Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This many lives could have been saved if social distancing had started 1 week earlier
New research from Columbia University found that the US could have prevented nearly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if social distancing tactics were put in place one week earlier in March.
www.theladders.com
One Decision on Social Distancing Could Have Prevented 90% of US Coronavirus Deaths, Say Experts
The timing of social distancing can have an exponential effect on the death toll of the coronavirus, epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell recently wrote in The New York Times.
www.sciencealert.com
Estimates vary for how many lives would have been saved if the guy who thought it was "all going to be fine" and that COVID was "under control" had taken the risk of a pandemic seriously early on. To be sure, precisely defining the number is impossible. Just as it is impossible to define how much of an impact Russia's interference in the 2016 election had on actual votes.
However, we should not interpret the imprecision of the studies linked to above as being a reason to discount them. The message is clear. Due to the exponential spread of this virus if earlier measures were taken to slow the spread the health and economic impact would be far less than it is today. That's not a partisan observation, it's one founded in science.
I don't think anyone expects the government's response to a crisis to be perfect. Errors in judgement, in the execution of plans, unexpected turns of events, are inevitable consequences of a crisis. Moreover, the federal government is not alone in its missteps to respond in an efficient way in order to minimize the damage from COVID-19.
However, there are a plethora of ways the federal response could have and should have been better. Ways that have been discussed on this board endlessly. The responsibility for the deficiency in the federal response falls on the head of the government. Responsibility our president has sought to put on the shoulders of others. But there is no escaping accountability. No amount of spin can change an essential truth.
By virtue of his poor decisions, whatever their motives or reasons, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars of wealth lost are his burden to bear. He was not just a victim of circumstance. His actions, and lack thereof, made this crisis worse than it needed to be. If there is no reckoning for his failures the country has no chance of healing itself any time soon.
Shirking the responsibility of establishing a coordinated national response early enough to have saved lives is just one aspect of Trump's failure to lead. Trump, at different times during the outbreak, has inconsistently sought to claim the authority to order states to act in certain ways and lay off responsibility to the states for their response so as not to have to accept accountability for the outcome.Now I could have sworn Trump had authorized the States to handle their responses to the outbreak
Calling this study........................This many lives could have been saved if social distancing had started 1 week earlier
New research from Columbia University found that the US could have prevented nearly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if social distancing tactics were put in place one week earlier in March.
www.theladders.com
One Decision on Social Distancing Could Have Prevented 90% of US Coronavirus Deaths, Say Experts
The timing of social distancing can have an exponential effect on the death toll of the coronavirus, epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell recently wrote in The New York Times.
www.sciencealert.com
Estimates vary for how many lives would have been saved if the guy who thought it was "all going to be fine" and that COVID was "under control" had taken the risk of a pandemic seriously early on. To be sure, precisely defining the number is impossible. Just as it is impossible to define how much of an impact Russia's interference in the 2016 election had on actual votes.
However, we should not interpret the imprecision of the studies linked to above as being a reason to discount them. The message is clear. Due to the exponential spread of this virus if earlier measures were taken to slow the spread the health and economic impact would be far less than it is today. That's not a partisan observation, it's one founded in science.
I don't think anyone expects the government's response to a crisis to be perfect. Errors in judgement, in the execution of plans, unexpected turns of events, are inevitable consequences of a crisis. Moreover, the federal government is not alone in its missteps to respond in an efficient way in order to minimize the damage from COVID-19.
However, there are a plethora of ways the federal response could have and should have been better. Ways that have been discussed on this board endlessly. The responsibility for the deficiency in the federal response falls on the head of the government. Responsibility our president has sought to put on the shoulders of others. But there is no escaping accountability. No amount of spin can change an essential truth.
By virtue of his poor decisions, whatever their motives or reasons, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars of wealth lost are his burden to bear. He was not just a victim of circumstance. His actions, and lack thereof, made this crisis worse than it needed to be. If there is no reckoning for his failures the country has no chance of healing itself any time soon.
Funny stuff!!
China is responsible for many things. Trump's failure to respond in a way that could have saved lives based on information available to him isn't one of them.China is responsible for COVID deaths, no one else.
Shirking the responsibility of establishing a coordinated national response early enough to have saved lives is just one aspect of Trump's failure to lead. Trump, at different times during the outbreak, has inconsistently sought to claim the authority to order states to act in certain ways and lay off responsibility to the states for their response so as not to have to accept accountability for the outcome.Now I could have sworn Trump had authorized the States to handle their responses to the outbreak
This many lives could have been saved if social distancing had started 1 week earlier
New research from Columbia University found that the US could have prevented nearly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if social distancing tactics were put in place one week earlier in March.
www.theladders.com
One Decision on Social Distancing Could Have Prevented 90% of US Coronavirus Deaths, Say Experts
The timing of social distancing can have an exponential effect on the death toll of the coronavirus, epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell recently wrote in The New York Times.
www.sciencealert.com
Estimates vary for how many lives would have been saved if the guy who thought it was "all going to be fine" and that COVID was "under control" had taken the risk of a pandemic seriously early on. To be sure, precisely defining the number is impossible. Just as it is impossible to define how much of an impact Russia's interference in the 2016 election had on actual votes.
However, we should not interpret the imprecision of the studies linked to above as being a reason to discount them. The message is clear. Due to the exponential spread of this virus if earlier measures were taken to slow the spread the health and economic impact would be far less than it is today. That's not a partisan observation, it's one founded in science.
I don't think anyone expects the government's response to a crisis to be perfect. Errors in judgement, in the execution of plans, unexpected turns of events, are inevitable consequences of a crisis. Moreover, the federal government is not alone in its missteps to respond in an efficient way in order to minimize the damage from COVID-19.
However, there are a plethora of ways the federal response could have and should have been better. Ways that have been discussed on this board endlessly. The responsibility for the deficiency in the federal response falls on the head of the government. Responsibility our president has sought to put on the shoulders of others. But there is no escaping accountability. No amount of spin can change an essential truth.
By virtue of his poor decisions, whatever their motives or reasons, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars of wealth lost are his burden to bear. He was not just a victim of circumstance. His actions, and lack thereof, made this crisis worse than it needed to be. If there is no reckoning for his failures the country has no chance of healing itself any time soon.
36,000 lives could've been saved? That's how many people Cuomo killed.Shirking the responsibility of establishing a coordinated national response early enough to have saved lives is just one aspect of Trump's failure to lead. Trump, at different times during the outbreak, has inconsistently sought to claim the authority to order states to act in certain ways and lay off responsibility to the states for their response so as not to have to accept accountability for the outcome.Now I could have sworn Trump had authorized the States to handle their responses to the outbreak
When he's responsible for your deathm we'll take notice.This many lives could have been saved if social distancing had started 1 week earlier
New research from Columbia University found that the US could have prevented nearly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if social distancing tactics were put in place one week earlier in March.
www.theladders.com
One Decision on Social Distancing Could Have Prevented 90% of US Coronavirus Deaths, Say Experts
The timing of social distancing can have an exponential effect on the death toll of the coronavirus, epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell recently wrote in The New York Times.
www.sciencealert.com
Estimates vary for how many lives would have been saved if the guy who thought it was "all going to be fine" and that COVID was "under control" had taken the risk of a pandemic seriously early on. To be sure, precisely defining the number is impossible. Just as it is impossible to define how much of an impact Russia's interference in the 2016 election had on actual votes.
However, we should not interpret the imprecision of the studies linked to above as being a reason to discount them. The message is clear. Due to the exponential spread of this virus if earlier measures were taken to slow the spread the health and economic impact would be far less than it is today. That's not a partisan observation, it's one founded in science.
I don't think anyone expects the government's response to a crisis to be perfect. Errors in judgement, in the execution of plans, unexpected turns of events, are inevitable consequences of a crisis. Moreover, the federal government is not alone in its missteps to respond in an efficient way in order to minimize the damage from COVID-19.
However, there are a plethora of ways the federal response could have and should have been better. Ways that have been discussed on this board endlessly. The responsibility for the deficiency in the federal response falls on the head of the government. Responsibility our president has sought to put on the shoulders of others. But there is no escaping accountability. No amount of spin can change an essential truth.
By virtue of his poor decisions, whatever their motives or reasons, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars of wealth lost are his burden to bear. He was not just a victim of circumstance. His actions, and lack thereof, made this crisis worse than it needed to be. If there is no reckoning for his failures the country has no chance of healing itself any time soon.
So full of shit you stink.China is responsible for many things. Trump's failure to respond in a way that could have saved lives based on information available to him isn't one of them.China is responsible for COVID deaths, no one else.
Paragraph 3 of the OP.And you completely ignore the Democrats responsibility in it all.
Deflection doesn't change the facts. But I understand it's all you've got.36,000 lives could've been saved? That's how many people Cuomo killed.
Trump was trying to save lives while democrats were impeaching him. Instead of democrats trying to come up with a plan to save lives now. What are they doing? Impeachment 2. At least Trump is working to save lives while you loons are telling blacks they aren't black if you don't vote for Biden.China is responsible for many things. Trump's failure to respond in a way that could have saved lives based on information available to him isn't one of them.China is responsible for COVID deaths, no one else.
Actually 2 million were suppose to die. So Trump actually saved millions of lives without help from the democrats. Who were to busy impeaching Trump during a national emergency.Deflection doesn't change the facts. But I understand it's all you've got.36,000 lives could've been saved? That's how many people Cuomo killed.
..he's not responsible for any lives--plain and simpleThis many lives could have been saved if social distancing had started 1 week earlier
New research from Columbia University found that the US could have prevented nearly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if social distancing tactics were put in place one week earlier in March.
www.theladders.com
One Decision on Social Distancing Could Have Prevented 90% of US Coronavirus Deaths, Say Experts
The timing of social distancing can have an exponential effect on the death toll of the coronavirus, epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell recently wrote in The New York Times.
www.sciencealert.com
Estimates vary for how many lives would have been saved if the guy who thought it was "all going to be fine" and that COVID was "under control" had taken the risk of a pandemic seriously early on. To be sure, precisely defining the number is impossible. Just as it is impossible to define how much of an impact Russia's interference in the 2016 election had on actual votes.
However, we should not interpret the imprecision of the studies linked to above as being a reason to discount them. The message is clear. Due to the exponential spread of this virus if earlier measures were taken to slow the spread the health and economic impact would be far less than it is today. That's not a partisan observation, it's one founded in science.
I don't think anyone expects the government's response to a crisis to be perfect. Errors in judgement, in the execution of plans, unexpected turns of events, are inevitable consequences of a crisis. Moreover, the federal government is not alone in its missteps to respond in an efficient way in order to minimize the damage from COVID-19.
However, there are a plethora of ways the federal response could have and should have been better. Ways that have been discussed on this board endlessly. The responsibility for the deficiency in the federal response falls on the head of the government. Responsibility our president has sought to put on the shoulders of others. But there is no escaping accountability. No amount of spin can change an essential truth.
By virtue of his poor decisions, whatever their motives or reasons, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars of wealth lost are his burden to bear. He was not just a victim of circumstance. His actions, and lack thereof, made this crisis worse than it needed to be. If there is no reckoning for his failures the country has no chance of healing itself any time soon.
and if hitler's mother killed hitler, many lives would've been savedThis many lives could have been saved if social distancing had started 1 week earlier
New research from Columbia University found that the US could have prevented nearly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if social distancing tactics were put in place one week earlier in March.
www.theladders.com
One Decision on Social Distancing Could Have Prevented 90% of US Coronavirus Deaths, Say Experts
The timing of social distancing can have an exponential effect on the death toll of the coronavirus, epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell recently wrote in The New York Times.
www.sciencealert.com
Estimates vary for how many lives would have been saved if the guy who thought it was "all going to be fine" and that COVID was "under control" had taken the risk of a pandemic seriously early on. To be sure, precisely defining the number is impossible. Just as it is impossible to define how much of an impact Russia's interference in the 2016 election had on actual votes.
However, we should not interpret the imprecision of the studies linked to above as being a reason to discount them. The message is clear. Due to the exponential spread of this virus if earlier measures were taken to slow the spread the health and economic impact would be far less than it is today. That's not a partisan observation, it's one founded in science.
I don't think anyone expects the government's response to a crisis to be perfect. Errors in judgement, in the execution of plans, unexpected turns of events, are inevitable consequences of a crisis. Moreover, the federal government is not alone in its missteps to respond in an efficient way in order to minimize the damage from COVID-19.
However, there are a plethora of ways the federal response could have and should have been better. Ways that have been discussed on this board endlessly. The responsibility for the deficiency in the federal response falls on the head of the government. Responsibility our president has sought to put on the shoulders of others. But there is no escaping accountability. No amount of spin can change an essential truth.
By virtue of his poor decisions, whatever their motives or reasons, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars of wealth lost are his burden to bear. He was not just a victim of circumstance. His actions, and lack thereof, made this crisis worse than it needed to be. If there is no reckoning for his failures the country has no chance of healing itself any time soon.
