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.
You don't want to take it seriously because doing so leads to an inescapable conclusion. X amount of deaths are attributable to Trump's late response despite being given ample warning of how serious the outbreak would be based on observational evidence taking place in other parts of the world.Can't take this seriously
In the mind of the TDS moron, anything short of stalinism is anarchy. There is no power they don't believe government should have.There goes another leftist false talking point .Nobody is talking anarchy....We are talking limited government ....you know the line...Dedicated to Life,LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness.....government control is not liberty...it is fascism,marxism,and communism.
That's utter horseshit.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.
You don't want to take it seriously because doing so leads to an inescapable conclusion. X amount of deaths are attributable to Trump's late response despite being given ample warning of how the outbreak would be based on observational evidence taking place in other parts of the world.Can't take this seriously
Pick a number. Depending on how much earlier the response occurred, thousands of those deaths could have been prevented. The data suggests 10,000 at a minimum.We are now just shy of 97,000.
Just reading the premise of your first sentence, and no more, you are fundamentally wrong.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.
That's the goal.The GOP that you hate so passionately knows that we cannot stay at home till the chinese disease goes awayThis virus shows no signs of slowing down
because it may be with us from now on
but if you kill the economy as dems are trying to do you lose the ability to help anyone
I’ve never actually met anybody that believes in open borders?Well, according to their logic if we had of gone with the Democrat open border then over 120,000 more would have died.
Stupid libtardos, arrogance blinds them from the obvious.
But I think we have seen people that believe in shooting joggers if they’re black.
I highlighted the part you referenced in post #85. Unlike Trumpleheads I do research before writing posts. You're going to need another line of deflection.Translation: I didn't bother to read the paper
Your post. That's a lie.Well, that's a lie.Now I could have sworn Trump had authorized the States to handle their responses to the outbreak........after he had tried to shut down travel and other forms of containing the virus, that he got hell for doing from the Democrats that insisted on everyone coming out, enjoy life and keep doing all the normal stuff
And just what part is a lie????
He did give it to the states to handle the responses.
He did want to shut down international travel, China specifically...…...but was called racist for doing so
and the Democrats were telling everyone get out & about.
So again...…….what part is a lie??????
Your worthless opinion, disputed by the facts, is noted.Just reading the premise of your first sentence, and no more, you are fundamentally wrong.
Your worthless opinion, disputed by the facts, is noted.Just reading the premise of your first sentence, and no more, you are fundamentally wrong.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion, Berg
Ha ha ha, your TDS in full swing, you are going to IGNORE the Abstract which tells us they use a Model and a bunch of scenarios for their "evidence" (which doesn't exist) which is why you and the easy to fool media are all over this.I highlighted the part you referencedin post #85. Unlike Trumpleheads I do research before writing posts. You're going to need another line of deflection.Translation: I didn't bother to read the paper
Well, that's a lie.Now I could have sworn Trump had authorized the States to handle their responses to the outbreak........after he had tried to shut down travel and other forms of containing the virus, that he got hell for doing from the Democrats that insisted on everyone coming out, enjoy life and keep doing all the normal stuff
And just what part is a lie????
He did give it to the states to handle the responses.
He did want to shut down international travel, China specifically...…...but was called racist for doing so
and the Democrats were telling everyone get out & about.
So again...…….what part is a lie??????
As long as dems are in power they dont care how many innocent people they have to hirtThat's the goal.The GOP that you hate so passionately knows that we cannot stay at home till the chinese disease goes awayThis virus shows no signs of slowing down
because it may be with us from now on
but if you kill the economy as dems are trying to do you lose the ability to help anyone
You don't want to take it seriously because doing so leads to an inescapable conclusion. X amount of deaths are attributable to Trump's late response despite being given ample warning of how serious the outbreak would be based on observational evidence taking place in other parts of the world.Can't take this seriously
Congrats. You've found another path to denial by ignoring the actual data used to model different scenarios.Ha ha ha, your TDS in full swing, you are going to IGNORE the Abstract which tells us they use a Model and a bunch of scenarios for their "evidence" (which doesn't exist) which is why you and the easy to fool media are all over this.
Congrats. You've found another path to denial by ignoring the actual data used to model different scenarios.Ha ha ha, your TDS in full swing, you are going to IGNORE the Abstract which tells us they use a Model and a bunch of scenarios for their "evidence" (which doesn't exist) which is why you and the easy to fool media are all over this.
As I noted in the OP, the lack of an ability to be absolutely precise in calculating numbers do not detract from the usefulness of the study. You know for a certainty, based on how other countries were more successful than we were in preventing COVID from spreading, that measures like social distancing and wearing masks works. They took steps to employ those methods of prevention early on. We did not. The fault for that lies with Trump. The extent of the outbreak was preventable. Full stop.
