COVID-19 Outbreak (Update: More than 2.9M cases and 132,313 deaths in US) (11 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

Yeah because all of these protests are happening at high noon. Face it, it’s back for round 2. Just a general Memorial Day weekend and opening up is creating record cases in some areas.

The 7-day average for new cases reached record highs in 14 states and Puerto Rico yesterday. The June case count in some states is already approaching their totals for the entire month of April.

Those states are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Kentucky, New Mexico, North Carolina, Mississippi, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Utah.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/06/08/14-states-puerto-rico-hit-their-highest-seven-day-average-new-covid-19-infections-since-june/

 

[St. Widge]

 

[0rion]

Ohio is now covid free. I kid but that's what it feels like anytime I'm out. I was really lucky yesterday and had to go to 3 stores. I don't enjoy even going to 1. Basically no masks on anyone including employees. I'm trying to stay the course and I keep wearing mine but the mask does nothing for me so I'm questioning why I'm still wearing mine. The only employees wearing them had them pulled down on their chins so they meet the state requirement of wearing one but it's not covering their mouth/nose.

 

[Merl]

Just goes to show how incompetant the WHO is. Nothing they say can be trusted and it should be disbanded or at least the current leadership should be fired. If they bring in new leaders then they will have to prove their ability to correctly run it correctly and apolitically before another U.S. penny is given to them.

 

[James Spader]

Just goes to show how incompetant the WHO is. Nothing they say can be trusted and it should be disbanded or at least the current leadership should be fired. If they bring in new leaders then they will have to prove their ability to correctly run it correctly and apolitically before another U.S. penny is given to them.

Yep, that money will be better spent in our own country.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

It seems like the science of WHO remains fairly robust, it’s the PR - and by extension political interference- that is the major issue
That seems like a simple fix
Not an easy one, but simple

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Yep, that money will be better spent in our own country.

Since Covid did not originate here, I see a fundamental flaw in this argument

 

[Arathrael]

It seems like the science of WHO remains fairly robust, it’s the PR - and by extension political interference- that is the major issue
That seems like a simple fix
Not an easy one, but simple

Right. The WHO statement was qualified from the outset. "From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual," Van Kerkhove said on Monday (emphasis added). From what I've seen, at no point was it said that was definitively the case, or that it doesn't happen, or that this refers to all presymptomatic individuals as opposed to those who are asymptomatic (i.e. never develop symptoms at all) but then it's reported, without seeking clarification, in headlines without any qualification, repeating "very rare" as if it means "doesn't happen". Which, as you say, is a PR issue.

Yep, that money will be better spent in our own country.

Because the US has done such a great job keeping on top of this? Countries that followed the WHO advice from the outset have done better than the US, and the UK for that matter. Which, granted, isn't hard since the US and the UK are pretty much at the bottom of that particular league table.

 

[St. Widge]

Just goes to show how incompetant the WHO is. Nothing they say can be trusted and it should be disbanded or at least the current leadership should be fired. If they bring in new leaders then they will have to prove their ability to correctly run it correctly and apolitically before another U.S. penny is given to them.

And how do all those changes get made if we aren't part of the organization and don't pay for anything?

WHO needs to be fixed, but you can't do that if you aren't even part of the organization anymore.

 

[DaveXA]

And how do all those changes get made if we aren't part of the organization and don't pay for anything?

WHO needs to be fixed, but you can't do that if you aren't even part of the organization anymore.

Well, I think it's entirely possible that WHO doesn't want to be fixed, or held accountable, which could be part of the problem. Maybe?

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Right. The WHO statement was qualified from the outset. "From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual," Van Kerkhove said on Monday (emphasis added). From what I've seen, at no point was it said that was definitively the case, or that it doesn't happen, or that this refers to all presymptomatic individuals as opposed to those who are asymptomatic (i.e. never develop symptoms at all) but then it's reported, without seeking clarification, in headlines without any qualification, repeating "very rare" as if it means "doesn't happen". Which, as you say, is a PR issue.


Because the US has done such a great job keeping on top of this? Countries that followed the WHO advice from the outset have done better than the US, and the UK for that matter. Which, granted, isn't hard since the US and the UK are pretty much at the bottom of that particular league table.

Are you implying that he US and UK are in danger of being relegated?

 

[St. Widge]

Yep, that money will be better spent in our own country.

The problem is that you can't stop pandemics by just spending money in this country. Pandemics are by definition a world wide problem. If we want to stop them at their source, that usually means doing things and spending money in other countries or on organizations that can get access to work in other countries. At this time, because of many decades of messing with the governments of other contries as well as a lack of foreign policy ability by the curreent administration, we as a nation can't do that with out an organization like WHO clearing a path and brokering a deal for us to act.

 

[St. Widge]

Well, I think it's entirely possible that WHO doesn't want to be fixed, or held accountable, which could be part of the problem. Maybe?

It's possible, but we will never know since we left it without even trying to fix it.

 

[James Spader]

Since Covid did not originate here, I see a fundamental flaw in this argument

I don’t. Why spend money on a foreign organization when we can increase CDC research and provide the funding to the states. A lot of diseases don’t originate here, what are you trying to get at?

 

[superchuck500]

Just goes to show how incompetant the WHO is. Nothing they say can be trusted and it should be disbanded or at least the current leadership should be fired. If they bring in new leaders then they will have to prove their ability to correctly run it correctly and apolitically before another U.S. penny is given to them.

I think this is an overreaction. Part of the problem with the WHO has always been that it doesn't speak with one voice - it has different offices and officials, and is principally a science and advisory body constituted by people of different nationalities and in various locations. It isn't run like a monolithic executive agency, so messaging isn't always vetted or coordinated. That's a weakness but it's also a product of what the body is and how it operates.

The underlying data is always available on WHO reports. Sometimes officials vary in how they characterize it. The comment on Monday came from an official's comments in a news briefing. The characterization was more conclusive than the data actually suggests and it was an overstatement by the official. The organization elected to address that by stating it isn't as conclusive as the official stated.

But on that record you're going to say "nothing they say can be trusted and it should be disbanded". Is that your standard for every agency? If, for example, the current attorney general or secretary of defense describes facts differently from the president, that means that the executive branch (or at least the Justice Department and/or the Defense Department) should be disbanded as incompetent?

Apart from geopolitics in major episodes like this one, the WHO serves valuable purposes in various applications that benefit the United States. Most of the US health community that have commented about it (that I have read) underscore that there is quite a bit of value in the organization - weaknesses notwithstanding. It's the politicians who are most critical and aggressive about withdrawing or otherwise defunding the WHO. It's sort of like deciding to discontinue your trash collection service because they don't do a good job with the big days - like after Christmas or when you're moving. That's fine, but all the rest of the time, it was pretty valuable and now you're going to have to haul all of your trash yourself.

Has the US offered any plan to reorganize, reconstitute, or otherwise replace the WHO? All I have seen is a lot of complaining - and no plan to fix or otherwise substitute the value that the WHO does bring in many applications. Health issues and pathogens don't give a crap about international borders. I have no problem with reconstituting the WHO. I'd even like to see it have greater investigatory powers with some real enforcement mechanisms.

But it's a serious matter for the health of the world's people and I think people are too quick to fold into geopolitics without a lot of thoughtfulness.