Live data from Hacker News

The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

buzzfeednews.com

171–180 of 200 posts

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#171
post #39

"Believing people without symptoms didn't spread the virus, the agency limited testing, discouraged masking..." This is false by Fauci's own account (see below interview) in which he states mask wearing was discouraged in order to secure availability for health workers. This is no small distinction as it raises questions about the importance of public trust/credibility during a health crisis. https://m.youtube.com/wa…

There are a minimal number of excess deaths now associated with COVID, so what is the problem? Allowing the community to acquire immunity naturally during Summer is a good way to minimise the spread of the virus come Winter. COVID severity seems heavily linked with Vitamin D levels, so lockdown during Summer would possibly have been counter-productive for the general population. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/cov…

> Why should Governments force people into lockdown for a virus with a CFR of 0.26%

Do you have a source for that--not something like "The Dental Tribune," but a link to the CDC page, or scientific study. I haven't seen anything in studies below 0.4%. You're leaving out long term consequences in your calculation, which we're seeing but haven't quantified yet.

You're also leaving out the explosive speed of spread, which can overwhelm ICUs.

Mask wearing is cheap and easy and seems to be associated with a region bringing it under control, so perhaps you can make your case about lock down, but the "open up without masks" seems foolhardy given those other facts.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to be at risk. There's a difference between "someone in their armchair behind a computer screen" and looking at reports issued by the Government saying "CPAP is dangerous for people in the area" and raising a question about why it's allowed in areas that are regulated by the Government, like commercial airline cabins.

Should we ban CPAP users from other forms of public transportation as well? From being in public entirely? It’s a tough question, nowhere near clear-cut, but I lean strongly away from banishing them.

People don't use CPAP on trains and buses. Just when they're sleeping on airplanes.

And the answer is "yes".

I have been told on United flights that I can't eat the nut snack I've brought on board because there's some kid 20 seats behind me in the coach cabin with a nut allergy. If 1 person with a nut allergy is allowed to dictate what particles the rest of the plane can emit, then surely the "rest of the plane" should be able to dictate what one person who wants to use an in-flight CPAP will emit.

Plus there are other treatments for sleep apnea, such as weight loss. See these _medical school_ web sites.

- http://healthysleep.med.harvard.edu/sleep-apnea/treating-osa...

> For those who can't tolerate the CPAP machine, there are other options for treating sleep apnea. Losing weight is one: a majority of sleep apnea patients are overweight or obese. That extra weight causes their airway to collapse and their breathing to be interrupted.

(Source: https://healthcare.utah.edu/healthfeed/postings/2019/09/slee... )

> Lose weight if overweight. Even a 10% weight loss can reduce the number of sleep apnea events for most people.

(Source: https://www.cedars-sinai.org/health-library/diseases-and-con... )

Why this is relevant to this thread:

We have some government agencies (presumably the DOT and whoever enforces the ADA) saying one thing, and other agencies giving other advice about exposing other people to CPAP machines in close quarters.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there'll be politics on an issue of great social importance. That's supposed to be the point of having a CDC, that they can offer respected, apolitical advice on what we need to do. When they fail catastrophically, we inevitably fall back to the normal strategy for resolving disputes about what our society should do, which is politics.

Looking at the HN comments apparently nobody wants to believe that civil servants can fail unless hindered by the political bosses, and that Presidents are personally responsible for what 2.8 million federal employees do all day. I wonder if they blame the Queen in the U.K.?

The queen isn't in charge of the civil service.

People in Britain absolutely do blame the cabinet (the UK's executive) and particularly the prime minster when they fuck up, yes. I mean, obviously.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#174

This is my favorite chart: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/new-covid-deaths-per-mill...

Best they rename Swaziland to its new name "eSwatini" before the woke find out!

Being offended by completely speculative offence theoretically been taken by ill-defined third parties is one of the Internet's weirder trends.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IDK the US that well If I can offer a piece of advice in that direction, it is to remember that the US is in fact a union of 50 states, and those states actually have a fair amount of power. The federal government, as powerful as it appears to be, really does lack authority in many areas. While they could absolutely have done a 1000% better job leading the response to the coronavirus, it was always going to fall mo…

And yet America managed two world wars just fine. Speaking from the Netherlands, it seems clear that about 40% of Americans lost their marbles in this grand collective paranoid fantasy starting around Nixon, growing through Reagan, and then really taking off around the end of the W. Bush administration. They started to believe these terrible and terribly false things about their fellow citizens, about science, about…

> And yet America managed two world wars just fine.

Sure, defense is one of those things that is definitely the purview of the federal government.

But for many things that the feds haven't managed to figure out how to control yet, the tenth amendment is very much in play. For pandemic response this is definitely true. It was true in 1918, remains true today. The states are in charge.

Given recent history (in particular, as it relates to your 40%), I expect that the states may actually start asserting more authority, instead of continuing to cede it bit-by-bit to the federal government. Which perhaps does lead to your final comment ;-).

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are a minimal number of excess deaths now associated with COVID, so what is the problem? I don't usually use such language on HN, but this is absolutely delusional. Covid19 has killed more people in 6 months, with lockdowns, than Malaria did all of last year. More than a third of those deaths are in the US. How can you possibly in good conscience claim this is even remotely comparable to the Flu?

You're using ambiguous language, and you didn't at all refute the parent's argument. If sars-cov-2 actually turns out to have overall IFR of around a quarter of a percent, then it most certainly is comparable to seasonal flu. I personally think that's unlikely, as most reputable estimates have continued to converge on the 0.5-1% range. But even that is "comparable" in the true sense of the word, in that reasonable an…

The IFR for Covid-19 is still not known, but just based on deaths, it is obviously either much more virulent or much more deadly than a seasonal flu. There is no way to look at ~127k deaths in the US for half a year, with no sign of slowing down in summer, and say that it is similar to the flu (which killed ~34k people last year in the US).

The comparison to malaria is also interesting. You're absolutely right that the infection vector is completely different in almost all characteristics. The difference between a disease killing mostly children and a disease killing mostly old people is important, but I don't think "robbing a country of its future" is a meaningful way to look at it. For example, there are no demographic risks from malaria, like your metaphor would seem to imply. The majority of the economic impact is coming either from households having to pay for the care of their sick family, or from lost work due to the sickness. The long-term impairments that malaria may leave children with are also a factor.

Of these, the first and possibly the third apply to COVID-19 as well, except that the costs for COVID-19 care are much higher, and with the important caveat that we don't know the long-term impacts of COVID-19 (though it is very likely not to affect children significantly, fortunately).

And while malaria can be eradicated (with great effort and time), as has been done in the southern US and southern Europe at least, it remains much more likely that COVID-19 will remain an endemic burden that we will just live and die with. I don't think we have any examples of successfully eliminating a human-to-human transmitted respiratory disease, unless we get lucky with a vaccine. It may well end up as a new tuberculosis.

And the assertion that limited restrictions could work as well as lockdowns is an extraordinary claim without any form of evidence. The only countries that successfully stopped the disease used some combination of timely lockdowns, travel restrictions, ubiquitous mask wearing, large scale testing, and excellent universal healthcare. Limited protections for the elderly have not been shown to work anywhere in the world, so why bother discussing them?

Note: in the spirit of nitpicking about my use of "not comparable" when I meant "much worse than", I should also point out that SARS-CoV-2 is a virus, so it is literally not comparable to the Flu, which is a disease. You can compare SARS-CoV-2 with (one of) the Influenza virus(es), or compare COVID-19 with the Flu/Influenza.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you seriously suggesting that if the US empire scaled back its efforts in those regions then we'd return to the dark ages? No, we’d probably return to the era of world wars. > Because when I was in Europe Somali pirates were hi-jacking oil tankers and the US didn't intervene, it took the European companies and military to put an end to that entirely by themselves without the need of US involvement. What? https:…

> No, we’d probably return to the era of world wars. As opposed to the constant and just as deadly porxy wars fought in placed like Georgia, India, Hong Kong, Syria, Yemen, Somlaia, Tunsia, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan... That seems like a World War situation to me in that it spans 2 or more continents and some conflicts/occupations have lasted longer than the World wars combined. > > In the late 2000s, anti-pir…

> As opposed to the constant and just as deadly porxy wars fought in placed like Georgia, India, Hong Kong, Syria, Yemen, Somlaia, Tunsia, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan... That seems like a World War situation to me in that it spans 2 or more continents and some conflicts/occupations have lasted longer than the World wars combined.

England and France famously fought a "Hundred Years' War" in the 14th and 15th centuries over the claim of the English king to the French throne. From that time onwards, neither country ever experienced a Hundred Years' Peace even on their own soil. The longest stretch of peace for either country started in 1945 and extends to the present day.

If the world today seems like a World War situation, you are severely underestimating just how deadly the World Wars were: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-conflict-deaths-var... and see also https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/conflict-deaths-per-10000...

> The existence of a collation and the presence of the US doesn't invalidate my statement

Your statement was:

"Somali pirates were hi-jacking oil tankers and the US didn't intervene, it took the European companies and military to put an end to that entirely by themselves without the need of US involvement"

In other words, you made the very strong statement that European powers addressed the issue of Somali piracy "entirely by themselves" and that "the US didn't intervene". In reality, the US did intervene and the European intervention was not entirely by themselves--countries including Pakistan and Japan even helped!

> But here are a list of hijackings and see how many of them bein released were a result of US involvement, its not as many you are making out to be

It's more than zero, which is what you made it out to be.

> You base your (flawed) argument on the basis that Humanity cannot conduct itself without abject violence and wanton barbarism

Yes, and I think it takes a completely willful or perhaps tendentious ignorance of history to claim otherwise.

> when in reality those predictable outcomes are a direct byproduct of Imperial decree: importing slaves from Africa and generational disfranchisement, isolating conquered aboriginal People into small, remotely located and undeserved areas of the US (reservations)...

That's beside the point. Every part of the world had centuries of war before Americans ever did these things. Those slaves were exported by West African slavers. Indians also practiced slavery and warfare.

It also applies across cultures. If you look at the history of China, there are periods where China is a unified empire and then there are periods where China is divided into multiple warring states (one of which is literally called the "Warring States Period"). European history between the fall of the Roman Empire and the end of WWII can be seen as a single long Western warring states period.

> Its not like this notion is anything new, it was just limited to the rich and powerful: Venice, London, Vatican, Monaco, Gibraltar, Macau etc...

The Venetians sacked Constantinople in the Fourth Crusade. London was the seat of a global empire won through centuries of warfare and more of an example of my model than of yours. The Vatican's relative inability to maintain the loyalty of continental Europe was a direct contributing factor to the Thirty Years' War, which is one of the most brutal and bloody conflicts in history.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, we’d probably return to the era of world wars. As opposed to the constant and just as deadly porxy wars fought in placed like Georgia, India, Hong Kong, Syria, Yemen, Somlaia, Tunsia, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan... That seems like a World War situation to me in that it spans 2 or more continents and some conflicts/occupations have lasted longer than the World wars combined. > > In the late 2000s, anti-pir…

> As opposed to the constant and just as deadly porxy wars fought in placed like Georgia, India, Hong Kong, Syria, Yemen, Somlaia, Tunsia, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan... That seems like a World War situation to me in that it spans 2 or more continents and some conflicts/occupations have lasted longer than the World wars combined. England and France famously fought a "Hundred Years' War" in the 14th and 15th cen…

> England and France famously fought a "Hundred Years' War" in the 14th and 15th centuries over the claim of the English king to the French throne. From that time onwards, neither country ever experienced a Hundred Years' Peace even on their own soil. The longest stretch of peace for either country started in 1945 and extends to the present day.

And Spain fought for independence/Reconquista for 780 years against Moorish occupation of Iberia, the Sengoku Jidai lasted 148 years of internal civil war. I'm really not sure what else you're trying to achieve other than deflecting from the point that we don't have to abide by this mode of operation moving forward and trying to one-up your understanding of Imperial conflicts form the past isn't proving as effective as you think it is.

That fact that it occurred is not being denied, no one is disputing this took place. It just isn't in the US' People's interest to do this given the alternative that exist today. I'm come for a military family, I lived near the biggest Marine Base camp in the US: I've seen first hand the consequences of these campaigns, there is no glory in it just a long list of sad casualties and injured people on the US side.

> It's more than zero, which is what you made it out to be.

Only because your initial argument was based on the notion that the dark ages awaited us if the US pulled out of trade route protection in its attempts to fill the vacumm left behind Rome, when in reality that it's clearly not true... But if you wish me to clarify: yes, US joint coalitions helped, in conjunction with other Global partners participation, re-commandeer sea vessels lost to pirates.

> Yes, and I think it takes a completely willful or perhaps tendentious ignorance of history to claim otherwise.

You seem entirely fixed on the idea that it must continue this way so much you refuse for it to be any other way. Do you really think having this mindset is correct during a pandemic, mass economic crisis and global civil unrest while China is trying to expand its territory and illegally annex Hong Kong and eying up Taiwan, while playing bully in the South China Sea? This doesn't end well for Humanity if it does and could ensure we really do go extinct, Nuclear leaks have been detected in N. Europe from possible failures in Russia this week, do you really think Warfare is in any way a viable choice given all the problems we have going on? We still have Fukushima pouring nuclear contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean for what will soon be a decade in 9 months from now.

I'm afraid there really is no getting to people this belligerent and jingoistic about the matter, I just wonder how long you'd hold that point of view if it was you and those you care about on the front lines fighting these needless banker wars.

1: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/radiation-sc...

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using ambiguous language, and you didn't at all refute the parent's argument. If sars-cov-2 actually turns out to have overall IFR of around a quarter of a percent, then it most certainly is comparable to seasonal flu. I personally think that's unlikely, as most reputable estimates have continued to converge on the 0.5-1% range. But even that is "comparable" in the true sense of the word, in that reasonable an…

The IFR for Covid-19 is still not known, but just based on deaths, it is obviously either much more virulent or much more deadly than a seasonal flu. There is no way to look at ~127k deaths in the US for half a year, with no sign of slowing down in summer, and say that it is similar to the flu (which killed ~34k people last year in the US). The comparison to malaria is also interesting. You're absolutely right that t…

> And the assertion that limited restrictions could work as well as lockdowns is an extraordinary claim without any form of evidence.

Japan, for example, has so far found success with very limited restrictions. There are other examples.

> The only countries that successfully stopped the disease used some combination of timely lockdowns, travel restrictions, ubiquitous mask wearing, large scale testing, and excellent universal healthcare.

This completely contradicts your previous sentence. Every intervention that you listed except for "lockdown" is... not a lockdown, and therefore by definition an alternative to a lockdown. Governments at all levels around the world are exploring alternatives, which will largely be judged to "work as well as lockdowns" if they can keep healthcare systems from being overwhelmed while significantly avoiding the economic devastation caused by the stricter interventions.

> Limited protections for the elderly have not been shown to work anywhere in the world, so why bother discussing them?

That's an extremely unhelpful way to approach any complicated subject, especially one of such enormous importance. Thankfully, most healthcare professionals don't indulge is such nonsense, and have in many places been successful in keeping infections out of care homes. As of this weekend, there are still nursing homes in the USA reporting zero deaths from COVID, and many others that have kept infections to a level similar to that of other respiratory diseases.

Re: The CDC lost control of the coronavirus pandemic, then the agency disappeared

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the HN comments apparently nobody wants to believe that civil servants can fail unless hindered by the political bosses, and that Presidents are personally responsible for what 2.8 million federal employees do all day. I wonder if they blame the Queen in the U.K.?

The queen isn't in charge of the civil service. People in Britain absolutely do blame the cabinet (the UK's executive) and particularly the prime minster when they fuck up, yes. I mean, obviously.

You should watch “Yes, Minister” and “Yes, Prime Minister” for reasons why you shouldn’t believe the elected politicians have anything to do with what the UK government actually does.
Post reply on HN