about being liberal or conservative anymore y'all. That is a hype offered by the fascist whores who want to confuse the people with lies while they turn this country into an aristocratic police state. Some people will say anything to attain power and money. There is no such thing as the Liberal Media, but the Corporate media is very real.
Here is a great article at Statnews that dissects the limitations of the small-sample studies that are being touted as indicating "some benefit".
Keep in mind that there is a huge problem with testing if a certain drug shows benefits to people who have a disease, and that is how to measure the "severity', because people will improve regardless of what treatments are given. People survived the blood letting during the 1700's to remove "the vigors" from the body, but that didn't mean it was due to the treatment. So in any study using small samples, people can and do improve despite the treatments, which makes it difficult to say whether the improvement was enhanced by the treatment.
The scientific method is currently in the boxing ring with con-artists and a public relations political campaign. Who will win? Who should win?
Sunday, 5 April 2020 at 22h 42m 42s
Enabling price gouging too.
Sunday, 5 April 2020 at 22h 54m 55s
Epidemic expert Dr. Seema Yasmin helps debunk some common medical myths surrounding Covid-19. Will drinking water flush the virus out? Can you take ibuprofen? Will garlic prevent infection? Can you hold your breath to test if you have coronavirus?
Or from Ari Melber
Sunday, 5 April 2020 at 11h 20m 43s
From 4 March 2020
Dr. W. Ian Lipkin is an infectious disease expert at Columbia University who is fresh out of quarantine after traveling to China, where he was studying the coronavirus outbreak. The virus has now infected nearly 94,000 people around the world with more than 3,000 deaths. Today, Italy closed all schools as the country's death toll reached 107. In 2003 Dr. Lipkin helped Chinese authorities to combat SARS. He was also an adviser on the film "Contagion" — a thriller inspired by epidemics. Dr. Lipkin spoke to our Walter Isaacson.
Walter Isaacson is from New Orleans, and sits on the board of my alma mater, Tulane University.
Sunday, 5 April 2020 at 10h 21m 32s
Latest SF Coronavirus update from the SF Dept of Public Health
Up 39 from yesterday's public posting by the SF Department of Public Health. Up 32 from the day before, and plus 47 from the day before that. So we are up 71 over two days, and up 118 OVER 3 DAYS.
Currently the a value of the euler model is 7.96207 and the b value is 0.108954. The bell curve model has the width of one standard deviation interval equal to 13.96, or 14 days. So if this thing peaks and starts coming down, right now that is possible in 2 weeks. Not guaranteed, just possible, because the growth is still exponential - +47, +32, +39 over the last 3 days - even if the euler model's estimate of increase has now dropped below 11%.
Here are the model's updated 14 and 21 day predictions:
19,238 = 568×7.96207×(1+0.108954)^14
39,678 = 568×7.96207×(1+0.108954)^21
Saturday, 4 April 2020 at 20h 2m 17s
This was known on 13 February 2020
Though the coronavirus that originated from Wuhan, China has a lower fatality rate than SARS, it has proved far more contagious.
With an incubation of 14 days and evidence that COVID-19 can be passed on by asymptomatic individuals, experts say that the actual number of infected persons could be a lot more than what is being recorded.
Dr Leong Hoe Nam, who was infected with the SARS virus back in 2003, puts the estimate at 40 times the official statistics and said that the lockdown on cities in Hubei, while it may seem heartless, is the right move to take.
The adminstration knew, and they salivated profusely about how they could take advantage and achieve fascist nirvana.
Saturday, 4 April 2020 at 22h 53m 57s
Labor is prior to and independent of capital
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
The above quote comes from Abraham Lincoln's State of the Union Address on 3 December 1861, just after the first Battle of Bull Run disaster, the installing of McClellan as General of the East, during the end of the first year of the Civil War. This is also a month after the US Navy seized a British mail ship named Trent and captured two Confederate envoys. This moment in history is now referred to as the Trent Affair. The British were outraged and began threatening war, but Lincoln gave in and released the envoys, saying "One War at a Time."
It's a very long speech. The "labor" quote occurs in the latter 20% of the State of the Union Address. Here are the surrounding paragraphs.
In my present position I could scarcely be justified were I to omit raising a warning voice against this approach of returning despotism.
It is not needed nor fitting here that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions, but there is one point, with its connections, not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effort to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor in the structure of government. It is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital; that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow by the use of it induces him to labor. This assumed, it is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded so far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers or what we call slaves. And further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer is fixed in that condition for life.
Now there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them are groundless.
Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights. Nor is it denied that there is, and probably always will be, a relation between labor and capital producing mutual benefits. The error is in assuming that the whole labor of community exists within that relation. A few men own capital, and that few avoid labor themselves, and with their capital hire or buy another few to labor for them. A large majority belong to neither class—neither work for others nor have others working for them. In most of the Southern States a majority of the whole people of all colors are neither slaves nor masters, while in the Northern a large majority are neither hirers nor hired. Men, with their families—wives, sons, and daughters—work for themselves on their farms, in their houses, and in their shops, taking the whole product to themselves, and asking no favors of capital on the one hand nor of hired laborers or slaves on the other. It is not forgotten that a considerable number of persons mingle their own labor with capital; that is, they labor with their own hands and also buy or hire others to labor for them; but this is only a mixed and not a distinct class. No principle stated is disturbed by the existence of this mixed class.
Apparently the supplies states are purchasing from the "free market" are getting taken by the feds and put into the national stockpile.
On a runway in China, French officials were preparing to load pallets of much-needed masks and other protective gear, but minutes later those masks took off for the United States after unnamed Americans pulled out wads of cash on the tarmac to buy the supplies away from the French. One day later, a shipment of 200,000 masks and other gear on its way to Germany was “confiscated” as it passed through Bangkok, Thailand. The German government called the actions “modern piracy.” And in the port of New York, 3 million masks purchased for the state of Massachusetts were taken away by an unnamed federal agency. In seizing the supplies, the government employed what state officials described as “force majeure” to breach existing contracts and carry off the goods.
But in Washington D.C., Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that the federal government is not a “shipping clerk” for the states, and both he and son-in-law Jared Kushner have made it clear that the federal stockpile of masks, ventilators, and other gear is just that—a federal stockpile. States be damned.
Who is buying these supplies? And what the hell are they doing with them?
it seems unlikely that all the purloined protective gear is going to the national stockpile in the first place. Though, as the Boston Globe reports, Massachusetts officials managed to smuggle in vital supplies by hiding them in the New England Patriots team plane, that doesn’t explain why they had to do this. What happened in New York harbor goes beyond just the already incredible spectacle of the federal government outbidding the states in a pointless, uncoordinated free-for-all. They confiscated, seized, stole equipment that had already been purchased by the state. And all of this seems to have happened without explanation of the authority under which it was taking place, or the reason why those masks were more necessary … wherever they went.
Why are states being forced to sneak in equipment under the threat that it might be taken away by a federal government that has simultaneously made it clear that states are not getting that equipment back?
In the German case, it seems the masks had been manufactured by American company 3M—though a large number of 3M’s masks are being produced in Singapore or Mexico for markets outside the United States. Trump has recently been pointing at that company as a bad actor and used emergency authority to order it to stop shipping equipment overseas—even though Trump hasn’t implemented any general provisions that would prevent companies for fulfilling contracts for protective gear overseas. In fact, there has been a large and active market of U.S. equipment being shipped out of the country since the coronavirus crisis began. Also, the FDA has pointedly not used emergency authority to approve import of masks directly from the companies who actually make them for 3M. All of which seems like perfect chaos.
Where did the masks, which were intended for Germany’s police force, actually go? The BBC says they were “presumably diverted to the US.” Trump may have been discussing this same shipment when he said that the U.S. had “taken custody of nearly 200,000 N95 respirators, 130,000 surgical masks and 600,000 gloves.” However, Trump didn’t say where this occurred, and the list doesn’t match what Germany says was taken.
To make sure they can get masks without interference, French officials have also had to go to alternate routes and move materials in secret. Who is buying up their supplies before they can be loaded on a plane? Are the “Americans” with piles of money spending government dollars, or are they private actors feeding the burgeoning market for pandemic profiteers? It’s all completely unclear. The French masks were being sought by an organization providing them for caregivers at nursing home, so they were especially vital. According to a French official, “Masks are becoming scarce, and Americans buy them everywhere they find them, no matter what the price, it was confirmed, on condition of anonymity, in one of the regions victims of the process. They pay double the cash before they even see the goods.”
Trump may say that he’s “not a shipping clerk” for the states, but he certainly seems to be collecting a lot of masks for … someone. Are they going to Galt’s Gulch? David Geffen’s yacht? Mar-a-Lago? Is Donald Trump taking the profit off those ads for protective gear that are probably bracketing your screen right this moment?
Then there is the curious comments made by Jared Kushner that caused his minions to change the government website.
President Donald Trump’s top adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner insisted on Thursday that the government had not built up a national stockpile of medical equipment for states to use during threats like the coronavirus since those states have strategic reserves of their own.
The remark drew raised eyebrows from experts, considering presidents have dispersed supplies from the national strategic stockpiles for use by states dozens of times over the last twenty years. In fact, the Trump administration itself has dipped into the federal reserves to help states in need. Most notably, in 2017, the administration used the stockpile to send materials such as beds and medical equipment to states ravaged by Hurricane Harvey.
In case you didn't catch that ... military supply planes are bringing in equipment that they are then giving to private firms so that the various states can compete to purchase supplies. The government is purchasing supplies at lower cost and then funneling the supplies to private firms who are selling at higher costs. WTF is going on?
Click here for a story on the history of how the administration "bungled" the federal response to the coronavirus.
Saturday, 4 April 2020 at 10h 52m 59s
Identifying Nutritional Deficiencies Through Nails, Skin, & Hair
Interesting video by Dr. Eric Berg.
If you eat a lot of "processed food" and/or drink a lot of "processed beverages" (including gatorade & Red Bull) you probably have Nutritional Deficiencies. If the beverages you drink has more than 2 ingredients than that beverage is processed.
Saturday, 4 April 2020 at 9h 25m 44s
Shut up Devin Nunes
Watch Governor Newsom politely toss him to the curb.