDelete
  16. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/us/coronavirus-china-travel-restrictions.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

    ReplyDelete
  17. We are near the end of the influenza season

    ReplyDelete
  18. See effectiveness of so called ban
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/us/coronavirus-china-travel-restrictions.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

    ReplyDelete
  19. When the Trump administration had imposed restrictions on people traveling from China or Europe to the United States, the virus had already reached communities across the country.









    Travel restrictions can buy a government some time in stopping viral spread. But with that time, research shows, authorities need to put a dent in local transmission – by testing robustly, and then quarantining people who are positive.

    https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/03/jesse-watters/are-covid-19-travel-restrictions-more-critical-sav/









    The American travel restrictions may also have created a false sense of security, experts said, when more essential precautions weren’t taking place.

    ReplyDelete
  20.  In 2017, the federal government and households accounted for the largest shares of spending (at 28 percent each) followed by private businesses (20 percent), and state and local governments (17 percent).
    More money spent on health by Feds than state and local governments
    https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/highlights.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  21. Either Fox News or DJT

    ReplyDelete
  22. In reality, quarantining works a lot better for something like SARS or Ebola. It doesn't truly work very well when there is asymptomatic spread as in the case of wuhan virus. EVERY western country is getting hit hard by this virus. It is a fact of life. I choose not to blame this on a person who is listening to the virologists and scientists around him on what to do, especially when outcomes are largely no different than anywhere else except a few countries whose populations had the previous outbreak experience and tackled it differently than all the others.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.