Friday, April 3, 2020

Alarm, Denial, Blame: The Pro-Trump Media’s Coronavirus Distortion

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/us/politics/hannity-limbaugh-trump-coronavirus.html?algo=top_conversion&fellback=false&imp_id=352627997&imp_id=996661251&action=click&module=trending&pgtype=Article&region=Footer



The pervasiveness of the denial among many of Mr. Trump’s followers from early in the outbreak, and their sharp pivot to finding fault with an old foe once the crisis deepened, is a pattern that one expert in the spread of misinformation said resembled a textbook propaganda campaign.
 
Yochai Benkler, a professor at Harvard Law School and co-author of a book on political manipulation called “Network Propaganda,” said that as the magnitude of the virus’s effects grew and the coverage on the right shifted, Mr. Trump’s loyalists benefited from having told people not to believe what they were hearing. “The same media that’s been producing this intentional ignorance is saying what they’ve always been saying: ‘We’re right. They’re wrong,’” he said. “But it also permits them to turn on a dime.”



47 comments :

  1. China response bad.

    Trump response good.

    #animalfarm

    ReplyDelete
  2. Garnel IronheartApril 3, 2020 at 3:47 PM

    Step 1. Absolutely correct. This is something that has to be hammered home over and over again: this pandemic is China's fault. For the third time - THIRD - they released a virus onto the world. Once is neglect, twice is stupidity, thrice and you've got to wonder if it's intentional already. What's more, they've revised history to blame the US and they've tried to keep the world from paying attention to the one country that quickly knocked down their outbreak, Taiwan, for puerile political reasons. Then they shipped PPE and testing equipment all over the world which was rejected by almost every nation that received it when they checked it out and realized it was all defective. Again, intentional perhaps? Trump is right to keep heat on China and when this is over there needs to be a reckoning.
    Step 2. Yep, Trump's response has been terrible. He was behind the curve, lagged behind, and reacted way too slowly until recently. Then he revised history to make it look like he was a great leader all along. He also has to be held to account.
    So what do China and Trump have in common? Neither will be. What's the difference? When Trump retires in 2024 he won't be able to cause more damage. China is not planning any retirement for itself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. China response: cover-up outbreak

    Trump response: cover-up own incompetence

    #bloodiedhands

    ReplyDelete
  4. Correct. Like Fox viewers (and, lol shekein, those to the right of them), she's sleepwalking.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We're responsible for the "bear" market, now?!

    ReplyDelete
  6. He wasn't even responsible for the bull market. Despite the damage done by the China trade war and spending, the very robust economy the Obama Admin left us with has continued to bear fruit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I get the dinstinct impression you have not drunk the Koolaid yet. So let me mix some up for you.

    Presumably, you live in New Jersey since your first screen name is Passaic. And if so, then, you bear partial responsibility for governmental policies there such as abortion, assisted suicide, and forcing LGBT agendas on public school students.

    Which of these issues have you been actively opposing? Any passivity on your part might be interpreted, using your standards, as your having blood on your hands.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To be fair to me, I said the voters bear guilt, not blood. It's Trump who's got the blood. (Although I did say they sleepwalk like Lady Macbeth, who's the "original" bloody-handed criminal, so my figural bad.)

    By your logic you'd vote for maniacally suicidal Jack D. Ripper because his opposing candidate showed signs of -- gasp! -- cultural decadence!!! Oh, my... get the guns and turn on Fox news to stay current!

    The matters you cite are all merely distasteful, some dreadfully so, and hardly of such monumental consequence as competence & sanity in office. (Mothers determined to murder their babies will do so, with or without government sanction. As it is now, you should be kinda hopeful, as abortions have reached a historic low. But still you whine and rally for a cultural warrior to wreak havoc, citing this greatest of all political red herrings.)

    Read Hobbes: Where we can't trust the sovereign to keep us secure, we have no real state at all! So nothing to talk about. Secure the polity, and then within it we'll leverage resources to lobby for the cultural goods we, in our wisdom, recognize as better than our opponents'.

    ReplyDelete
  9. “Alarm, Denial, Blame: The Pro-Trump Media’s Coronavirus Distortion”
    No.
    I love reading Joe Orlow. Bravo he fights Passaic Friend. Is Passaic Friend the same fellow on this blog during the Kavanaugh hearing, fighting Kavanaugh, with such passion and puerile nonsense? I love reading Tzvi Fishman. see http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/25493
    I’m waiting for Tzvi Fishman’s latest book of his thrilling series. I love reading Malachi.
    “But for you who revere My name a sun of victory shall rise healing in its wings ומרפאה בכנפיה; You shall go forth and stamp like stall-fed calves, and you shall trample the wicked to a pulp, for they shall be dust beneath your feet on the day that I am preparing—said the Lord of Hosts. Be mindful of Torah of My servant Moses תורת משה עבדי, whom I charged at Horeb with laws and rules for all Israel. Lo, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before the coming of the awesome, fearful day of the Lord. He shall reconcile parents with children and children with their parents, so that, when I come, I do not strike the whole land with utter destruction.” (Malachi 3: 20-24)
    I love reading Winston Churchill’s 4 books on WW2. Thank God the amazing developments in radar critical in turning the tide of good versus evil.
    I must correct something Passaic friend said to me. Allow me. I always followed Ian Anderson’s advice. God bless Ian, brilliant international lawyer. Ian was my lawyer against Fordham U and against Susan. It could be because of Ian CUNY gave me the PhD June 11, 1991. Surely it was because of Ian Susan never got her NYS civil divorce until September 10, 2013. Miracle, thank you God. I won in USA Tax Court against a crooked IRS agent named Jewell (yes the same name as in Clint Eastwood’s wonderful film Jewell). True I checked the wrong box all those years I got $1,000 per child (God blessed me with 3 children in Israel). I checked jointly when I meant separately. The puerile (silly nonsense) September 10, 2013 NYS divorce save me from Jewell’s demand for $18,000+.
    Ian stopped being my lawyer and cut all connection when the late Judge Gerald Garson said harsh words to Ian December 2001. Gerald Garson was later jailed for 4 years for bribery. After Ian, I did motions and papers myself, with buoyancy (an optimistic and cheerful disposition, a Churchill word). Passaic Friends knows of this part. I’m waiting now for the final proof of my forthcoming book.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As a matter of fact, I was told that Reb Yaakov zt"l was asked a question as follows. Which candidate should I support in a race: the one who supports morality but is against Jews, or the one who is for Jews but wrong on morality.

    That wasn't the exact form of the question, but gives the gist of it. The actual question may have been worded as "pro-Israel" not "for Jews", for example.

    The answer was to vote for the candidate who is right on morality, meaning issues like abortion. That would not include voting for a serial killer.

    In reality I would never serve anyone a drink with sugar, high fructose corn syrup, artificial colors and flavorings, etc. Kool-Aid is merely a useful metaphor.

    Flouride occurs naturally in many sources of water. That being said, it is added to the water in this jurisdiction, and in fact, I filter all the water I drink and cook with.

    I mention that because I doubt your actions match your rhetoric. If you really felt that Donald Trump is as incompetent as you say, then you would be preparing for the next unforeseen crisis. There could come a time when potable water is no longer available. As you research how to deal with that possible eventuality, may I make some suggestions to incorporate into your contingency plan?

    Stock up on Aquagear brand filters and LifeStraws. Used together, these technologies could make fresh water collected from a stream or river suitable for human consumption. They won't be sufficient in every situation (they won't make salt water fresh, nor rid water of nuclear radiation) but they will be better than nothing. A portable UV light designed for water disinfection would be nice to have also. A small camp stove that boils water with twigs would also be helpful.

    In the President's defense, he was poorly advised, perhaps. I found a documentary of the Spanish Flu pandemic featuring Dr. Fauci where he expresses confident the world is in a much better position today to fight a viral pandemic. True, to some extent, but maybe not to the extent he expressed confidence. There are also reports circulating of statements by him from months ago when this coronavirus mades its debut that seem to indicate he downplayed its severity somewhat.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hah, I see you still haven't woken up to the fact that your "national treasure" Fauci along with the CDC is behind the failure of response and underestimation of the virus. They are the ones who are supposed to be virology experts. Not the US President. They are supposed to advise him and they gave him TERRIBLE advice. They woke up to this reality in mid March. And he listened and changed course when they realized what they had done.
    If you are going to blame a deadly VIRUS on people, as if they can possibly control it, then you need to blame those who actually crafted the policy and had Trump's ear the whole time.

    I can already anticipate the response. I'm not gonna put links here because I'm going to see if you embarrass yourself further, first. Then we'll document whether there is blood on Fauci's hands. Let's see how you reply

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 5, 2020 at 2:46 PM

    There is already a shortage of chemical reagents for testing kits, and for protective clothing. Shutting down the economy wil slow down treatment. Testing, medicine for this and other diseases. Clinical trials for other diseases already stopped, that is bad. Some hospitals turning away cancer patients. So the cost of shut down may be more lives lost to other diseases.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 5, 2020 at 4:00 PM

    No, he has a point . The best response so far has come from Naftali Benent (the guy with a small kippa). He says that the Health authorities do nto know how to deal with this . It is akin to a biological warfare scenario, and most likely the army has some kind of plans on how to manage and run the country in such a situation.
    It is very much like a biological attack, even if the virus was unintentionally spread from bats to humans.

    Armies have contingency plans for wars , Nuclear, biological or chemical, as well as conventional.

    In WW2 , there were air raid sirens in Britain, and people had to run to shelters. But this is not possible to do 24/7.

    If the CDC doesn't have a clear plan, the US army should. I respect Cuomo. America seems to be worst hit than any nation so far, and that is to do with numbers in big cities and movement of people.
    To feed 330 million people over the next 6 months is simply not possible if they are under total lockdown.


    It is time to quite playing politics and try to unite and get the best plan possible in action.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You predictably fell into the trap, but I'm waiting for Passaic Friend.
    Will he also embarrass himself now?

    ReplyDelete
  15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=150&v=Gv1ITJr3uZw&feature=emb_logo n

    ReplyDelete
  16. https://youtu.be/Gv1ITJr3uZw




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

    ReplyDelete
  17. https://youtu.be/g-J5GxjBVuk

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't feel any fear, so we must not be getting put into a state of fear, Berel. If you choose to feel fear, that choice is on you.

    ReplyDelete
  19. OK, the tone of this Comment (last paragraph, specifically) venturing into creepy territory. Not quite sure what strange psychological agenda at work here. However, if it's the partisan question of blame assessment that truly interests you, FYI in this thread I have replied to JOrlow with a comprehensive Comment that I think addresses whatever it is you think you're bringing up above.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh, and it was not "creepy" or something much worse than creepy when you stated that Trump voters bear the guilt for Coronavirus deaths!? How dare I put a little attitude in my reply.
    Meanwhile, you responded to absolutely ZILCH regarding Fauci. Which suggests to me you are unwilling to approach the topic with a rational mind but rather play the partisan blame game against your boogeyman and his supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  21. When CDC and NIH, including its "national treasure" convince the President the threat is contained, what resources exactly were supposed to be marshaled and in preparation for what? When Fauci woke up from his dream and recognized the nightmare in Italy, then Trump marshaled every possible resource available. And those that didn't exist, he ensured were created! The testing system was created wholecloth when CDC and FDA botched it thinking this was a SARS-scale problem (and with a worthless test that would have been useless even for that!) Under Trump's direction, the task force went outside and beyond the system and utilized private industry to build a scalable testing system. Now 150,000 (and growing) per day are being tested in the good ol USA. Maybe you want to credit Mike Pence for his work leading this task force group, but you said managerial credit must go to the executive, so then I have to credit Trump. He certainly listened to the experts and put the "15 days to slow the spread" plan in place. That, and its continuation, have already done wonders against the exponential spread of the virus.

    ReplyDelete
  22. SOURCES THAT TRUMP HAS BEEN FOLLOWING INACCURATE VIEWS of CDC and NIH


    TRUMP has claimed he knew all along that it would be a pandenic

    ReplyDelete
  23. It's super simple, fella:
    This is the wealthiest, most resourceful, most powerful country in the world, and the population still doesn't have widespread testing available. Much of the testing that is available (not widespread) is failing both on the pos./neg. sides and taking in some cases over a week. That is a colossal failure. And still no sign of antibody tests, which would help the country emerge from this so much faster -- just some talk. I really never in my life expected I'd be reduced to longing for Hillary Clinton, but God doth have a sense of humor....

    The country should have had testing kits & masks, etc., getting churned out all through Feb, not March. The President is vested with the powers to make that happen, but he never took it seriously until the 13th hour. You want to say it was because of one single advisor? Well, who's responsible for appointing and following that advisor? Simple math, so I don't know what puzzles you.

    Sounds to me like you're saying that when it became apparent that it was too late not to not act, the President dropped his business-as-usual "fake news" facade and ceased to refuse not to do nothing. (Multiple negatives on purpose. Matches this administration.) Well, isn't that just something to sing ballads about? Such a leader!

    Corresponding with you makes me feel like I'm talking to one of these deluded knuckleheads.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Not sure if you have me mixed up with someone else? It was you who brought up Fauci. He & Birx are of no interest to me at all and are not on my radar. I see things very simply in this latter, and I've explained (more than once) why I consider that question a red herring.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Much of the testing that is available (not widespread) is proving to be fairly worthless, both in its failure rate of false positives and of false negatives."

    This just isn't true.

    It was WHO tests that were REJECTED by CDC and FDA because of their high rate of false positives. Some Chinese test kits were reported to have massive failure rates. The tests in the US are actually better than that now that they were developed here. And they are providing very useful information. There are now over 150,000 tests being run per day in this country and increasing. That is a scale no other country has nor HAD to develop. This is a massive country. You seem pretty confused. This testing regime had to be developed by leveraging private industry. Like most things, the govt is not capable of that kind of scale and technical ability. The same is true of antibody tests. Diagnostic companies are hard at work to develop this type of product. The federal govt's role is to EVALUATE those products and if they meet high standards (Ie, NOT having high false pos and negative rates) to APPROVE THEM for sale in the US. It takes TIME to develop this kind of test and deploy it at scale. That you doubt they are working on it shows the degree of emotional lunacy that has taken over your perceptions of this crisis.
    There are companies racing to get this solution to market. To instruct you how difficult it is to do this RIGHT, consider the fact that the UK tried to deploy a mass antibody testing only to find that the tests didn't work. So we aren't going to do that here. They're going to approve something that actually works. That is FDA's job.
    I love how you think Hillary Clinton is going to create an antibody test in her basement. That's not how science works.
    It is not one single advisor (It's ok buddy you can say his name Fauci), it is multiple advisors and scientific advisors at CDC and NIH who convinced Trump that this would be like SARS (Because they were convinced of that themselves). His action was commensurate with that. All you do is employ hindsight bias. You certainly didn't know what this was. But most didn't. There was not ONE article about PPE shortages or potentially running out of ventilators (Which, by the way, we didn't - so shouldn't you thank Trump that he made sure of that?) before the Italy situation exploded and people realized just how taxing on the healthcare system this could be. The world was lulled to sleep by fake case and death numbers from China and an easy experience in surrounding Asian countries. It was plausible to look at that and think Hubei province was an exceptional situation and the numbers in there weren't even that largescale. But they lied. The numbers were much worse. And then the situation erupted in Europe and the US govt took action.
    Your belief that some mythical "leader" would have known better than CDC and all the scientists around him and would have begun stockpiling gloves and masks in February and stopped a deadly virus from attacking is nothing short of infantile. There is no magical man (or magical hilary) that could have prevented this virus from spreading here.
    Such utter hubris to think humans have that kind of power over novel microbes.

    ReplyDelete
  26. source that American tests developed in US are superior?

    ReplyDelete
  27. "And still no sign of antibody tests, which would help the country emerge from this so much faster -- just some talk. "

    Yeah, no.
    "@ScottGottliebMD

    Nonetheless, sero-surveys can inform clinical and public health decisions and will be important part of understanding and addressing spread of #COVID19. The
    @CDCgov
    has begun large sero-surveys. We should have insight into U.S. covid incidence soon. "
    https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/04/cdc-launches-studies-to-get-more-precise-count-of-undetected-covid-19-cases/
    Tweet by Gottlieb: twitte.r.com/ScottGottliebMD/status/1247850661074612225
    (Take out the period before r)

    Your idea that they wouldn't be working on this is downright nutty. Birx talks about this in the briefings because it IS something they are focusing on.
    Your statement is kind of like when Chuck Schumer demanded Trump involve the military in the response and specifically a military man as "czar" to coordinate supplies. Even though Rear Admiral Polowczyk was already leading the supply chain effort, the feds are already using DPA, and already have been involving FEMA and army core of engineers in helping multiple states with hot zones.

    You imagine things are not being done that are being done because of your anger and the hubris of thinking a perfectly managed effort would prevent deaths from a deadly virus, so they therefore must be managing it poorly. That assumption is a false construct.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 12, 2020 at 1:16 AM

    The only way to "contain the virus would be to hermeticalyl seal each individual or household, and prevent them from leaving the house. This is impossible, because there are many key workers who need to go out , and even ordinary people need to buy food. There are not enough delivery people and vans to deliver to the entire nation.
    So semil lockdown, where people are allowed to go out and buy food, and exercise, is what is going on in UK, and we still have terrible deaths.

    Many carriers don't even know they have it, so they can spread it too.

    Sadly, until there is a vaccine /herd immunity or widespread therapeutic drugs, the virus will continue to spread, unless the summer temperatures finish it off.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Dude, how much time do you expect me to sit here and read this? Can't you try to make your points more succinctly ?
    Length is not strength - they taught me that in High School English class.
    Dr. Birx stated the WHO tests had at least 30% false positive rate, some 50%. That is TERRIBLE for a diagnostic. Absolute trash.
    No matter how many articles you cite and long narratives you craft, you cannot change that basic fact.
    The tests are so bad that now they are seeing "reinfections"
    Those are very likely NOT reinfections, those are false positives who have now contracted the virus, OR people who cleared the infection and now turning up false positive on retesting. When a diagnostic is that bad, you will see stuff like this happening. But you want me to believe those are tests that work. You're not the Amazing Kreskin

    ReplyDelete
  30. Exactly like I said: More talk. I've been regularly in touch with friends of mine who do hospital rounds at various levels -- a few in nursing & PA, one M.D., & one administrator. These front-line workers will be the first to see the antibody tests, and every day they get a briefing on all the latest virus update info. None of them have been given a delivery date.Your idea that they wouldn't be working on this is downright nutty.Correct: Had the initiative been entirely renounced, that would be nutty, and I never thought it had. I suppose because you read quickly, without considering the general trend & course of an argument, it escaped you that when I say "No sign of antibody tests..." it's yet more support buttressing my larger, consistent, & repeated point regarding the costs of the administration not responding much sooner. That means: Had Trump prioritized this in mid-January, when it hit high alert, instead of waving it off, then delivery of antibody tests would likely be on the horizon by now, instead of being a "wait'n'see...". What's more -- and I've already made this point as well -- the quality assurance of the test would likely be better, having been manufactured less under panicked delivery conditions.

    This ain't rocket science. Note for the future: If your interlocutor doesn't pass the "peshitta" test, well then you've probably read too fast with too little thought. As with Gemara, so with life.

    ReplyDelete
  31. That's your ADD talking. As a reality check, I just read through my last post casually & slowly, pausing between major paragraph breaks. All I omitted was checking the hyperlinks. Took me four minutes. If you can't afford that amount of time without antsy-ness kicking in, well then that would explain a lot about the quality of your replies.

    I'd advise you "religiously" to pause & reflect before formulating a reply. Should you succeed in taking on that practice, I think you'll find over time the quality of your own thoughts on the page to improve dramatically.

    See, in this very case you've lost the hemshekh. It was you who brought up the WHO tests, claiming that when I cited the failure rate of our local testing in domestic U.S., I was mixinup up those failures with reports about WHO tests that the U.S. refused. Obviously I'm not inclined to concern myself with matters that are moot: Whether the WHO tests are indeed as bad as you just claimed is irrelevant, at least to me, and I never advocated for whether they should be accepted or rejected -- although I (really, R' Eidensohn) regardless provided you sources in contradiction to what you assert re their unreliability. Rather, it is the reliability of our tests available here that is the point: They are showing failures of up to 30% false negatives & 10% false positives. Upshot: Basically worthless. And what's more: They take too long between testing & results. That is a simple point & quite factual ... all your rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I don't think you understand what happens in the world. z
    "These front-line workers will be the first to see the antibody tests, naturally, and every day they get work briefings on all the latest virus update info. None of them have been given a delivery date for antibody tests."

    Antibody tests cannot be magically "Delivered" until they are first DEVELOPED successfully and APPROVED for use by FDA. A date of approval would not be predictable except by a navi. A delivery date would be known after an order is placed. Orders can't be placed on something that doesn't exist yet.
    Your contacts may think things just appear out of thin air and get delivered to their hospital by some invisible hand, since they are not involved in whatever happens leading up to that moment, but a lot of other things had to happen before that.

    Exactly which test do you think will appear and delivered by whom? I really am interested to know how you think this sort of thing happens. Like I said, there are companies developing tests as we speak. It requires scientists and technical skill to do this work.

    "delivery of antibody tests would likely be on the horizon by now"

    LOL, you cannot deliver something that doesn't exist. DELIVERY is not the relevant hurdle. UPS, Fedex, and USPS work just fine to deliver goods in this country. You seem to not understand that developing a diagnostic test that works takes time, skill, money, and resources.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "but their quality assurance would likely be better, having been manufactured less under the panic of peak urgency for delivery."

    Guy, the challenges of creating a diagnostic test that works well is not as simple as making sure the factory is operational according to specifications. (quality parts is a prerequisite). Are you not understanding that this is a biological assay!? It's not a TV assembly line.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I strongly suggest you revisit my suggestion re learning to apply the "peshita" test when in discussion. (Better suggestion: Learn more Gemara -- regularly. Your dibbur showing signs of talmud deficiency.)

    More semantics: I was using the word "delivery" in the technical business sense, not the everyday sense -- as in "I have a deliverable for my manager that I haven't yet met." 'Delivery' in such sense is synonymous with work completion, not a literal physical handing over. Is not as common a usage as yours, granted, but frankly I wouldn't have expected a word choice short of perfection to lead to such misunderstanding and send you for a headspin. Anyway, mystery solved. "Delivery on horizon..." thus meant to signify announced availability, not some UPS man ringing the doorbell. (A strange havamina there!)

    But even semantics aside, your "plug-in" still fails (see above re talmud Torah), for how would my misunderstanding vaccine development get you to a maskana that acquits the President of sitting on his hands for 70 days in the midst of a pandemic threat floated first in early January, then emphatically memo'd by his own trade advisor in late January, and then lobbied by government & international experts all through February and the first third of March? Lost time is still lost time, after all. (Have you lost track of the argument again?)

    ReplyDelete
  35. I guess you object to the terminology of "quality assurance" being applied to vaccine production? FYI, it is a subfield unto itself, and is applied to pretty much every product, as far as I'm aware.

    But even if not, it's just semantics, and the point still stands: The current failure rate of testing is worse than substandard, and that is likely attributable to not even time invested in the production.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 14, 2020 at 9:56 PM

    It's important to distinguish between manufacture of pharmaceuticals, where QC applies, and research and development (R&D). In normal times, it takes 8-10 years to get a new pharmaceutical drug or vaccine from lab bench to hospital bedside. Biotech observer has expertise on this. I did 2 years of a PhD on certain aspects of pharmaceuticals r&d .
    Let's take an example. Flu jab is updated yearly, and quickly manufactured. Now, with a different "animal", the corona virus, you can't just modify an existing flu vaccine to protect against it. Same way, you can't use goji berries to make tefillin.
    Test kits _ is also a long process, since you are starting at scratch.

    ReplyDelete
  37. So drive it home: Are you saying the failure rate of the current tests are not attributable to being so under-the-gun rushed?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Now you're jumping around from antibody tests to covid19 testing for current infections (which are RNA based). It's clear you are out of your element.
    I'll make this clear without getting into technical jargon of any kind.
    None of these companies sat around waiting for someone to tell them "Hey, we could really use a test, would you give it a try for us?"
    I don't know why you think that's reality-based or that this is the role of federal govt, but it is merely your fantasy. Hillary in her labcoat cooking up medical tests in a basement somewhere or whipping Roche executives on their backsides. No. Companies developed these assays when they saw the need.
    The need for testing was obvious long before you googled for the first time, "What are these antibody tests people keep talking about"
    That is also true of RNA based testing for current infections. What they did have to wait for was for OLD, pointless FDA regulations to get removed out of the way so that the tests these companies were working on could actually be brought into the market place. Thankfully, Hahn course corrected and struck down this regulation so that private industry could be leveraged for testing. Then tests went from <2000 per day to 150,000 per day in USA. An improvement you will never acknowledge. And in time, more improvement will be coming, I am sure.

    Just as several antibody tests got approved over yom tov. The same tests you were telling us no one was working on and no one prioritized.
    Maybe you should cool off on the commentaries to preserve what's left of your credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "announced availability date,"
    Do you just comment without reading? This phrase is no different from how I interpreted your strange and obviously unschooled commentaries.

    As I said above: 'Antibody tests cannot be magically "Delivered" until they are first DEVELOPED successfully and APPROVED for use by FDA. A date of approval would not be predictable except by a navi. A delivery date would be known after an order is placed. Orders can't be placed on something that doesn't exist yet.
    Your contacts may think things just appear out of thin air and get delivered to their hospital by some invisible hand, since they are not involved in whatever happens leading up to that moment, but a lot of other things had to happen before that.'
    /End Quote

    I'm not sure if it's your contacts or actually you who is completely misinterpreting the situation. Do them a favor and stop asking for daily updates whether their hospital has antibody tests. Let them treat patients and not have time wasted by pointless inquiries. Instead, track the FDA EUA's and you will see when tests become available for them to utilize. Quite simple.

    If we could predict when such tests would be approved (under obviously expedited review processes in a nationwide emergency), it would make the review process a sham, now wouldn't it? Perhaps you need to think deeper instead of criticizing the gemara kup of everyone else here. This just isn't your area of expertise, as much as you want to use it as another angle to push your anti-Trump agenda. #Fail

    ReplyDelete
  40. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 17, 2020 at 1:50 PM

    Tests _ it takes time to a)develop a kit that you think will work. B) validation, ie testing the tests, to see how accurate they are, c) regulatory approval.
    So if this is being pushed at speed, there may be some sacrifice of accuracy.
    That's a balance that has to be decided upon. In UK, we have the same issue. No widespread testing. And these people who get infected twice, could be down to errors in testing.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I comment too fast??! Availability-for-order, genius!

    #alreadyclarified

    ReplyDelete
  42. Now you're jumping around from antibody tests to covid19 testing for current infections (which are RNA based).No, not at all. Strange. The point I was making was quite basic. I'm starting to wonder if you're even sane....

    Just as several antibody tests got approved over yom tov. The same tests you were telling us no one was working on and no one prioritized.But I just clarified that I never said any such thing ("...no one was working on..."), that it was only you who'd invented that I had. (Goodness, why bother?)
    Take a breath and think about this for moment: See what a great, productive step forward you feel it is that antibody tests are approved? Now imagine how wonderfully productive to the current chaos that'd have been if that were two whole months ago (i.e., 2-3 whole weeks before even the first lockdowns), in an alternative reality where we had a truly capable person in the front office (yes, like Hillary, for example -- beggars can't be choosers). Or just even one-to-one-and-a-half months ago, had Trump had just heeded his own adviser Peter Navarro's report.
    As I said: "Lost time is lost time." Is a pretty simple point. Why you keep making this more complicated and obfuscating matters remains the only looming question, but that migrates us more over to an analyst's couch.... No, thanks.
    #ThisGuyGotSomeSeriousIssues

    Maybe you should cool off on the commentaries to preserve what's left of your credibility."Credibility"?! You think reputational risk is a motivator here? Fella, boqeir tov we're all anonymous here. (Well, except Gerald, who's clearly some kind of über-eccentric anyway, addicted to public confessionals.) So that's a mighty strange go-to warning; maybe it betrays the fact that in life you're just a natural bully, so you let quips like that slip even when they have no applicability...?

    ReplyDelete
  43. You make the same talking points over and over again without reading the responses which explain to you why they don't make sense. There was no lost time on antibody testing. Companies did not delay because of some comment Trump made in a rally that made you upset, about how Democrats were trying to blame him for the virus.
    I will directly quote you from what I wrote in the very comment you replied to:
    "None of these companies sat around waiting for someone to tell them "Hey, we could really use a test, would you give it a try for us?"

    Please, read it again. Let it sink in.

    "Companies developed these assays when they saw the need.
    The need for testing was obvious long before you googled for the first time, "What are these antibody tests people keep talking about""

    They did not wait for a request from someone in the federal government or a kick on the behind to go faster. That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works. So what time was lost for antibody testing? NONE.

    ReplyDelete
  44. You complained multiple times about the "failure" (as if this is a govt failure) to provide a date of availability for this kind of serology test. (which doesn't make sense to have a date, unless someone is a navi). AND that this reflects the Trump admin not being sufficiently interested in or focused on this approach (which was directly refuted by Gottlieb commentary and explanations). Now going to pretend you didn't? You constantly change and recycle your arguments but accuse others of various logical fallacies

    ReplyDelete
  45. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 17, 2020 at 5:44 PM

    UK ordered 3 million test kits from China, for $20 million or more, and they turned out to be junk, and cannot be used. Like buying junk from ebay from the same country.

    ReplyDelete

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