Coronavirus

Joe Biden's COVID-19 Death Forecast Looks Less Plausible Every Day

So far the president-elect's "expectation" is off by a factor of more than three, which does not bode well for his approach to the pandemic.

|

During a debate with Donald Trump last month, Joe Biden said "the expectation is we'll have another 200,000 Americans dead [from COVID-19] between now and the end of the year." That implied a total U.S. death toll of about 423,000 by January 1. The current total is around 242,000. Biden's projection therefore suggests that COVID-19 will kill more than 3,600 Americans a day between now and the end of the year, compared to the current seven-day average of fewer than 1,100.

That is not likely to happen. The "ensemble forecast" from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, based on projections from "45 modeling groups," puts the death toll at 250,000 to 266,000 by November 28. Assuming that estimate is in the right ballpark, Biden is projecting at least another 157,000 deaths from November 29 through December 31, or nearly 4,800 a day. That's more than four times the current seven-day average and more than twice the April 21 peak.

Biden's "expectation" suggests that the president-elect is not paying attention to the COVID-19 case fatality rate in the United States, which has fallen dramatically since mid-May and continues to drop. His hyperbolic warning also suggests that his election will replace a president who falsely assured us that COVID-19 was "going away" with a president who errs in the opposite direction.

That Biden was excessively pessimistic hardly means everything is just fine. Between mid-September and yesterday, according to Worldometer's numbers, the seven-day average of newly identified COVID-19 infections rose more than threefold, from about 36,000 to more than 129,000—a new record. The weekly average of daily deaths also has risen, but not by nearly as much: As of yesterday, it was up 53 percent from the recent low of about 700 on October 28 but still 52 percent lower than the peak of nearly 2,300 in April.

Since there is a median lag of about two weeks between laboratory confirmation and death, the fatal consequences of recently identified infections are not immediately apparent. But by two weeks ago, daily new cases in the United States already had risen by more than 100 percent since September 12. The increase in daily deaths has been less than half as large.

That gap is consistent with the downward trend in the case fatality rate (deaths as a share of confirmed infections), which fell from more than 6 percent on May 16 to 2.3 percent yesterday—a 62 percent drop. The trend probably has been driven by several factors, including ramped-up testing that identifies milder cases, a younger and healthier mix of patients, and improved treatment. But the upshot is that increases in deaths are not commensurate with increases in cases, even allowing for the lag between the two indicators.

Given the ongoing rise in daily new cases, we can expect the daily death toll to continue going up as well, although not by nearly as much as Biden anticipated. That much should have been apparent from the experience with this summer's infection spike, which did not lead to a proportional spike in deaths.

The fact that Biden predicted more than three times as many daily COVID-19 deaths as we are currently seeing does not bode well for his approach to the pandemic. All government interventions aimed at curtailing infections, ranging from mask mandates to lockdowns, have costs. Those costs need to be weighed against the likely benefits, which depend on what would have happened otherwise. Biden's scaremongering puts a big thumb on one side of the scale.

NEXT: Here Come the New Lockdowns

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “….will replace a president who falsely assured us that COVID-19 was “going away” with a president who errs in the opposite direction.”

    Duh. welcome to the world of modern politics, where everyone wants to be as wrong as possible as different as possible from the other “side.”

    1. Since July 15, the US covid mortality rate has increased EIGHT times more than Sweden’s rate (i.e. 309 versus 38 per million deaths), and yet Sweden never shut down businesses or schools, and never mandated mask wearing.

      https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&country=USA~SWE~FRA~CZE~ITA~PRT~BEL~NLD~GBR~ESP&region=World&deathsMetric=true&interval=total&perCapita=true&smoothing=0&pickerMetric=population&pickerSort=desc

      From March – June, hundreds of editorials, op/eds and media stories by lockdown lovers demonized Sweden for not locking down (when Sweden’s covid death rate was significantly higher than the US death rate).

      But during the past several months (when the US covid death rate skyrocketed past Sweden’s), nobody in the news media has even reported the sharp decline in Sweden’s daily covid death rate, or that Sweden’s libertarian policies towards covid has (so far) proven far more beneficial for public health and for its economy (than countries and states that imposed lockdowns).

      1. “What is this ‘Sweden’ you keep talking about? Sounds like some kind of right-wing conspiracy theory to me.” – prog-tards

        1. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills.

          This is what I do….. Visit Here

          1. Wants To Work From Home Without Selling Anything? No Experience Needed, Weekly Payment… Join Exclusive Group Of People That Cracked The Code Of Financial Freedom! Learn More details Good luck…………… WORK24HERE

      2. Since 13% of Swedes are 70+ years old, compared to 10% of people in the US, Sweden’s significantly lower daily covid mortality rate since July is even more striking.

        So why won’t anyone at Reason (or other media outlets) write about Sweden’s libertarian response to covid, which has, to date, proven more effective for public health and their economy than countries and states that imposed lockdowns and mask mandates?

        1. Pretty sure Reason did take a shot at debunking Sweden as a success story…

          1. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 moniths back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action.FEs I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

            what I do…………Click here

            1. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

              what I do………work92/7 online

        2. So why won’t anyone at Reason (or other media outlets) write about Sweden’s libertarian response to covid,

          You still think this is a libertarian site. How quaint!!

      3. Sweden’s infection rate has been going up in recent weeks along with the rest of Europe. (Google “sweden covid” and concentrate on articles from the last couple of weeks.) They have even selectively tightened restrictions in some places. TANSTAAFL

        Their remarkably low infection rate last summer may be due to their very generous summer vacations: Swedes go out to cabins in the woods to take advantage of long sub-arctic summer days, before the darkness of subarctic winter.

        They are not doing badly (their children, for example, are getting properly educated), but neither have they discovered a perfect answer, certainly not for other countries whose populations are less inclined to cooperate and to follow scientific advice.

        1. Sweden’s death rate is almost entirely disassociated with its case rate to the point that what you are seeing is nothing more than the seasonal uptick in respiratory viruses that happens every year since the dawn of time.

        2. There is a lot about the Swedish approach that is very relevant to – Denmark, Norway, and Finland.

          But I find it funny that American libertarians who know absolutely nothing about public health or Sweden or epidemics or the SARS2 virus – or for that matter any actual data – have latched onto Sweden purely as an extension of DeRp politics.

          IOW
          Sweden = America without a lockdown

          We have now entered the Twilight Zone.

          1. What?

            Hey numb nuts. No one is saying Sweden = America without a lockdown. What people are trying to draw attention to is that a country without lockdowns does not equal everyone dying everywhere on the streets all at once because of COVID.

            I think it’s funny that people still are holding onto this lockdown policy all in the name of science, and burning at the stake those who oppose it and justifying your stance because anyone who disagrees with you obviously knows “absolutely nothing about public health or Sweden or epidemics or the SARS2 virus – or for that matter any actual data”

          2. Everyone is an expert now JFree.

            Sweden is the only banner of freedom left, didn’t you know?

            Sweden was the model of hated social democracy.

            Then they were idiots for letting in all of those nasty Muslims

            Now they are heroic.

            Cant forgive them for ABBA though.

      4. Apples and oranges. Swedes aren’t all “fuck you, I do what I want” like Americans are. They are a lot more homogenous race-wise, they have a population of 10 million and they’re the size of California. I don’t think it would work here without a lot more dying.

        1. JV, a rare sensible comment on this site.

        2. That is correct. Swedes are much more likely to follow government advice. Sweden didn’t have lockdowns (yet) but it had plenty of restrictions, plus a lot more “recommendations” that were followed by the populace. Plus, it wasn’t the COVID magnet early on that the US was – it wasn’t the center of global commerce and air travel.

          Sweden currently has more cases per million than the US (slightly) and a significantly higher growth rate (Rt).

          It ain’t over ’till it’s over.

          1. I won’t disagree with your entire post, but your last sentence is spot on and I wish idiots would stop trying to make comparisons based on the status quo or single stats. Everyone looks for some single low stat from somewhere and backtracks to say, “this proves that my one thing is all we need to do”.

            Hell, every place and culture [however you define it] has unique characteristics that will pave a specific path on damn near everything including COVID. Sometimes the numbers are going up, sometimes down or at different trajectories.

            Everyone is tying their motivations to whatever they define as a success at that given moment, without giving credence to the fact that thousands of factors go into whether one stat is going up or down.

            The reality is that the world has COVID and no country has licked it by any measurable amount short of a small island country putting themselves in a bubble. Few countries can do that. Also a reality that COVID isn’t going anywhere until they invent a cure [unlikely], a vaccine [whatever else the cost that comes with that], or herd immunity [and then some people will still be getting it].

      5. The proper comparison of Sweden is with its 3 neighbors, who had 70-90% lower death rates (with lockdowns) and suffered LESS economic damage and are now safely reopened. In addition, the Swedish plan to get herd immunity failed terribly, with less than 20% and no assurance that immunity is permanent.

        A better comparison for the US would be China, South Korea, or Japan which had draconian lockdowns and 99% lower death rates than the US and have opened safely, whereas in the US, the pandemic rages on with 1500 deaths yesterday and getting worse.
        “According to a July survey by the Pew Research Center, two-thirds of Americans believe that China has done a bad job dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. As of Oct 4, 2020, China had confirmed 90 604 cases of COVID-19 and 4739 deaths, while the USA had registered 7 382 194 cases and 209 382 deaths. The UK has a population 20 times smaller than China.”
        How did they have 99% lower death rate? Strict lockdowns in hotspots and comprehensive testing and tracing, just what our medical experits advised but Trump dismissed.
        Japan: 1800 deaths, 90% lower than the US…South Korea, with 50 million people in one of the densest places on earth has had less than 500 deaths, nearly 90% lower than the US adjusted for population. They were prepared, acted early, and crushed the virus. Yesterday, the US had 1465 deaths, South Korea, 2.

        And since the US was compared to Sweden let’s compare to Norway which has had 4 deaths in the past 6 weeks, compared to about 30,000 in the US. Norway is open……and have less than 40 deaths in the last 5 months.

        1. fuffsoft, please don’t confuse us with facts.

        2. … except those OTHER nearby countries that had strict lockdowns but still have much higher death rates.

          Regardless, I’d take whatever portion of that 70% increase you get from the difference between whatever the US is doing and whatever you want to do if it means we can live as a fucking free people again.

        3. Sweden had much lighter flu seasons in 18-19 than its three neighbors which accounts for about half of the difference in death rates. The correlation between severity of previous respiratory virus seasons and Covid epidemic responses is nearly perfect in Europe.

        4. I love it when people suggest they have any idea what is or isn’t going on in China based on government figures. Your choice to believe:
          (a) The government has a handle of 1.4B people and the millions that go in and out of the country
          (b) The Chinese government lies

          1. (b)

            China has lied from the very beginning. Their numbers are complete garbage. The real number of cases and deaths there is far higher than official numbers. A study using cremation data, ventilator usage and hospital capacity data indicates the deaths in Wuhan alone were 9-10 times higher (by February) than the official toll for the ENTIRE country. This coverup hid the seriousness of the disease and contributed to the slow response in the US and around the world. It is certain that China has continued to have many more cases throughout the country than the official numbers. Maybe they regained some control through draconian and totalitarian measures but this is unknown. Regardless, they continue to lie.

            Any discussion or article (including the recent idiotic NEJM political propaganda) which uses China’s numbers cannot be taken seriously.

      6. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 monaths back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

        what I do………work92/7 online

    2. Domt worry. Biden wont be president.

      Biden lost NC, AK, GA, and AZ today.

  2. How long before we realize these people don’t know any more than we do?

    1. How dare you question “the science”! Your post should be flagged for “potentially harmful” content.

      1. I was listening to a Ben Shapiro lecture and he made an interesting point. He said that everything that isn’t “religion” is labeled “science,” even when it is based upon faith. But because the faith isn’t a recognized religion, it’s considered to be science. So when someone disagrees with these statements of faith, they are called a science denier.
        Don’t think human industrial activity should be stopped in order to save the planet from CO2? You’re a science denier. Don’t want to destroy the economy with lockdowns and make people wear masks? You’re a science denier.
        I think he’s pretty much on point.

        1. That’s a ridiculous claim, like most things that come out of Shapiro’s mouth. Is anyone out there labeling things like art, music, sports, politics, or barbeques as science, just because they are not religion?

          1. See, you just don’t get wingnut thinking.

            Their idea is to belittle science so it can’t be used against them, i.e. particulate science in AGW or Natural Selection.

            “Hey dude, that’s just your religion. You can’t prove it” is their strategy.

            1. Why would wingnuts need to belittle science when Biden-supporting post-modernists continually belittle it by classifying science as nothing more than a racist and sexist gimmick designed by dreaded white male supremacists.

              The roles have switched and some haven’t caught on.

              1. No one but the most extreme SJWs are saying that, and no one is taking them seriously.

                1. Because they seem to direct the media, entertainment and a good portion of academia and seem to have real influence on one of the two major parties, and even some influence on the LP? Just off the top of my head reasons to take them seriously.

                  1. I am gonna have to see some evidence for that bullshit claim.

                    1. Point to what is wrong? You are the one calling bullshit so it is your responsibility to show what is untrue in my statement.

                2. Professors are saying it dummy. The ones you elevate above everyone else.

                3. Nobody took the belief that one can change their sex solely due to feelings seriously either. We have seen where that goes.

            2. I find that wingnuts are correct more often than leftards because wingnuts are more likely to engage their brains rather than relying solely on emotion. Trump supporters excepted of course.

              1. Tell me why all 15 GOP candidates rejected Natural Selection in the 2012 presidential debate?

                Creationism is stupid and anyone who embraces it should be ridiculed.

                1. While I’m not a man of faith myself, I at least I’m not a dick who ridicules those are. Seriously dude, mocking people for their faith is about as dickish as you can get. It might make you feel smug, but it doesn’t score points with anyone other than complete assholes.

                  1. I mean religious faith, not scientism.

                    1. I have no problems with humanists. Godless communists on the other hand…

                  2. They deserve it. They’re childish and stupid.

                    Unfortunately that is now a prerequisite to be a conservative.

                    If I’m a dick for acknowledging reality then so be it.

                    1. Suit yourself. I respect people’s religious faith even if I don’t share it.

                    2. Post-modern tenured professors who denounce math and science as nothing but racist constructions are far worse, because, unlike religious kooks, they are in highly-paid – and in the case of public universities, paid with taxpayer dollars – positions of influence……

                      like 2 plus 2 doesn’t really have to equal 4….

                    3. Surely you can point to an example of tenured professors who denounce math and science. Then explain how they have political power equal to or greater than that of religious kooks.

                2. Yet Democrats are the ones who can’t seem to wrap their heads around the fact that race doesn’t exist. There are no sub-species of homo sapiens sapiens.

                  Racial justice is stupid and anyone who embraces it should be ridiculed.

                  1. The fuck? Republicans are the racist ones because they expect everyone to be treated equally! Democrats understand that some races are inferior to others, and because of this deserve special treatment! If you don’t treat different races differently then you’re a racist hater!

                  2. The government has no business in racial justice unless a race is deprived of a Constitutional right on the basis of that race.

                  3. That is true, but that’s not the way this works.

                    Race is real in the minds of racists. They then act on that delusion in ways that harm their chosen out-group. Thus decent people have to respond to protect that group from them.

                    Racism evolved from the fact that all the slaves were taken from a continent full of people with some different phenotypes than the ruling class. The racists, to this day, centuries later, continue using those phenotypes as a basis for treating people as an underclass.

                    It would be like saying there are no religious wars because Jesus never existed.

                    1. Racism evolved from the fact that all the slaves were taken from a continent full of people with some different phenotypes than the ruling class.

                      Racism has been a pretty common feature of human civilization for about 10,000 years.

                      You don’t conduct warfare on other societies and send the captives into slavery because you think they’re your equal. And the fact that white liberals are the only political/ethnic group to display negative in-group bias indicates something closer to internalized self-loathing towards their skin color than it does anti-racism in any substantive sense.

                    2. I’m sorry but I think Tony has a point.

                      Through most of history slaves have been the losers in a political battle. Conquest, lost wars and such. American slavery was different in that it took a race of men, dehumanized them, and then treated them like animals based upon the color of their skin. To rationalize treating people like that one must be justified in their own mind. That’s where the racism comes in. And after slavery was over, that attitude remained.

                    3. Yes, that is how the particular type of anti-black racism in America came about. And it is not something that can be dismissed. So if all you mean by “racial justice” is trying to get people not to hold those attitudes, then great. But that’s not what the “racial justice” crowd is pushing these days. They want people to be treated differently and thought of differently based solely on their race. That’s the definition of racism if you ask me.
                      And there is plenty of racism around still. But not very much of the sort that thinks that different racial groups should be given a different status in society. It’s really mostly just casual bigotry, which while offensive is mostly harmless. Not something that requires a radical reshaping of society.

                    4. American slavery was different in that it took a race of men, dehumanized them, and then treated them like animals based upon the color of their skin.

                      The Arabs had cornered the market on that long before any white man set foot on American soil, much less owned a slave.

                3. Subtlety is not in R’s brain matter.

                  IMO there is a huge difference between:
                  Creationism is what happened in biological history
                  v
                  If a particular school wants to offer ‘creationism’ as a substitute for or an alternative/supplement to a different course on ‘biology’ is that going to be legal or illegal?

                  The only reason R’s don’t see the difference is because their view of the culture war is to impose their belief on everyone else via coercion and therefore their belief must be labeled ‘truth’.

                  1. Fuck off. That is not even remotely true today.

                    1. It is precisely true. Scopes is alive today in the minds of the right.

                    2. Right commentators tell you you’re wrong and you rejoinder is to imply that you know more about their beliefs than they do?

              2. “Trump supporters excepted of course.”

                Along with TDS victims, TDS victim.

                1. Very emotional of you. Thanks for proving my point.

                  1. Your entire statement was emotion dummy.

            3. That’s interesting because Progs (as Post Modernists) argue that falsifiability is not necessary to determine scientific truth but instead preponderance of evidence and consensus is the way to go. So they outright recast science as religion.

              CIMP5 models all run hot, all of them. Idiot.

          2. Are art, music, sports, politics or barbeques statements?

            1. That seems to be Shapiro’s intent, or at least what I can read into it.

          3. You know exactly what I mean and are being an asshole because I could have chosen my words better. Get bent.

            1. I wasn’t attacking you, but Shapiro. And no, I guess I don’t know what you meant, if it wasn’t what I said above.

              1. I think his point was that what is called science isn’t always science. Much of it is faith-based, like global warming, masks and lockdowns, and other excuses for government fucking up our lives. The people who support these things shroud themselves in “science” when they are really preaching faith. Especially when they don’t allow any dissent. Dissent is at the core of science. I believe Einstein said something along the lines of “No amount of experimentation can prove something is correct, while one experiment can prove something to be wrong.” People in these “science” fields won’t allow that to happen, which makes them more faith-based than science-based.

                1. Ok, I get his point, but those seem like bad examples. Climate change is backed by a myriad of studies and very few climatologist dispute the fact that the climate is warming. There is dispute about how catastrophic the change will become, and you can make the argument that the predictions are based on faith, but they are not, they are based on models. Models can be wrong and often are.

                  And I agree that dissent should be encouraged and tolerated. I do agree that at times there is too much intolerance in the science community. Definitely. But the answer to that is not less science.

                  1. It is faith when you ban dissension, and while that is a rarity it has happened with worrying increasing frequency. Read the science journals, there is a huge discussion about it among scientist.

                    1. Should a science journal allow papers on creationism? There are certain limits as to what a science journal should allow. Dissent within an established scientific Overton window is healthy and should always be encouraged. Any dissent outside of the Overton window needs to be backed up by evidence and the further away from the window a claim is, the more evidence is required. Without such evidence, the claim can be readily ignored.

                    2. Depends on how solid their methodology is.

                    3. The very fact it is creationism or supports creationism in itself doesn’t render it unfit for publication. If their methodology is strong and their conclusions based upon data then it should be published.

                  2. Also you left out a key factor in the question about global warming, namely how sensitive is climate to CO2 increases. The worse case scenarios have it very sensitive, the best case little sensitivity. Both are probably wrong.

                  3. Climate change is backed by a myriad of studies

                    First, cute how you substitute climate change for climate alarmism. You tried to walk it away in the 2nd half of your statement but almost nobody believes climate doesn’t change. It always had. From the MWP to the LIA.

                    Climate alarmism is not backed by science, it is backed by a myriad of models. The average of the models we use to simulate global warming have been running between 2x and 7x hotter than what happened in reality since 1980. The models use different parameters to try to do hindcasting fits of historical data, so you will find one particulate number vastly different from one model to the next (dependent on how they tuned the value to get what they wanted). It is to the point they are even replacing measured data with modeled data of what they think it should be int the past You don’t understand science.

        2. if you don’t think human industrial activity should be stopped or reduced, that is an opinion. if you don’t believe the CO2 is causing a change or that people are the cause…. that is what makes you a science denier.

          the problem is people who have a different opinion, and chose to conflate what people think we should do with the science behind those differing opinions. science is not faith, or in anyway analogous to a religion. you even saying that demonstrates either a dishonesty or ignorance of reality.

          CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels causes global warming. that is science.
          the use of masks can help slow the spread of respiratory viruses. that is science. (also, common sense.) same with social distancing and minimizing how often you go out or have large gatherings.

          that you don’t want to stop burning fossil fuels does not change the science.
          that you don’t want to wear a face mask at your MAGA rally does not change the science.

          the science is the part that is not opinion. it is the part that does not change no matter what you want.

          1. …the use of masks can help slow the spread of respiratory viruses. that is science.
            “Can help slow the spread” is not science. It’s mush talk.

            1. i guess we should stop using condoms, too….. “helps prevent the spread but is not 100% effective” applies to them too……. why don’t you go mush talk your way into a few illegitimate children.

              1. Do we make people not engaging in the act wear them just in case?

              2. I don’t recall any government public health directives requiring people to wear condoms when they fuck.

                1. i don’t recall ever saying we should have them for masks, either…… stating that masks can make a difference is not saying we need directives.

                  1. i don’t recall ever saying we should have them for masks, either

                    Nice deflection. Government health officials HAVE called for mandatory mask directives.

                    1. i’m not a government official…

                2. Didn’t parts of California mandate the use of condoms for porn stars??

                  1. They tried until the porn industry threatened to leave for Florida and Arizona. Then they backed off .

            2. HAHAHAHA

          2. “[I]f you don’t think human industrial activity should be stopped or reduced, that is an opinion. if you don’t believe the CO2 is causing a change or that people are the cause…. that is what makes you a science denier.”

            Somebody does not understand science.

            1. i’m guessing it is you.

              1. Yes, because you have demonstrated excellent science literacy. Oh wait you have shown the opposite.

          3. that you don’t want to wear a face mask at your MAGA rally does not change the science.

            Feel free to cite a study published prior to March of this year that shows masks are effective at preventing the community spread of viruses. Especially cloth ones.

            1. i guess with the bots, it flags anything with multiple links. lets see if it will post one. from Feb, 2010.

              https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0009018

              you can STFU and stop spreading lies, now.

              1. Mathematical Modeling

                He asked for a study, not a model.

              2. Yeah, that’s not actually a study–it’s a projection based on guesstimates, not actual data.

                To estimate the parameter values used for the effectiveness of facemasks, we used available data from studies on N95 respirators and surgical facemasks. The results show that if N95 respirators are only 20% effective in reducing susceptibility and infectivity, only 10% of the population would have to wear them to reduce the number of influenza A (H1N1) cases by 20%.

                I don’t know what school you went to, but 20/100 is generally considered a failing grade.

                Where does pieces of cloth fit into this?

                You can shut the fuck up and stop spreading lies now.

                1. it is a model based on real data…. is this the shifted goal posts now? we have to have a “study” on something that hasn’t happened in over 100yrs? and we have to have done it before it happened? extrapolating from empirical evidence from smaller scale examples of other novel viruses is not sufficient?

                  also, nice job highlighting 20%…… fail at including the fact that that is if only 10% of he population wore them……

                  the fact remains that there is evidence, predating the pandemic, that shows masks are effective….. and the more people who wear them, the more effective they are. saying anything else makes you a liar spreading misinformation.

                  1. It’s a model based on selective data. You keep cherry-picking something that doesn’t actually apply to the real world.

                    we have to have a “study” on something that hasn’t happened in over 100yrs?

                    You’re fucking kidding, right? You do realize there have been pandemics between this and the Spanish flu, yes? The article you cited mentions one right in the preface.

                    the fact remains that there is evidence, predating the pandemic, that shows masks are effective

                    Yes, N95 and medical-grade masks in very limited, contained settings. Nothing AT ALL about cloth masks, which is what I said in my very first post: Feel free to cite a study published prior to March of this year that shows masks are effective at preventing the community spread of viruses. Especially cloth ones.

                    saying anything else makes you a liar spreading misinformation.

                    Saying masks, broadly, prevent the community spread of viruses makes you a liar spreading misinformation.

                    1. the studies were not only n95 masks, they also included surgical masks….. which are essentially “cloth masks.”

                      can i ask a question? why is this departure from common sense so important to you fucktards? seriously, let’s move past how stupid it is to suggest that a barrier over your nose and mouth has zero impact on a virus transmitted primarily through breathing…… why is that stupidity so important to you? i have not said i want to force anyone to do anything, i just want you assholes to stop trying to dissuade other people from VOLUNTARILY taking that action. why is it so important to try and convince other people that masks do not do anything?

            2. Of course, we all know, new Biden lockdowns are coming in 2021. And.,we all know the “hardest hit” states will be Illinois, NY, NJ and California (and the riot cities). In other words, bailouts for pensioners will be distributed due to “COVID”.

              1. Add…bailouts for pensioners and riot destruction

          4. CO2 causes global cooling. Warmer air holds more water leading to more snowfall leading to more sunlight being reflected leading to global cooling.

            1. you do understand that snow melts as things get warmer, right? congratulations on saying the stupidest thing i have ever seen a denier say.

              1. “Things get warmer” is a climatological proposition fit for a third grader, in a special education program.

              2. You do know that 2/3rds of the warming predicted by the models is from feedback loops and not from the heat absorption of carbon right?

                1. yes, i do. when people are in denial about the whole thing, i like to start small. if you talk about the feedback loop too early, those looking for scraps to cling to tend not to understand that those feedback loops are still the end result of the increase from CO2, and instead try to use it to deflect from the influence of CO2. (which, is the direction i presume you are going with this.) the feedback loops are the result of increased water vapor that is caused by the temperature increase from the CO2. they are not separate, they are just the part not “directly” caused by CO2.

                  1. “i like to start small.”

                    Start small retarded, and end big retarded.

          5. You just proved my point to be correct.

          6. if you don’t think human industrial activity should be stopped or reduced, that is an opinion. if you don’t believe the CO2 is causing a change or that people are the cause…. that is what makes you a science denier.

            No it does not, and anyone who makes statements like these don’t know what science is and should be dismissed out of hand. Science is not a set of conclusions, it’s a process that under constant contention and debate. Your suggestion is just a slightly indicrect way of saying the “science is settled” which gets an automatic fail in the understanding of what science even is.

            1. science is fact, that has been tested and systematically proven. everything i call science fits that classification.

              1. Of course. All conclusions and laws based on science are facts which must never be challenged. This is why we know the Earth is really the center of the universe despite what those frauds that came later said.

                1. so where is your new information calling anything into question? surely you have something more substantial than “it might not be 100% correct.” please, explain why multiple laws of nature and physics are incorrect. explain why technologies we currently have shouldn’t work. explain why reality is wrong. the earth as the center of the universe (a theological assertion, and not actually scientifically derived in the first place) was called into question when the motion of the stars and planets did not fit that model……. where is your evidence that what we currently know to be true is actually wrong?

                  1. Irrelevant argument. We understand it enough to get it to work, to harness it. It doesn’t mean our understanding is completely true or wrong. We understand that electron transfer transmitd energy which can be harvested, but we don’t understand the true nature of electrons. We understand enough about the laws of motion and gravity to harness these things but we still understand what exactly gravity is, how it is created and if we could artificially nullify it or create it.
                    Also, when you talk about technology you are actually talking about engineering, which does apply scientific principles and current understanding.
                    Yes, it takes more science to counter the current understanding, but that doesn’t rule out the possibility it can be ruled out in the future, nor does it predict it will be ruled out. It does, however, predict that in the future we will refine our understanding as we continue the process. And this will undoubtedly lead to new technology.

                    1. so, what you are saying is that you have zero reason to question what is known and understood. you don’t have a single thing to suggest it is wrong. you don’t have a single rational reason it should be questioned. you just won’t believe anything, no matter how compelling and consistent the evidence is. by your logic, we should believe that people can’t get pregnant from having sex, fire won’t burn you, and everything might be fine if you jump off a tall building…. because we don’t “know everything.”

                    2. I don’t know where you got any of those conclusions from in regards to my statement. And my point is science is about questioning not accepting blindly. Questioning doesn’t mean rejecting, can you offer an intellectually honest argument. Nothing I stated at all implies any of the shit you claim it does.

                    3. there is a difference between “questioning” and ignoring. that science can be questioned is not an excuse for ignoring what we currently know and understand. if you want to pretend that it is, then you are saying that all of human knowledge should be ignored based on the premise that it is inherently able to be questioned. fire isn’t hot, falling far won’t kill you, sex never leads to babies….. nothing anyone knows should ever be trusted or acted upon. we should all go drive into a brick wall, because that might actually be a good idea.

                      if it sounds absurd, you need to understand that that is how you sound to me. you want to ignore what we know on a purely philosophical notion that does not in any way change what we know.

                    4. Where did I ever imply ignore? Again your understanding seems to be simplistic at best. I never once said or even implied ignore. That is your own interpretation. In fact I specifically stated questioning doesn’t equate to ignoring. You don’t understand science at a fundamental level. You state you do but the fact that your takeaway from my correction of your misinterpreting what I stated shows how little you understand about science. At no point did I ever imply, or state ignore. I stated our understanding is incomplete, thus you question constantly and retest and the reason real scientist do that is because it helps us to refine what we understand.
                      I don’t blindly accept what I read, but I also accept the preponderance of evidence with the caveat that that understanding is incomplete. That is how science works.
                      It isn’t about belief or ignoring it is about questioning and refining and testing. A constant process not an end goal. There will never be an end to science.
                      If you can quote anywhere in any of my statements that even remotely suggest ignore, please do.

                    5. “you need to understand that that is how you sound to me.”

                      Because this conversation is waaaaaaaaay above your head.

                    6. If I sound that way to you it is because you can’t read. Nowhere do I imply that you ignore current understanding. If you got that it is because your reading comprehension sucks.

                    7. your reality comprehension is what sucks. go jump out of a plane without a parachute….. we don’t “know for sure” that that will turn out badly.

              2. As a scientist you definition is wrong and his is right. Science is the process by which we try to understand natural phenomena. It requires observation, testing, evaluation and retesting. Science doesn’t say anything is 100%, because there is always room to improve understanding.
                For example the science on ulcers was clear until the mid 1980s, but one experiment completely upended the accepted science.
                Lister and Pasteur were widely ridiculed because science stated it was mal air and corruption that causes illness, not microbes. Science evolves. Science adapts, science works to understand phenomena that we can’t explain 100%. Centuries after his death, people still test and question Newton. A half century after his death we still test and question Einstein. Science is not fact, it is the best understanding we have, via observation and testing to explain nature but new testing may either further our understanding or completely makes us rethink what we thought we understood. Only people who worship “science” call it facts. It is a process and must always be re-evaluated.
                This is especially true of most science, where the level of significance is 0.05. This means that there is a 95% probability that your tested hypothesis explain your observations better than random chance. That means there is a 5% chance it doesn’t. You can’t achieve a p value of 1.0.

                1. [FOR USA] ★Single Mom With 4 Kids Lost Her Job But Was Able To Stay On Top By Banking Continuously 1500 Dollars Per Week With An Online Work She Found Over The Internet… Check The Details HERE…….. Click For Full Detail.

                2. You’re talking to an idiot. Don’t waste your time.

                3. “As a scientist…..”

                  cue the BS…..

                  the point is that science says things that have been validated. if you don’t want to believe them, you need to do more than BS doublespeak and innuendo about “100% certainty.” you need to show the “new information.” science does not ignore what it already knows just because you want to.

                  1. I have cited my peer reviewed article on here multiple times. I never said it does ignore what is already probably known, I stated it isn’t fact but an attempt to understand how nature works and a process of constantly improving our understanding. You are a sycophant who can’t understand distinction and gets sophomoric when people point out your misunderstanding.

                    1. in case you have not noticed, the people arguing about this are not especially bright, and they are not talking about subtle distinctions…… they want to ignore what is already known, with zero evidence against it. they are not talking about the academic doublespeak you offer, they want to ignore reality.

                    2. And the reality is that there is no study published prior to March of this year that showed masks, especially cloth ones, are effective and preventing community spread of a virus.

                    3. Actually, most of them aren’t ignoring what is already known. The data is at best conflicted. Plenty of studies that show no correlation between mask wearing and decrease virus spread and plenty of studies that do show it. At best both they and you are cherry picking data that backs up your assumptions. Neither group is being exactly scientific. At best, you can state that the data is to inconclusive to show real correlation but that doesn’t rule out mask wearing as a possible effective preventive measure.

                    4. are you really going to make me prove you wrong twice?

                      https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0009018

                      it is from 2010. there are dozens of these, that study the empirical evidence from the last couple novel viruses that got out but never quite reached the level of this pandemic. include H1N1 instead of covid in your search and you can find them. saying there is nothing pre-pandemic showing that masks make a difference is a lie.

                    5. But he has just as many studies, peer reviewed, if not more that contradict these findings. At best the science remains ambiguous.

                    6. are you really going to make me prove you wrong twice?

                      You already cited that cherry-picked, “mathematical model” based on speculation.

                4. So well said Soldiermedic. Nicely done.

              3. No scientific “fact” has ever been proven or ever will be proven true. You can show one is false by counter example. You do not know what in the fuck you are talking about.

                1. How dare you question foo_dd’s faith!

              4. science is fact, that has been tested and systematically proven. everything i call science fits that classification.

                Models are not proof. Models are created based on assumptions because actual proof cannot be obtained and its predictions are examined over time to see if they fit reality. So by your own definition, what passes as ‘climate science’ is not science.

                The proof of that is that every model they have ever produced has failed to fit reality. Or did I miss it when the glaciers in Glacier National Park disappeared, Florida became submerged, and all the ice melted in the Arctic?

                What you believe in is not science.

              5. Fact: The U.S. accounts for only about 14percent of global carbon output and its going down every day. The carbon output battle (if that’s what you’re into) will be won or lost in developing countries such as China and India.

          7. You are very, very, very, very stupid. That is science.

            1. you smell bad, and your mom is fat!

          8. Human fossil fuel burning is one factor in global warming. COVID 19 is a novel virus beyond human containment. The “body” of humanity will evolve strategies to cope with it. That’s non-politicized science.

          9. First of all nobody knows with any precision, what the double sensitivity of CO2 is. It has to be pretty large to support the unsubstantiated hypothesis that CO2 is driving the warming. The estimates I see for those metrics keeps moving down. Also the CIMP5 models have clearly run hot, they do not track with the temps at all. They cannot hindcast. They are fucking useless.

          10. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Science != fact. Perhaps the best we can do is accept the body of evidence and act based on it. There’s been plenty of “scientific fact” across human history that’s been flat-out disproven.

            Yes, human activity almost certainly contributes to global warming, and yet we still don’t have consensus, for example, on the % of global warming caused by humans. Majority opinion != fact. That means there’s still science to be done, and plenty of it.

            So: Anyone who utters the phrase “settled science” is also a science denier, because that’s not what science is. Science != fact.

            From a scientific standpoint, that fetus is alive in all senses of the word at 40 weeks. There’s no magic when it comes out the vagina and starts to breathe air; it was alive two minutes prior, feeling pain, thinking, and in just about all senses of the word human.

            Yet plenty of people have the opinion that it’s perfectly ok to pith the thing, because they’ve convinced themselves that it’s not really a human, yet. For thinking pro-abortion folks, it’s not a “settled science” as to when life begins, and as such, better to give the incubator parent the benefit of the doubt. (Me personally–I don’t care, and some people need to be able to choose an abortion, but I just wish people would be honest and admit they almost certainly were snuffing a human life. I get it–I’m sure it’s hard. It’s also damn hard on that fetus.)

            It’s interesting how differing sides use “science” as a cudgel. Science is the admission of uncertainty.

        3. I think Shapiro is a broken clock, but when he’s right, he’s accurate to the nanosecond.

        4. Estimates of cases and deaths from illnesses, especially something like Covid-19, that are made out of faith, and no science are particularly dangerous. Donald Trump’s criminally irresponsible handling of the Covid-19 virus pandemic is an excellent example of this.

      2. It’s not science. It’s politicians picking and choosing among bad science reporting for a nugget that will fit their narrative.

      3. Why would Biden rely on Science when his post-modern core voting bloc deems Science a contrivance of white devils.

        1. It is conservatives who reject science. Pew Research conducted a poll among scientists a few years back and found that only 6% of scientists identify as conservative.

          1. Yeah, there are the clinging wingnuts with marginal influence, but it’s the post-modern leftists in charge of the academic institutions that are now out in front attacking things like scientific rigor because rigor is an offshoot of the “by our definition inherently racist and sexist” Western Civilization.

            1. Nonsense.

          2. That’s rather unscientific of scientists to not empirically question their own beliefs about matters in which they are not qualified. We’re always supposed to defer to the scientists…but why not to the laborers? The businessmen? The entrepreneurs?

            1. Because scientists all wear those snappy white coats.

            2. Do entrepreneurs have the most rigorous evidence requirements and checks on biases that mankind has ever devised? Or isn’t their entire purpose to get money out of you?

              1. Scientists with political agendas are wonderfully brilliant at getting fat government grants for agenda-affirming scientific studies constructed in the most elegant ways.

                Entrepreneurs generally want to sell you something. Politicized scientists with government grants tend to want to put something over on you.

                1. You apparently have no understanding about how science works.

                  1. You apparently post dumb remarks like that because you refuse to face the fact that certain brilliant, successful, and influential scientists will fudge the evidence to push an agenda.

                  2. Strange how he was talking about politicized scientists, and not science.

              2. Appeal to authority is not considered a valid argument, dipshit and the scientist actually don’t agree on the best method to go forward. A number have questioned if the lockdowns will end up costing more lives than they save. In fact some of the same scientist who championed lockdowns are now stating continued lockdowns will only result in preventable deaths while doing little to curb COVID deaths. Your problem and Foo_dd is you suffer from confirmation bias, where you accept only research that you agree with while rejecting any research that runs counter to your narrative. You then try and claim the mantle of science. However, confirmation bias is considered one of the worse mistakes a scientist can make. So basically, by rejecting science that runs counter to your narrative, you are being unscientific. And yes, some of those who oppose the lockdowns also suffer from confirmation bias.

                1. Confirmation bias. That’s the one I always forget about! And the one I gotta look out for.

                2. Appealing to authority is often a perfectly valid thing to do. This isn’t logic 101, it’s figuring out what science says. That means asking scientists.

                  The only people suffering from confirmation bias and cherry picking are the covid (and climate) deniers. It’s their stock and trade.

                  1. No one denies COVID, what they deny is how lethal it is (99.7% survival rate according to almost all current science) and if lockdowns and masks work. Again the science doesn’t support your supposition, but neither does it support theirs. You both deny science. However, the growing consensus among multiple fields besides just epidemiology is that the lockdowns will likely cause lasting harm which very well will result in more global deaths than COVID ever would have.

          3. It is both conservatives and liberals. Try suggesting that there are scientifically-demonstrated differences in information processing between the two sexes (there are only two, scientifically, by the way) to a liberal.

    2. Biggest thing that the entirety of the American public needs to understand about leaders and media in DC.

    3. For me, that happened more than a decade ago.

  3. Oh NOW you tell us. Thx.

    1. We had to elect Biden to find out what’s in it.

      1. Joe Biden is a crook.

        1. You think Joe Biden’s a crook? You’re dead wrong here, Don’t Look at me! Donald Trump is the crook here, who’s screwed people left and right.

          1. Brilliantly worded response. Yeah, so what, Trump’s a dirtbag. Nyaah nyaah so’s your mother.

            Ahh the scientific rigor of the left.

            Yes, Joe’s a crook. The stats demonstrate it, so it must be a fucking “settled science.” The whole money thing doesn’t pass the smell test, for one (unless you have your head up your own ass admiring your own smell). For two, he’s a proven cheat. For three, he was part of screwing a few hundred thousand people out of their lives as VP during the Syrian debacle (go read Jeffrey Sachs on it). For four, he has almost 50 years of general politician dishonesty, claiming to be for one thing after having done the opposite. He’s a racist, probably sexual predator, narcissist, old, white, lying sack of feces.

            I can guarantee the old fuck is a crook.

  4. Curious. If, as Biden’s advisor says, the US starts donating vaccine to foreign countries once ‘the most vulnerable’ US population have been vaccinated, are the following US deaths directly attributable to this policy? Can we then blame Biden for those deaths?

    1. No, because it’s a Democrat doing it.

    2. It’s not fair we’ll have access to the vaccine first after paying for it so the rest of the world needs to get it while taxpayers who fully funded this operation go get fucked with continued social distancing and arbitrary and capricious rules in the meantime.

    3. Actually it means that now we can blame Trump for every Covid death in the world, since he doesn’t support this policy

      1. Well, he did cook up the WuFlu in the WH kitchen last year!

    4. Won’t happen, because Andrew Cuomo and his fellow Democrat governors are going to block the distribution of the vaccine for the next two months and one week. He said so himself, so it must be true.

    5. I’m wondering if they’ll at least admit that the lockdown will be much longer than 4-6 weeks if they implement that plan.

      1. No, they’ll just keep extending it out like they have been for several months now.

        “Any day now, guys, we promise!”

        1. Exactly.

          I hope people remember, ten years from now, when we are deep in a lockdown of an unprecedented scope, that this all began with “two weeks to flatten the curve.”

          Lockdowns are the new Afghanistan. We’ve got at least 20 years in the bank.

  5. . All government interventions aimed at curtailing infections, ranging from mask mandates to lockdowns, have costs. Those costs need to be weighed against the likely benefits, which depend on what would have happened otherwise.

    Sullum we are close to a year in at this point we have data and it seems to be pointing at these measures are all costs with no benefits. Anyway Lockdowns and mask mandates are a complete and total infringement of our most basic rights, think reason would be more hardline against this as opposed to meekly sayin there are “costs and benefits”.

    1. “Masks work. We know that.” -Ohio Gov. DeWine

      There has been a mask mandate since the end of July and, based on what I’ve seen, people have complied. However, cases have continued to rise… but masks work, we *know* that.

      1. Cases are rising because the weather is getting colder and we’re entering “flu season”. That does NOT mean this is the flu, it means this is the season when all respiratory viruses have their wave. Flu, colds, COVID19. Heck, some colds are actually a corona virus, so COVID19 is going to mostly follow the same curves as colds. Does NOT mean it’s just a cold, it’s very dangerous, but it spreads the same way colds do. I

        1. Sounds like you’re saying that masks work based on the season they’re used in.

          I would think they either work or they don’t. And if #thescience is telling us they do, then how can compliance with wearing them still result in cases rising?

          1. Remember the ol’ “jobs saved or created” gambit?

            “Just think of the deaths that would have occurred had people not been wearing masks!”

          2. Someone can always claim that the rise would have been worse if the masks weren’t worn?

          3. No, that’s not how the world works. The world is not all binary. I know conservatives like to think that way, but it’s not masks either work or don’t work. That’s like saying airbags either work or don’t work. Well, airbags reduce driver fatalities by 29%. Similarly, masks reduce covid-19 infections. Of course they are not 100% effective. No one is claiming that.

            1. LOL–there’s so many fucking caveats in that article that it’s hardly worth taking seriously.

              1. I know you are used to getting fed information in absolutes from the news sources you consume, but this is how scientists communicate.

                1. Your attempts at clairvoyance are certainly less hedging than the article.

                2. Here’s the scientific response to “Chipper”:

                  Our experiments suggest that the liberal NPC known as “Chipper Morning Wood” eats Joe Biden’s ass for a minimum of 18.2 hours per day. This conclusion was reached by quantifying the number of “dumb ass statements” he has made on unreason, and dividing by the number of asses he eats on an annual basis.

            2. If masks are effective, then there should be a drop in cases, or at least a slight increase, not an explosion. But you guys have a nice counterfactual argument going here… “think of how many cases there *would* be?!”

              1. No, that’s not how this works. You would have to have some good numbers on mask-wearing in an area and compare it with another area where mask-wearing was lower and that had comparable spread. Read the Nature article I posted elsewhere in this thread for studies that actually did this are re doing this

              2. All it takes is a minority of stupid-assed f**ktards who refuse to wear masks and social distance like they’re supposed to get everybody else screwed over! It’s disgusting.

                1. No, what’s disgusting is letting walking cancer cells who consider themselves people, like you and eunuch, continue to infect the world with your presence.

                2. It’s not just a minority of those stupid-assed fucktards whose politics you hate. Let’s not forget most of the stupid-assed 20-somethings who think they’re invincible, who do stupid ass shit like storm football fields, party like hell in large sweaty groups, or play basketball and sweat all over each other. We know, “settled science” here, that most of these young folk are far-left thinkers. They just don’t give a shit. It’s disgusting.

            3. The real issue, IMO, is as always: should consenting adults be able to assume their own risk? Pretty sure libertarians would say yes to this prop.

              Admittedly, the argument against would be that those decisions would pose secondary risks to others, and in a different scenario that might be valid. In this case, however, those secondary risks are self imposed. IOW, people who fear the virus are more than free to self isolate, even from family that are not so inclined (my stepmother with a history of asthma did this voluntarily) . Making everyone else responsible for their welfare is hardly just, reasonable, and/or even effective.

              Is it really more complicated than that? Am I missing something somewhere?

              1. No chance of a power grab there, and how can the Tonys of the world blame others if everyone is responsible for their own health?

              2. You aren’t always able to self-isolate. People need to go to the store to get their groceries, go to the doctor, or buy supplies for their house. And some people need to go to work where they have to be around others. Now, private establishments can set their own mask-wearing rules, and most do. However, the problem is enforcement, because store employees cannot be expected to enforce these rules and put themselves into confrontational situations. If you enter a store that requires masks without one, you are an asshole. Would any reasonable person disagree with that?

                1. Yes.
                  And you’re a pussy so full of shit that you’ve turned into an asshole.

                2. “You aren’t always able to self-isolate.”

                  This is true and something I considered when lockdowns first started but before any talk of stimulus. As a good little, empathetic citizen, I understood this to be a valid concern worth weighing, but don’t think it comes close to the damage of long term long downs. In fact, the furthest I would have thought reasonable would be to ensure that employees that opted to stay home and self isolate would be protected under…what is it called, medical leave act?…so that they would still have employment (salvaged by those willing to work), when the coast was clear.

                  Let me put it to you this way, Chip. POST stimulus is something else altogether and posted on an earlier thread today:

                  I’m not an expert on budgeting, but I’m going to safely assume that instead of spending two trillion on shutting the economy down, we could’ve spent a fraction of that (100 – 500B ?), to help “at risk individuals” mitigate the virus on an actual individual basis, and to the extent necessary (from full gas masks, to in-home cleanrooms), while everyone else did their civic duty – get back to work and let the virus work it’s way through people who are able (and willing).
                  To me, that STILL seems like a very pragmatic alternative to all this.

                3. Also, people have to go for important medical appointments and treatments, as well.

                  1. You mean they would risk their lives on the road? Don’t these fucking selfish pricks driving to and from work know that they could kill these poor bastards going to their necessary medical appointments???

            4. The question, though, is whether policies encouraging or forcing everyone to wear a mask are effective. I haven’t seen any data to support that position. You should be able to see some signal in the data when different places imposed mask mandates if it makes any significant difference.
              And masks aren’t without negative effects. Going around with reduced oxygen and increased CO2 levels is not good for your physical or mental state. They can spread disease. They can give people a false sense of security. And they fuck up your skin. And for me at least, wearing a mask for much of the day exacerbates my allergies and makes me feel sick by the end of the day. This isn’t nothing and balanced against “well, they probably do something”, which is really all they’ve got, it’s a good reason to let people make up their own minds.
              Seems to me that the mandates are mostly politicians desperate to be seen to be doing something.

              1. There is zero evidence that masks reduce oxygen and increase CO2 levels. That makes no sense. Masks don’t block gas flow.

                1. They hinder rather they block it or not. It is harder for CO2, a larger molecule than 02 to diffuse out. Simplest understanding of partial pressure states therefore the volume of CO2 will be higher than if it was unhindered.

                  1. No, sorry, N95 masks do not block particles smaller than 0.3 microns. A CO2 molecule is 0.33 nm in diameter. That’s a thousand times smaller than the holes in the N95 mask.

                    1. It doesn’t block but it takes more got them to pass through. An N-95 is a much denser medium than atmosphere. This hinders even gas molecules. To what extent is the better question. The slower the movement the greater the CO2 concentration. Physics dude take some.

                2. Seemed like people thought they did several months ago. And the air in the little pocket inside a mask is certainly depleted in O2 and enriched in CO2. I will have to check on that, perhaps I was misled. The rest of my point stands.

                  Perhaps it’s just the restricted breathing, but I can’t wear a mask over my nose for more than 10 minutes or so without getting very anxious. All kinds of health problems result from that. And increased stress and anxiety is definitely a result of masks and the non-stop fear campaign we have been subjected to.

                  1. I own a moving company and so you can imagine the tenuous situation we’re in, handling the hysteria. Anyway, in the beginning, some guys wore them for work, voluntarily, and before long, it was a common request from customers. The first week they didn’t report any issues, but by the start of the second week, the guys started reporting being more sluggish, harder to wake up in the morning, and all around weaker, physically. Even those who initially chose to wear them.

                    As far as long term effects, I wouldn’t know, and they haven’t said anything, now months later. Most of our clients don’t care anymore, which is funny to me. The ones who do (have someone in the house who is at risk) have been surprisingly sympathetic to the plights I just described and a compromise is typically reached.

                    1. Thanks forcontributing more evidence that people aren’t wearing masks like they are supposed to.

                    2. Aw, dude, no problem. You should’ve asked sooner. I would’ve told you I never wear them. 🙂 Then again, I’m in a state without the mandate, so I’m not sure what you mean by “supposed to”.

                      People who are concerned about the virus, owe it to themselves to do what is necessary to protect themselves. I’m sure you agree.

                  2. Sorry, Zeb, but you have to wear a mask, whether you like it or not. Nobody likes wearing a mask, but for your own benefit, as well as that of others, well, it’s necessary.

                    1. Fuck you, mapol.

                    2. I’m pretty sure they said multiple times that the mask is not for your benefit, it’s for the benefit of others.

                3. Masks don’t block gas flow? Are you hearing yourself? That would mean they don’t block covid for one.

                  You are wrong anyway because anybody who has ever worn a mask knows that it’s slightly harder to push air in & out of your mouth while wearing one. Therefore, they are (partially) blocking gas flow. If they (partially) block exhaling breath, then there is an increase in CO2 while exhaling, and a decrease in O2 while inhaling.

                  You were never taught critical thinking in school, were you? Try taking a physics class sometime.

                  1. My wife wears one as a primary care provider; she would back your claim up. It is indeed harder to breathe in one, and it sucks having to do it for 9 hours; it also produces skin problems for her.

              2. This. Fortunately I am able to WFH, but if I had a job that required me to wear a mask all day, I would quit rather than spend the day with a feeling of suffocation.

                Do you know how ridiculous the mask BS is? The CDC now claims that mask wearing helps the wearer reduce the risk of getting the virus. But in September, the CDC warned people in areas affected by wildfires that masks (other than an N95) wouldn’t protect them from the smoke because the particles are too small. Virus particles are far smaller than smoke particles, yet the CDC claims the same masks that won’t stop smoke particles will stop virus particles. Does this make any sense?

        2. we are having increases because it finally hit other cities these things don’t spread overnight and the only way to avoid that is to literally lockdown forever. I think the enviros would like that. society might parish though and cities will crumble into ruin, people in detroit won’t notice the difference

        3. Cases of Covid are rising because of new cases of flu? Which the masks aren’t stopping?

          But the masks are working?

          1. No there are new cases of Covid-19 arising because there are too damned many assholes who refuse to cooperate with the rules for mask wearing when out in public, and against having large gatherings of people, either indoors or outdoors.

            1. Exactly. Thank you.

              1. The US had similar mask compliance rates as Europe ass hat.

        4. The official numbers in my state put it at a .9% death rate. I wouldn’t call that very dangerous. If you use the official numbers for the flu the death rate is 15%!

        5. Isn’t it interesting how flu deaths all but disappeared this year?

      2. You do realize that a large percentage of the population is not wearing masks and also that masks will not protect you if you are going to be spending an extended length of time in an indoor space with infected people?

        1. study “science” say 80% of those infected were wearing mask. shit why bother

          1. What study are you talking about?

            1. Those are CDC and WHO numbers.

        2. Which doesn’t change the fact that medical research prior to March 2020 indicated that masks were ineffective at preventing the community spread of viruses–which is why the WHO and Fauci told people in February to not go out and buy masks.

          When it became politically convenient to use masks as a social engineering measure, the left started claiming at that point that masks prevent the community spread of viruses.

          1. 1. Some 40 years of research stating mask use is insignificant.
            2. CDC says don’t wear masks.
            3. CDC says, jk we were just trying to prevent a mask shortage (never mind the fact that there was never a cloth shortage, i.e. people could make their own “face coverings”).
            4. #thescience said that wearing masks doesn’t protect the user, but protects people from the user, so don’t be selfish (this line of #thescience suggests that masks could only block particles one-way).
            5. The new #thescience confirms that mask wearing DOES protect the user (we couldn’t get those selfish bastards to protect others, now we’ll tell them that they must do it to protect themselves).

            Seems like if the newest #thescience is true… then perhaps people should decide for themselves whether the risk of not wearing a mask is acceptable.

          2. So it’s implausible to you that masks prevent some measure of virus spread, but it’s plausible that “the left” is in a global coordinated conspiracy to make you wear a mask because it tickles them.

            1. Feel free to cite a study published prior to March of this year that proves wearing masks, especially cloth ones, prevents the community spread of viruses.

              1. Umm Fauci said so? Does that stand up to scientific scrutiny? (I guess the standards have changed just for 2020)

        3. Then what’s the point chipper?( I’d just like your thoughts on this since I’m thinking differently) – I’m not catching it walking by someone or there’s very low chance, when I’m going to catch it is prolonged close contact so why wear one if that’s not helping? Also it seems like everyone in this western part of MT is wearing them that I see and we are still seeing it move around here.

          1. He knows exactly what the fucking point is, and he agrees with that point.

          2. There is no reason to wear a mask outside unless you are going to be in close contact with others for an extended period of time. All my arguments for mask-wearing are for indoor situations.

            1. Wrong, Chipper Morning Wood. Wearing a mask outside is important, because one never knows if one who’s not wearing a mask, and/or who will cough and/or sneeze on you.

              1. Yall’s psychological and emotional disorders are not other people’s responsibility.

          3. I am rather surprised our Governor didn’t go full lockdown after the ass kicking he and the Democrats took statewide on the 3rd. Fuck Bullock. To bad Tester isn’t up for re-election until 2024, I’d like to throw his ass out too.

      3. But masks do work! It is the stupid, stubborn, liberty minded individuals that have an aversion to being muzzled around the clock that are causing all the problems. The wreckers!

        1. You are causing all the problems. Why should society tolerate people who spread disease because they’re too much of a big fat fucking baby to take hygiene precautions?

          The rest of the world is in the same boat you are. The only difference is you are the biggest whiners.

          1. Wearing a moist rag on your face in public is now “hygiene.” Any other retarded takes you feel we need to hear, retard?

            1. I’ll just repeat the same one:

              Everyone in the world is in the same boat you are. The only difference is you are the biggest whiner.

              Tell me why I should even listen to the biggest whiner instead of sticking a binky in your mouth so you’ll calm the fuck down?

              1. Have you considered that at least some of us are outraged because most of the world has been forced into this awful boat?

                1. Be outraged at a virus all you want. See if it will listen to you.

                  Or try having thoughts instead of emotions. Human brains instead of chimp brains. Not everything is an enemy to club to death. Some things are complex problems to solve.

                  1. That’s what I’m saying. There is more to this than how many people die from one cause. The reactions have caused enormous damage. Masks we can argue about, fine. But I cannot see how anyone at this point thinks lockdowns are worth it. We know that they are causing all kinds of problems and will definitely lead to a lot of early deaths. I can live with people who think masks are great. People who think lockdowns are still a good idea are evil or not paying attention.

                    1. this ^^^

                    2. So how do you propose to keep people from spreading the disease?

              2. Tony, if there’s one thing that’s been obvious from the first day you ever showed your worthless lefturd self on on this site, it’s that you have NO room to call anyone else a whiner.

                -jcr

          2. Now do “the Jews”

            1. Trumpers have that more than covered.

              1. Yes, Trump was so bad for Jews he moved the embassy to their capital and helped get historic peace treaties that benefitts them. He also appointed a Jew to his personal inner circle. The monster.

                1. He’s also a Nazi sympathizer and documented anti-semite.

                  1. Biden is a documented rapist, a corrupt grifter, and worships the KKK.

                    1. And general racist. Even recently: “You ain’t black if…” And stuff like “”I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” And his drug war nonsense which targeted crack cocaine users.

                      Trump? Maybe. Hard to believe someone who pardoned Jack Johnson–no reason to, and no credit given by the press–or helping reform the justice system’s treatment of blacks–hates black folk. He’s probably just a run-of-the-mill bigot, kind of like you and most people.

            2. LOL Nardz

          3. Tony, even if I were to grant that masks are worth while, no one plausibly claims that they would stop the epidemic. At best they are marginally effective and slow it down a little bit. So fuck off with this “you are causing all the problems” shit. The problem will be pretty much the same even if everyone starts wearing a “face covering” (which is what is being pushed, not actual masks that might actually work). Countries with strict mask rules and wide compliance aren’t in general doing any better that countries that don’t have those things.
            The rest of the world needs to start whining more. Or there won’t be much of a world when this is over.

            1. The United States is not doing about the same as similarly wealthy countries, it is doing markedly worse, and the only meaningful variable distinguishing successful countries vs. unsuccessful ones is how quickly and intelligently they implemented mask and social distancing plans.

              Europe is seeing a rise after they eased restrictions, predictably. The US surely could have at least done better than the head of government actively promoting the most reckless possible response.

              1. There are other comparisons to be made besides the US and everyone else. Look within Europe. Or look at Peru compared to Brazil. Show me where in the data you can see the effect of mask mandates kicking in.

                1. He can’t. But gosh darn it, he FEELS that they should work. And besides, authoritarianism is totes good for you.

              2. Might want to look into what the numbers are if you exclude all the people that Cuomo killed.

                -jcr

          4. If you present me with valid evidence and request that I wear a mask, I’ll play ball with that. If you mandate, via armed law enforcement, that I wear a mask, I WILL NOT COMPLY. Wearing a mask must be voluntary, and if you have scientific evidence to back up your claims, you’d have no problem convincing the majority of people. But you’re too lazy for that since you spend so much time eating Biden’s ass.

            1. It’s hard to convince a majority of people of scientific reality when their media diet is right-wing horseshit science denial.

              Wearing a mask is exactly like a speed limit. A public safety measure. You don’t have to like it. You can even be violently opposed to it. But you’re still getting a fine if you violate it. Welcome to civilization, where you don’t get to be reckless with other people’s lives and not suffer consequences.

              1. All those mask talismans, and they still didn’t stop a massive spike.

                Oh well!

                1. I wonder if when we define the police we can implement a handgun mandate and if Tony would be okay with that?

              2. I’m sorry, but did you forget to include the link to any actual evidence at all?

                You’re just a fucking cultist.

        2. You’re absolutely right, Gelger Goldstaedt. Those assholes who refuse to wear masks and to social distance are screwing everybody else, and they don’t care. It’s beyond disgraceful–and disgusting, to boot.

          1. You know what would stop you from catching the virus, 100% guaranteed? If you wrap a plastic bag around your head and seal it so no bad germs can get past it.

            You should try it, I hear it works really well but only if you keep it on for an hour.

      4. Not only have you seen it, but the CDC itself has codified it.

        Most Americans have been wearing masks since at least May.

        Masks are a fucking sham. If they worked, cases would be going down at about the same rate mask wearing has gone up, but cases have skyrocketed while mask usage has been going up. That doesn’t necessarily mean more masks = more covid, but it does mean more masks != less Covid, which means masks aren’t worth shit in stopping it.

        1. I think it was some Dr. Redfield that claimed two months of mask wearing would “bring this virus to heel”…. and two weeks of lockdowns was going to get us back to normal too.

          I also think famed #thescience follower Gov. DeWine claimed that if only 85% of people wore masks, we’d get control… now we have to “rise to the task, wear your mask” because compliance since July hasn’t seemed to work.

      5. That’s the stumbling block. Mask usage has skyrocketed but cases have not dropped much. Deaths certainly have, but people still get it.

        Where is this evidence that masks work?

    2. There are clear and significant benefits.
      For instance, the socialists will now rule this country.
      It was never about the Communist Chinese Virus. If this were actually a medical issue, we would have done what we did for every other variation of the flu viruses we deal with on an annual basis.
      Swine flu. H1N1. Avian Flu. etc
      Never needed masks for all before.
      Never needed internment of the healthy before.
      Never needed to shut down the economy before.
      Never needed to bribe hospitals to report any death as due to a specific thing, regardless of contributing factors before just to whip up a propaganda frenzy.
      But then the socialists never thought they could actually take over the country before.

      Welcome to the revolution.

      1. Thank god we all voted for Jo Jorgensen.

      2. That’s because we had an anti-pandemic coalition in our government, which Donald Trump disbanded, and because of Donald Trump’s criminally irresponsible handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. He did nothing about it when Covid-19 was still easy to contain and control. Moreover, Donald Trump deliberately lied to the American people about it being a hoax, and was under control, when, in reality, the Covid–19 pandemic WASN’T a hoax, nor was it under control, either.

        1. Was that before or after Nancy Pelosi invited everyone in San Francisco to hustle over to China Town and hug strangers?

          I must be misremembering things.

        2. You failed to cite Trump’s order requiring hospitals to send infected patients into nursing homes.

  6. Say what you will, you’re still getting a top down mandatory lockdown. Jan 20, 2021, through however long it takes to render the economy ripe for the taking.

    1. Not “through however long it takes”, two weeks to flatten the curve!

  7. who are you writing to?

  8. For a second I thought he had it and was forecast to die. Better luck next time.

  9. This whole “briefing” was a propaganda stunt. First of all, there is no “Office of the President Elect”. He’s not even the president-elect yet, not until the electors vote next month. Second, this “briefing” is just a man’s opinion. The whole thing is an arrogation, designed to make the public think he’s some kind of authority because he LOOKS like he does.

    1. there is no “Office of the President Elect”

      This should be repeated very, very often

    2. Biden is the President Elect of 2020! you’re just anxious for the son of a bitch Donald Trump to stay in for 4 more years. Well, the SOB got voted out for a damned good reason: Donald Trump is the worst, most irresponsible president that we’ve had thus far. Donald Trump must be forced to concede to the new President-elect, and to be forcibly escorted from the White House in late January by Security or Secret service people, if necessary. So what if they drag him out kicking and screaming? They should.

      1. We get it. You’re an awesome lib guy. Go away now.

  10. who wants to bet that when covid death doesn’t hit 432000 people Reason will give Biden credit for it but they wouldn’t give Trump credit for keeping deaths down to 200000 instead of the two million predicted. Orwellian up is down down is up we may as well of voted for Gore here

    1. Fun times will be in 2 years when the cumulative deaths reach 2 million and they claim the projections were correct after all.

    2. “We were always at war with Eastasia… I mean, it was always supposed to be two million deaths.”

  11. You can’t blame them: how critically has anyone thought about what democrats are saying for the oblast 4 years?

  12. His hyperbolic warning also suggests that his election will replace a president who falsely assured us that COVID-19 was “going away” with a president who errs in the opposite direction.

    So, on average we’re just fine!

  13. I’m not sure if Sullum might not be overly optimistic about the future course of the case fatality rate.

    First, is the CFR calculated as fatalities/hospitalizations, or as fatalities/positive_diagnoses? If the latter, we’d expect the CFR to fall as testing was expanded: more of the people with mild or asymptomatic cases would be diagnosed, increasing the denominator and thus pushing down the CFR even if the fatality rate remained the same for hospitalized cases.

    Second, did the ensemble forecasters take into account the likely increase in the CFR should the number of patients needing hospital care exceed the available hospital resources? The linked site states that forecasters made varying assumptions about social distancing and like covid-avoidance measures, but it doesn’t mention hospital capacity; and the CDC site links to a set of brief descriptions, none of which mentions possible changes in CFR arising from that or any other cause.

  14. Beijing expelled four pro-democracy lawmakers from Hong Kong’s legislature. A fat chunk of the other non-pro Beijing lawmakers resigned in protest.

    “HONG KONG—Beijing forced the expulsion of four pro-democracy Hong Kong lawmakers, prompting the rest of the opposition bloc to resign in protest at China’s intensifying crackdown on dissent in the city.

    Hong Kong’s government Wednesday said that the democratically elected legislators had been disqualified with immediate effect. The government announced the move minutes after China’s legislature passed a resolution that empowered local officials to unseat dissenting politicians without going through the courts.”

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/beijing-ousts-four-opposition-lawmakers-in-hong-kong-11605080352?

    It will be interesting to see what a President Biden–if and when he’s officially elected–does with this kind of thing. I suspect his reaction will be entirely neocon. He’ll look at further sanctions against Beijing. He probably won’t call off the trade war. He’ll probably add to it.

    1. My prediction:

      Biden will pay lip service to defending democracy abroad. But, in the same breath, will insist that forcing democracy upon other countries does not work. He will lecture us about self-determination and will conclude that, if the people of Hong Kong want democracy they should fight for it and, of course, we will give them our moral support (and, our prayers) but we will not intervene. The best way to ensure freedom abroad is to strengthen our economic relations with the CCP. He will then cap things off by stating that we must respect our allies and friends, even if they sometimes make choices we disagree with.

      Sound about right?

      1. And he would be mostly correct for doing so.

        “Spreading” American democracy is functionally no better than the USSR “spreading” communism during the Cold War. Bombs that drop and bullets that fly under the banner of (forced) democracy are no less deadly than those dropped by communists, and the results are no better.

        If others want freedom, they should make it for themselves. It’s not my job to send my money, nor support sending good American men to some shithole to fight for someone else.

        1. It may not be your job to send them money, but the practical effect will be our country sending money to the CCP, under the guise of “trade,” even as the scope of their authoritarian governance expands and their human rights abuses break records. Frankly, I think we all understand that the noise about Hong Kong we are hearing today will simply disappear because a Biden compliant media will stop covering it. Hong Kong will be conquered and, by and large, nobody will care.

          1. This.

            Biden won’t be asked any question that could have the possibility of him having to answer with words that the CCP won’t like

            1. No he won’t the goals of the CCP and DNC are perfectly aligned.

      2. I think you nailed it. Of course, these statements will have to be distilled out of whatever nonsense coleslaw comes spewing out of his face – I can’t stand listening to Trump because you can’t understand what the fuck he’s talking about after he gets about 8 sentence fragments and tangents and asides into a 30-word statement, but I get the feeling Biden is going to be even worse when it comes to trying to make sense out of what he’s saying.

      3. America hasn’t supported democracies since WWII they “thought” it be easier to control dictator ships look a the history when was the last time we installed a democracy or even helped

      4. I think that’s about right, and then he will take the opposite tack with Russia.

      5. Don’t forget hashtags. That will show them we really mean it.

    2. Biden won’t criticize China for anything because China owns the Biden family.

      China can simply blackmail Joe Biden by threatening to expose more details of Jim and Hunter Biden’s corrupt dealings with Chinese businesses during the past decade (that Twitter, Facebook, Reason and the rest of the Trump hating media outlets have censored during the past month).

      1. China cannot blackmail Joe Biden because nobody that voted for him cares. The media will run cover for Biden and anything coming out of China will be dismissed as “disinformation.” In order to blackmail people, other people have to care about the information and I think it is abundantly clear that nobody cares.

    3. I’m almost expecting Biden to just give up Taiwan.

    4. wrt what Biden will do, I’ll just quote President Obama: ““Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f**k things up,” “.

  15. Soon there will be a running ticker of lives ‘saved or created’ under the Biden administration.

  16. I suspect that we won’t be told Biden’s “real plan” until after the Georgia senate seat runoffs.

    1. I’m sure Biden is hoping Republicans hang on to the Senate, then he’ll have an excuse to avoid passing the more radical measures and legislation the Left wants.

      1. I don’t think he really gives a shit.
        He’ll do whatever he’s told.
        All he wants is to be called Mr. President.

  17. Just ignore what the uptight self righteous democrats say or do. They clearly have no handle on it and are just failing about. Go live your life as best you can. If this virus worries you then you are free to do what you think is necessary to protect yourself. But don’t give democrats free reign over your life.

    This is why it’s more important than ever to make sure republicans have a senate majority. If there is no brake on democrats intentions then they plan to unleash hell on us – even worse than their stupid governors have already done.

    1. Oh come on now! The Republicans are the ones who need to be put under control. They’re too far out of control as it is, and so’s their beloved Donald Trump.

      1. Wow, good point, you’ve convinced me!

  18. “If this virus worries you then you are free to do what you think is necessary to protect yourself. But don’t give democrats free reign over your life.”

    There is a feedback loop here that trends toward authoritarianism. The democrats will continue scaring people into believing that their lives are in grave danger. People that believe their lives are in grave dangers are more likely to give government power over their everyday lives. Once people are sufficiently conditioned to believe they are in grave danger, going back to living one’s life as one did before the grave danger arose will become unthinkable. At the end of the day, the people will be willingly and enthusiastically demanding that stricter, more authoritarian measures are taken, for the public good. And on, and on, and on it goes.

    I live in a deep blue state and, though uncomfortable with the lockdowns, the overwhelming majority of people have already accepted them as part and parcel of life. “I understand that it is what needs to be done, even if I am inconvenienced.” This rationalization is being made now and, I firmly believe, will be made even as the lockdowns expand, and become more and more oppressive.

    1. Masks serve multiple purposes one of them being constant reminders that things aren’t normal and you should be scared.

      1. Nailed it. Without the masks nobody would even know there was a pandemic.

      2. Hey, who the fuck was making exactly that point months ago?
        Go look up the threads.
        Goddamnit

    2. Especially as the democrats will wave off every failure of their authoritarian measures with “but X% of the people aren’t obeying!”

  19. The “Party of THE SCIENCE,” ladies* and gents.

    *Who am I kidding, there’s not such thing as female libertarians.

    1. There are definitely ladies that **think** they are libertarians but, for some reason, almost every single one I have met has been a neo-Nazi. Alternatively, and quite ironically, the rest have been outspoken Jewish women that sucked off all the libertarian autists in the room with them. It is a really fucking weird dynamic, and I cannot quite explain why it is so.

    2. Who the hell are you to decide who is a lady and who is a gent! The Party Of Science has decreed that biology (among other fields of study) is a social construct (specifically a white colonialist patriarchal construct) and therefore not a science. Now that I think of it, it does seem odd that the Party of Science is the same party that decrees there is no such thing as science.

  20. LOL Now Reason starts publishing these damning essays about Joe and his Ho AFTER the 2020 election. Reason is Leftist propaganda.

  21. Biden’s “expectation” suggests that the president-elect is not paying attention to the COVID-19 case fatality rate in the United States, which has fallen dramatically since mid-May and continues to drop.

    To be fair, it’s not like anybody else has been paying any attention to the case fatality rate either, they don’t exactly make that sort of information readily available. You can’t feed the panic talking about a falling case fatality rate like you can talking about the rising number of cases, can you? And if it doesn’t feed the panic, why the hell would you bother talking about it?

    1. “And if it doesn’t feed the panic, why the hell would you bother talking about it?”

      +1000

    2. “they don’t exactly make that sort of information readily available”

      Except its been made readily available for every country on a daily basis since March at

      https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&country=USA~SWE~ITA~DEU~ESP~FRA~GBR~NLD&region=World&cfrMetric=true&interval=smoothed&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=aged_70_older&pickerSort=desc

    3. I literally went looking for this yesterday and couldn’t find it.

    4. I heard someone on the radio refer to this as “Panic Porn”. I don’t recall who that was.

  22. What’s the problem Jacob? You did everything you could to get Trump defeated.

  23. If masks worked we wouldn’t be seeing the number of cases that are happening. It’s obvious to any reasonable adult.

    1. Wrong, Truthteller1! The number of Covid-19 cases are rising, because too many dumb-assed fucktards are deliberately disobeying the rules and refusing to wear masks, and to social distance from each other. THAT’S obvious to any reasonable adult.

      1. Stop lying.

  24. He is not the president-elect. The electors haven’t voted yet.

    1. And there’s no “office of…” even if he was.
      Obo invented that pile of lefty shit.

    2. Oh, shut up! Biden was Elected, fair and square, as well as legally, into office. He takes office in January 2021!

  25. Even as new covid cases have skyrocketed in the US and most of Europe, the case fatality rate has continued to decline significantly in virtually every country.

    But of course, the news media have also refused to expose this critically important information.

    1. For which you can thank the medical community. They have learned a lot since this started.

      In the meantime hospitalization rates continue to increase.

      Death is not the only metric. People with serious illness and even mild or moderate cases can have long term consequences

  26. It’s going to be really funny over the next 4 years. Trump was supposed to be Hitler; instead he was a 90s Democrat with an edgy streak that remained speech and never affected policy. Biden is supposed to heal the nation; instead he’ll be everything Trump said he would be; a puppet to Harris and the DNC, a Bernie/AOC transition candidate who will bring Marxism into the mainstream, all the while becoming increasingly senile and needing to be propped up by the supposedly impartial and unbiased media. The Biden ticket was always suicide and now we’re seeing it in real time. The next 4 years of memes and clown world will be fantastic.

  27. I was going to mention that Trump’s prediction that it would all be over by Easter was something more of a misfire, but then the people here have already taken up the case: Biden is obviously terrible and wrong for some future prediction that will be on the order of death we already have, but Trump is my daddy and the bestest president ever because ONLY a quarter million are dead instead of 2 million.

    You people are so fucked. You’re doing literally everything you can to be as unhelpful as possible.

    I live in the same shitty world you do. Masks chafe me as much as they do. Why am I so much less of a screaming infant about everything? Must be all the soy.

    1. “…Why am I so much less of a screaming infant about everything?..”

      You misspelled “more”, whiny piece of lefty shit.

    2. The dull-witted who never question anything they see on TV will generally just do what they’re told without even wondering if it’s working.

      1. Then there are some who believe everything that comes out of the face of the most obvious pathological liar ever to hold public office.

        1. >>the most obvious pathological liar ever to hold public office.

          subjective proclamations always cute.

          1. Either he’s the biggest liar ever to hold public office, or the fact checkers took the time to invent 20,000 fake accusations of lying.

            1. Just about everyone who holds national public office is a liar. It’s more a matter of how good they are at it.

              1. Everyone who holds national public office also has a hairdo of some sort. That doesn’t make Trump’s average.

                1. Come on now, Obama and LBJ were much better liars than Trump.

        2. I’ll grant you that the Democrats’ pathological liars tend to be a bit more subtle.

          1. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
            “I moved on her like a bitch.”

            Ah, refreshing honest.

  28. I think 200K by the end of the year is a bit high. But with the current spike in the virus, it’s possible to have somewhere between 50K and 100K new deaths. No matter how you slice it, that’s a lot of dead people.

    In my opinion, the best bet is to follow what Fauci says. Stay away from crowds and wear mask if you must come in contact with others not in your immediate household, and wash your hands after being out in public. If you know you are infected, isolate yourself until you are better. Those simple rules will help dramatically.

    The big question is, can Americans follow those simple rules. More than likely, some will and some won’t. Trump has tainted about half of us with his lies and bullshit like “It will be gone by Easter.” Or “it will be gone by summer.” Or “It will magically disappear.” He’s been 100% wrong up to this point. Trump is no expert. So just listen to Fauci. He’s saying a vaccine should be available by the end of the year. Most of the public should start to be able to get it in the spring. I’m pretty sure most reasonable people will get it by the end of 2021. The only problem will be those who opt out of the vaccine program. So, some of those will die. Who knows, maybe some of us here who are card carrying members of the Trump cult won’t be here either.

    1. Fauci is not wrong.
      Staying at a distance at least 2 meters (better 3) is the most important thing especially indoors.
      A mask may stop spit and droplets but stopping biological aerosols is much more difficult. The way most people wear and fiddle with their mask greatly diminishes any efficacy. A proper seal is virtually impossible for anyone with a beard. So most importantly keep your distance.

    2. Good points , Haystack! Well said,. Thanks.

    3. You going to eat shit when you turn out to be wrong?

      Something tells me you’ve been wrong before, even on this very subject, but it doesn’t seem to phase you, eh?

  29. Herd immunity (another issue the media refuses to discuss except to condemn those who write about or discuss it) appears to be another reason why Biden’s death predictions are exaggerated.

    In four states (ND – 7.5%, SD – 6.6%, IA – 5.3%, WI – 5.2%), more than 5% of their population have tested positive for covid. Meanwhile, another eight states (IL, ID, UT, AR, LA, TN, MS, NE) have surpassed 4%, with many more states soon to surpass 4%.

    Several published studies (including one by the CDC) have estimated that 10 times more people have contracted covid than have tested positive for the virus, indicating that nearly half of the people in many states may have been infected already.

    And most infectious disease experts agree that about 70% of the population needs to be infected with a virus before herd immunity can be achieved.

    Its time to begin a serious discussion about herd immunity, as we’re getting closer to it every day.

    Big Pharma, which wants to profit from covid, wants herd immunity to be discussed only as it pertains to vaccines, which is why Big Pharma also advocated the Democrat lockdowns because doing so preserves more potential customers for vaccines.

    have surpassed a %5already reached a covid case rate of

    1. When your definition of herd immunity is indistinguishable from “maximum death,” then you’re not contributing anything to the conversation. Herd immunity has never been achieved without a vaccine. We don’t even know how strong immunity after infection is. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.

      But, again, that’s beside the point, since you are advocating a strategy of just letting the virus go and killing as many people as possible. To be fair, that’s also Trump’s plan.

      Or maybe we isolate the high risk individuals. This country is 40% high risk individuals. Are we gonna put 40% of the country in a bubble? Isn’t it easier just to wear a fucking mask?

      1. When your definition of herd immunity is indistinguishable from “maximum death,”

        Yes, everyone who gets the virus dies. It is known.

      2. Isn’t it easier just to wear a fucking mask?

        Feel free to cite a study published prior to March of this year that shows wearing a mask, especially cloth ones, prevents the community spread of viruses.

        Or was that recommendation to not buy masks early in the year just a big “ooopsie!”?

        1. So I can’t cite any studies that have to do with the actual virus we’re talking about?

          Do you think you could make a good faith argument about something for a change? When the novel virus was just getting started, people got some things wrong. They overreacted to surfaces and underestimated the benefits of masks. (They were also motivated to preserve masks for hospitals, which in the worst case was a triage-like decision.)

          You can’t decide to believe the authorities when they say what you want to hear and then reject everything they subsequently say that you don’t like.

          1. So I can’t cite any studies that have to do with the actual virus we’re talking about?

            So you’re saying you can’t cite any prior to March of this year? Because we’ve had several pandemics prior to this one that provided plenty of opportunity for study, and the “science was settled” that mask-wearing was ineffective at preventing community spread.

            Do you think you could make a good faith argument about something for a change?

            Pointing out that the narrative on masks suddenly did a 180 after several decades of pandemics showing that no evidence existed that mask-wearing prevented community spread of a virus isn’t a good-faith argument?

            You twerps are always going off about “MUH SCIENCE!,” but when the rubber hits the road, you can’t back up your big mouths with anything concrete.

      3. “This country is 40% high risk individuals.”

        Correct. And how many of them put themselves in that category by overeating and shunning exercise? Now I’m supposed to “wear a fucking mask” because they chose a lifestyle that makes them vulnerable to illness? Instead of making me wear a mask to protect them, how about we mandate 2,000 calorie diets so they can protect themselves?

        1. Is it really that big of a deal to wear a mask? I’m pretty healthy, although I do eat at McDonald’s more than I should haha. I’ll more than likely survive covid of I get it. Who knows, maybe I’ve already had it. But I wouldn’t know because getting an antibody test is next to impossible. But I still wear a mask. I don’t know about you, but I’d feel pretty bad if I knew I gave covid to someone and they died. So for that reason alone, I’ll wear a mask.

          What I’d like to know is why so many people absolutely refuse to wear a mask. They don’t cause pain, they don’t make you look ugly, they don’t keep you from doing your job, it doesn’t hurt others if you wear one. So why is it so hard to wear one? I’d like to know.

          1. Feel free to cite a study that shows wearing masks, especially cloth ones, are effective at stopping the community spread of a virus.

            “It’s not a big deal to wear a mask” is just magical thinking.

            1. Prior to March of this year, the Science! said that masks were ineffective at preventing community spread, and were only effective in certain limited settings and under controlled circumstances.

            2. I have never read a study about masks. Although I use N95 masks most of the time. The main reason is because my business partner orders a ton of them at a time. Her husband owns a dental office, so she has boxes of them. They were hard to get for a while, but pretty easy to get now. Although I have used the disposable surgical masks at times. I can imagine that some of the home made masks do very little. I see some people wearing them and the constantly fall down. But I’m pretty sure most masks do provide some level of effectiveness. The CDC recommends wearing them. So unless they are lying, then they must provide some level of protection.

              But if the cloth ones aren’t that good, you too could use an N95 mask. And don’t forget, staying away from people is probably the best way to protect yourself and others. I get it that there are times when we all have to go out in public. But I do my best to avoid crowded places. Even when I go to buy groceries, I get in and get out. This situation is only temporary, so just do your best to help out.

              A lot of people are socializing these days. From protests to Trump rallies and the Biden victory celebrations around the country. I would never attend any of these. The good news is that Trump is in hiding, so there probably won’t be anymore rallies in the near future.

              1. “The CDC recommends wearing them. So unless they are lying“

                Come on, now. At the start of all this, the CDC said masks were insignificant in stopping the virus… and then they claimed they were lying about that.

              2. So basically, you admit that wearing a mask is just a talisman.

      4. “Herd immunity has never been achieved without a vaccine.”

        Tony is dead wrong, as herd immunity has been achieved many times long before vaccines were discovered and made available, and many times since then.

        Its these types of false fear mongering comments that have helped create and perpetuate the covid panic and hysteria, which is far deadlier and destructive than the covid virus.

    2. Herd immunity is more like 25%.

      1. There is NO herd immunity.
        There can be “herd resistance” when somewhere upward of 2/3 of the herd are already immune. And that is not happening without a vaccine.

        1. Herd immunity has become a misunderstood and misused term. It is not what people think it is. It is political now which is the worst place to be.

          Mother Nature is very tricky and what is true today may be false tomorrow. Biology is the trickiest of all. Unlike physics the rules change.

          This is medicine both an art and a science. I would caution people to be careful about making conclusions.

          ‘I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me. ‘” Albert Einstein

    3. The Covid-19 virus is WAY too deadly and WAY too contagious to take chances on developing herd immunity through more and more people being infected. A comprehensive, affective vaccine against Covid-19 that’s mandatory for everybody is the best way to achieve that herd immunity, to protect everybody, including those, who for some reason(s), are unable to get the vaccine. The fact that over a quarter of a million people have lost their lives to the Covid-19 virus indicates exactly why a comprehensive vaccine program is necessary.

      1. mapol is either a liar, an idiot or both.

        Covid’s mortality rate for those under 60 and for non obese people is lower than the typical flu.

        The 1918 Spanish Flu killed 5,300 Pittsburghers (the vast majority of whom were otherwise healthy people under the age of 50).

        In sharp contrast, covid has killed 113 Pittsburghers, of which 75% have been senior citizens who lived in nursing homes.

        Similar comparisons exist for most cities and states in the US, as well as European nations.

  30. Democrats enforce a drastic lockdown, then when numbers are nowhere near where they claimed, they say “If it wasn’t for the lockdown, it would be much worse.” There is no way to prove it wrong. Conversely, if a politician does not opt for a lockdown, the argument is that things would not be as bad as it is if there was a lockdown and that pol will be accused of being responsible for thousands of deaths. Politicians will always err on the side that will be less likely to make them look bad and what makes them look bad is highly dependent on how the media chooses to spin it.

    1. The official Trump policy is that this would go away by magic months ago. Fuck you. We’re trying something else.

      1. If you have any iota of respect for the Constitution, then you nor anybody else should care about what Trump or any president would do. It’s not his fucking job; it was never his fucking job. Further, the various responses to the virus’ diaspora have been of the deliciously authoritarian flavor–something you wanted and continue to desire. And yet, that hasn’t turned out well with regards to outcomes and the God-given rights of man.
        In short, despite many Tony’s appearing from other times and dimensions, you continue your perpetual ignorance on matters of human rights. Also, you suck at kissing.

        1. Keep defining authoritarianism down to include mask wearing and speed limits and whatever the fuck else is bothering you at the moment, and you might miss the strongman clown trying to force his way into holding illegitimate power.

          1. Pursuing legal actions that are allowed by law is the same as “trying to force his way into holding illegitimate power”. You should definitely be afraid, because the vast majority of people in the U.S. do this.

            1. And when those legal options run out and Biden is president, Trump’s supporters will stoically accept the outcome and not assume Biden’s presidency is illegitimate from day 1 until the day he leaves office, right?

              They’re gonna treat him differently than they did Clinton and Obama because they’ve definitely gotten less crazy.

              1. Just like the Hillary supporters who willingly accepted Trump as a legitimate president. Tribalism all around.

                1. But they did. She conceded the day after the election.

                  Being sad about losing is not what I’m talking about. It’s calling Bill Clinton illegitimate because he only got a plurality thanks to Ross Perot. It’s calling Obama a secret African Muslim for 8 years. And now it’s rejecting the outcome of the election altogether.

                  The Republican party is terminal. It’s not both sides. Let’s hope they don’t take all of us down with it.

                  1. Do try and enjoy the democrat election victory, between all your hand-wringing and hyperventilation.

                  2. But they did. She conceded the day after the election.

                    And Al Gore didn’t concede until the day before the Electoral College met. What’s your point?

                    The Republican party is terminal.

                    Your side’s been saying that shit since 1932. I’m sure it will happen any day now.

                    1. Al Gore lost by 500 votes in one state, not tens of thousands in multiple states.vWho are you trying to convince with this slimy nonsense? Am I supposed to believe you supported Gore’s effort?

                    2. Al Gore lost by 500 votes in one state, not tens of thousands in multiple states

                      Yeah, and? Just because Trump isn’t doing what you want him to do doesn’t mean he has to. Once the Electoral College convenes, it won’t matter anymore, anyway, so stop having a bitchfit about it.

                      Hillary wasn’t going to concede, either, until Obama told her she needed to do so. And you guys were arguing all the way up and past the Electoral College that the people who were established as electors didn’t have to put Trump in office and could “vote their conscience.”

                      The Republican Party nor its leaders are obligated to give your side anything, since the only thing you guys practice is zero-sum politics. You’re just ass-mad that you’re getting a taste of your own medicine now.

              2. Tony,
                They won’t accept Biden. They will chant “not my president” from day one and will try to hound him out of office. Happened in Jan 2017 and it will happen in Jan 2021.
                Same play, different cast.

      2. Haha, that is funny that Trump said it would just go away. I guess I’m his mind, if you wish it to go away, it will.

  31. The REAL science is in computer models! All that real-world data from places that have been open is misinformation.

  32. I’am made $84, 8254 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business. Here what I do,.for more information simply open this link thank you….. Here is More information.

  33. Biden has to overestimate Covid deaths so by February he can claim he miraculously lowered the death rate just by taking office. The mainstream media, as usual, will support him on this, as announcers on CNN say, “Isn’t it just amazing?!” Yes, it is amazing what some people allegedly with brains will say.

  34. We knew from the get-go that Joe was losing his mind. Unfortunately we will see evidence of that every day.
    The day-by-day case mortality rate is about 1% in the US. Therefore, old Joe is predicting 20,000,000 new covid cases by the end of the year. Such a number is wildly implausible

  35. So let me get this straight. All of you idiots would prefer having the orange lying buffoon who lied to us every day for four years, not to mention the past 11 months? “It’s going to zero.” “We’re rounding the curve.” No, we are now exceed 145,000 cases EVERY DAY and losing the equivalent of three airliners EVERY DAY. So I don’t care if Biden’s estimates are too high. At least we have a competent intelligent administration coming in, people who are experts who will not lie to us. Now shut up and put on your damn mask.

    1. Some folks need something to continuously bitch about or their life seems to have no meaning, I guess. I’m just assuming, but I fear I may be correct.

    2. Feel free to cite a study published prior to March of this year that shows masks are effective at preventing community spread of a virus, especially cloth ones.

    3. Guess those magical mask talismans didn’t work after all.

  36. “have a competent intelligent administration ”
    we’ll be able to say that when we see it. No more Nobel prizes based on hope

  37. Hmmm…. many of these comments and responses seem so far to the right, it sounds like the same shit that spills from the mouths of Trump sycophants, sympathizers and supporters. Albeit, a little more intellectual, but no less idiotic. IMHO. Your opinion is your own, doesn’t make you correct. Sometimes blowhards prefer to hear themselves speak than listen to REASON and use common sense.

    1. Sometimes blowhards prefer to hear themselves speak than listen to REASON and use common sense.

      Keihan knows about blowhards because he sees them all the time. It’s called a mirror.

      1. You’re funny. Immaturity amuses me, try again.

        1. Immaturity amuses me

          Being able to laugh at oneself is an important skill.

  38. It’s hard to believe that some people still listen to what politicians say.

  39. I have been a Reason subscriber for a long long time. But after reading many of the articles over the past several months, the less and less Libertarian I become. It is becoming difficult to distinguish far-right conservatives from libertarians, both on socio-political or economic views. The only distinction that I can rationally discern is the difference in education or intellect, but even some intellectuals can be deduced to idiots if they have little logic or common sense. Logic should dictate that masks work as long as all parties comply but some would rather argue that case. For what reason? Because they can? Well there is no REASON in that argument and no serious science backing it. Oh, but they would argue against the science of the CDC, WHO and Fauci. So do Trump sympathizers. Why shouldn’t these particular libertarians be lumped into the same pile of imbeciles? I feel it is just a bitch session. Bitch to bitch. It’s nothing more than trolling.

    1. Logic should dictate that masks work as long as all parties comply but some would rather argue that case.

      Feel free to cite any scientific study prior to March of this year that shows masks, especially pieces of cloth, are effective at preventing community spread of viruses.

      1. Please feel free to cite how it is harming you to wear a mask regardless? There is no scientific evidence to support an argument against wearing a mask. There is case evidence where positively infected individuals whom were wearing masks in close proximity with others, also wearing masks (one case was 2 infected hair stylists in a salon and another on an aircraft) and no additional individuals became infected. This is plenty enough evidence for me. Instead of heeding recommendations from many in the scientific community with more knowledge of disease than you or I, you’d rather argue semantics. So, if wearing a mask isn’t harming you for some reason, your argument is only for argument’s sake. Just wear the fucking mask.

        1. So you’ve got nothing, thanks for confirming that.

          1. Nothing that you cant research for yourself. There are plenty of studies which confirm that if a COVID positive person and COVID neg person are both wearing masks the risk of transmission is lowered dramatically. If they follow all recommended guidelines, the risk is reduced even further. One such extensive study was made public on August 18th.

            1. And you still have nothing.

              “pLEntY oF StuDiEs!”

  40. The politicians are completely clueless. Most of the medical experts are no more than useless. You would think by now, our modern over-priced medical system, would have an answer for this fake pandemic after 8 months of fiddle-farting around. Most deaths claimed to be from Covid are not related to the invisible virus.

    Biden is a puppet for the Marxist left and their agenda is a total lock down, forced vaccinations and the destruction of freedom and our capitalist society even if there is only 1 death/day. No thanks, I do not want to alter my RNA nor do I want nano-particles floating around inside my body just so the megalomaniacs Gates and Schwab can get their jollies following my movements on their silly i-pads.

    Biden will not last his entire 4 years and that is by design. Harris will be 10 times worse than Hillary even would have been. She is beyond brain dead, as are most Dems in office. Republicans will see the end of legal elections and the end of any hope to retake anything, even the keys to the johns.

    By the end of the 2020’s, Venezuela is going to look like Monte Carlo on a cloud compared to this country. blm and antifa will be running Congress and every governor will be a die hard Marxist.

  41. “Never waste a good crisis.” The Deep State needs Biden to use Covid to massively expand gov’t even more. Immunization passports, covid tracing, nanny state busybody reporting and all for the good of the cattle we are to the global elite. We are to be managed. We don’t have Natural Rights endowed by our Creator, oh no, haven’t you heard, Gubment is God now. Welcome to the failed experiment of Socialism cause we’re ‘Murica and we’ll do it even better. We’ll do it right this time. War follows Plague and the Military Industrial Complex must survive. We haven’t had enough Wars in the last 4 years. Don’t worry, Harris will soon be the Warden of this Prison Country.

  42. There’s a casedemic. Not a pandemic. The pandemic is over.

    Biden. Please.

    GTFOH.

    That’s gonna be my comment for the next four years if he gets in.

    Man did they pull off the fraud scam of the century these rotten Democrats. Chapeau I guess.

  43. I read the headline and thought it was breaking news that Biden had COVID-19 too.

  44. Reading these comments, I hope some of you are starting to realize something:

    Leftists are cancer.

    Either we fight leftists like we fight cancer, or cancer will do what it always does.

    1. Have you ever expressed an actual thought, or is it all fascism all the time?

  45. So, when did the MS media become the entity that declares a candidate “president elect”?

  46. Fake pandemic? With that statement alone, I cannot take anything you say seriously. The flu and other seasonal viri, did not claim 250,000 deaths last year, nor the year before that… nor the year before that and so on and so forth. So what are you claiming has killed so many? Or is that some conspiratorial hoax as well? Did you get your data from Trumpians? Keep on with your lunacy.

  47. I made 10k dollar a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Here’s what I’ve been doing Please visit this site…. CLICK HERE FOR FULL DETAIL

  48. Biden’s grand plan is basically to do what Trump has done except without the corporate media nitpicking and hounding him 24 x7.

    I suspect that covid 19 will fade away from the focus of the media and backed up by the corporate media Biden will claim that he quickly solved the pandemic.

    In reality covid-19 will probably be with us like the flu each year and the vaccine will probably be about as effective as the flu vaccine is each year.

    While I’m glad that Trump appears to have lost the election, I’m sad that Biden appears to have won the election.

    It would be very interesting if after the recounts, Trump and Biden were tied in the electoral college actual vote. Not just the predictions of the corporate media.

  49. “Joe Biden’s COVID-19 Death Forecast Looks Less Plausible Every Day”
    Oh boy, did I read this title wrong.
    I was imagining a very disappointed Kamala Harris.

  50. “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f… things up.”
    Barack Obama

  51. Start making cash right n0w…. Get m0re t!me with your family by d0ing j0bs that 0nly require for y0u t0 have a computer and an internet access and y0u can have that at y0ur h0me. Start bringing up t0 $8668 a m0nth. I’ve started this j0b and I’ve never been happier and n0w I am sharing it with y0u, s0 y0u can try it t00. Y0u can check it 0ut here…

    ==========================➤Visit Here

  52. I’am made $84, 8254 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business. Here what I do,.for more information simply open this link thank you….. Here is More information.

  53. Thought I’d share this article to many people here, those who misunderstand the meaning of the word “faith”:
    https://www.deseret.com/2011/7/14/20203511/what-exactly-does-faith-mean-trust-removes-misunderstanding

    Hope this helps. God bless.

  54. While I’m happy that Trump seems to have lost the political race, I’m miserable that Biden seems to have won the political decision.

    It would be intriguing if after the relates, Trump and Biden were tied in the discretionary school genuine vote. Not simply the expectations of the corporate media.

    https://www.divineleather.com/2020-kawasaki-klx230-first-ride-review/

  55. Start making extra income Earns upto $550 to $750 per day by working just online. I have made $28K in this month by working online. Its a simple and easy home job and even a little child can do this job online and makes real money…. Here is More information.

  56. Will another lockdown finally get more of We the People angry enough about losing our freedoms to do something about it. If so, I say bring it on!

    1. Whiny crybabies itching to kill somebody. The left doesn’t do that. We get on with our lives. All the right has is whining. It’s literally all it does anymore.

  57. i am start online bussiness with USA contries….. click this link and know about this link…..https://www.hitsalary.com

  58. case fatality rate in the United States, which has fallen dramatically since mid-May and continues to drop

    a president who falsely assured us that COVID-19 was “going away”

    Hmm. You can argue semantics, but a dramatically fallen and continuing to decline CFR can be described as “going away.”

    Or do you just have to get your digs in at Trump?

    1. So tell me why that has changed since we went from 0 to 10.6 million cases reported in the US in less than a year.

      Keep in mind that CFR is

      Number of cause-specific deaths among the incident cases / Total number of incident cases× 10^n

      It is a ratio not a measurement. One explanation is that as you gain more ability to diagnose infected the denominator increases. Therefore CFR decreases. 1/10 is 10% 1/100 is 1%.

      I do not think there is much doubt that in the world diagnostic efficiency has greatly improved since the beginning. Also the medical community has better learned how to treat critical patients.

      Another variable is how these patients are reported which differs from one place to another and also has a time lag until the data can be correlated.

      It is one of the conspiracy theories that cause specific deaths are inflated by the medical community to get a few extra bucks from Medicare. Do you buy that? The president said so.

      If so do not talk about the numerator in the equation or CFR. The whole thing is then worthless. Even the raw count of deaths due to COVID-19.

      The virus has not gone away. It is not turning the corner. It is replicating. No amount of denial is going to change that. It is dangerous and deadly.

      What to do about it is another question.

  59. Yknow what else about Joe Biden looks less plausible every day?

  60. Making every month extra $15k or more just by doing very simple j0b 0nl!ne from home. previous month i have easily made $14839 by doing this 0nl!ne j0b in my spare time for only 2 hrs a day using my laptop. i am a full time college studnet and after my college doing this j0b for 2 hrs only. easy to do and regular earn!ng are awesome from this. get your hands on this j0b today and start earn!ng 0nl!ne by just follow details on this s!te…………… Here is More information.

Please to post comments