Why is SARS 2002 considered an EPIDEMIC and not a PANDEMIC like COVID-19?

I'm separating my response from Trump's failure to take specific actions as President--like using the Defense Production Act.

The worst result of his denial is the political energy given to Trumper covidiots. They're undermining efforts to suppress the virus as has been done in countries like Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and even Canada. My wife and I chose to ride out the pandemic in British Columbia and this is where things stand there now...



B.C. (with 5m people) never went to a full shutdown and is on the way to suppressing the virus.

Trump also failed to proactively get people onside by saying how important it is for the economy that business and consumers begin to think about how to adapt until we have a vaccine and/or effective treatments.

He could have used the Defense Production Act to force manufacturers to produce protective equipment like the respirator above. They won't in many cases switch production from what they're doing unless government either stockpiles respirators--a lot of people may not buy them even though they're reasonably inexpensive, and likely wouldn't if we get an effective treatment or vaccine.

I included a picture of a respirator so people can see how inexpensive they are to make.

They are, but we might be able to get closer to normal after the lockdowns (or instead of them) by using respirators to cut transmission instead of retreating into lockdowns.

The feds can put a lot of resources into testing and tracing in a state like South Dakota that had a huge outbreak at a meatpacking plant.

I also mean businesses that can operate but aren't now.

You won't have meat if the packing plants don't have enough workers to stay open.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

You mean the protestors who are calling for reopening? How do you know that each and every one of them are Trump supporters?

Okay... great, but why are you telling me this?

Because business and consumers haven't thought about that without Trump telling them to think about it? I'm pretty sure that people can think for themselves, just as I'm sure you have.

Was there a shortage of them in the end?

That was a 3M respirator for sale on Amazon that you posted.

Oh, you mean so that everyone would walk around with a respirator?

Is the South Dakota governor calling for this?

When are you saying that Trump should have told business "they had to prepare for operations in an environment of physical distancing?" January, February?

Oh I see, I thought that you meant food safety, not food security. So has food production reduced dramatically?

 

I assume that you understand now.

 

Do you think that it's a pandemic if a national government says so?

 

No, but I think they have much greater sway in the matter than the WHO. If there's a conflict between the two the WHO loses.

 

No, I mean covidiots whose way of protesting is helping spread SARS-CoV-2, not people who are calling for reopening parts of the economy. I'm calling for a more balanced approach like they've had in British Columbia where the virus has been largely contained without a strict lockdown.

Most of those who protest by deliberately flaunting social distancing rules appear to be Trump supporters. Perhaps the protests been organized on social media.

Because not everyone who wants to ease restrictions is a covidiot. I used British Columbia as an example of a North American location where the people continue visiting parks, many stores are open, etc.

My take is that some businesses under financial pressure are hoping against hope Trump will somehow save them from having to make costly changes. Trump could stop zigzagging on the goal of suppressing the virus.

There's a shortage right now. If you can't easily buy one at a reasonable price, we don't have enough. If we don't have them for front-line workers, we don't have enough.

Yes, they might if we have an outbreak in an area to cut transmission rates so we can get back to business as usual more quickly.

That was before COVID-19 to show what they actually cost when they aren't in short supply. They're not easily had now.

Don't know. It may not make sense to ask for what isn't available and might embarrass the leader of your party.

Probably January, but certainly by February.

Not yet.

We'll see what happens if we can't suppress SARS-CoV-2 because people are deliberately undermining efforts to socially distance.

 

@LangleyMan, seriously - how can you be bothered with constantly double quoting? I thought that I was doing well with MY level of quoting, but I've got nothing on you! You're making me feel that I should do it too - kind of to 'return the favour', because it does help to remember what has been said!

 

Do you have an example of one of these types of protests which are not protesting the lockdown? What the hell are they protesting about if not that?

What, are you seeing a bunch of MAGA hats or something?

Well how could Trump "save" them exactly?

How is he "zigzagging?"

I got confused between ventilator and respirator. Ventilators are not in short supply, right?

Then you're calling for a policy to be implemented in South Dakota without even knowing that it's needed. It's just simply your opinion, right?

 

They keep saying they want to go back to work. Well, the government is not going to allow businesses to operate that are likely to spread COVID-19. Many of them won't have many customers as long as COVID-19 is widespread, so it wouldn't matter if government let them operate.

Now, if we get the number of new infections down by social distancing--that's what the protests undermine--we can open businesses that can operate without spreading the virus. Can we get it down? Yes, British Columbia...



Can you visit British Columbia? Probably not. If they let you in, you'll be quarantined for two weeks. Cross BC to get to Alaska? No.

I used British Columbia as an example of a North American location where the people continue visiting parks, many stores are open, etc.

You can't set out rules for reopening at the same time you encourage protests against keeping them closed until a state meets those rules. I think some hope Trump will force open the economy and they can operate as they have in the past.

Of course, it's needed.

https://www.vpr.org/post/we-asked-all-50-states-about-their-contact-tracing-capacity-heres-what-we-learned#stream/0

 

I'm confused. You said "I mean covidiots whose way of protesting is helping spread SARS-CoV-2, NOT people who are calling for reopening parts of the economy." Now you're saying that their protests are about wanting to get back to work. So which is it?

Well those people must be under the impression that the federal government can tell state governments what to do.

Are any governors calling on the feds to resource testing and tracing?

 

A covidiot is someone who deliberately violates social distancing guidelines to register their protest, whether that protest is about the guidelines, shutting of some types of businesses, or any other collection of grievances about their rights.

These protests are hardly spontaneous and appear to be organized and/or encouraged by Trump and his supporters. I include Trump because he's certainly egging them on.

Trump set out the guidelines. At the same time, he's encouraging protests against states trying to follow the guidelines. Why is he making recommendations to states on the one hand and encouraging protests against them on the other. He's either dumber than a sack of hammers or dishonest.

Some did initially, but I suspect Republican governors are afraid asking now will incur the Orange Oaf's wrath, and that both Republican and Democratic governors don't trust the White House to do it correctly, or even do it at all as discontinuing tracing might become a political decision.

 

Again, what are you saying that they are CALLING for? You said that they are "NOT people who are calling for reopening parts of the economy."

Oh come on. He sent out one single INSANELY VAGUE tweet which said "liberate." Yes it was silly, but don't pretend that it was significant. He didn't even mention the protests.

When you talk about the feds putting "resources into testing and tracing", you're talking about funding aren't you?

So is Trump in complete control over all of these things? I was under the impression that the United States government was composed of various departments and agencies. If what you're telling me is that one single person (the President) is in charge of the country independently, then I can't believe that you even still have a country after all of these hundreds of years!

 

One more time... "A covidiot is someone who deliberately violates social distancing guidelines to register their protest..." I don't care what motivates their protest.

He was egging them on. We all know that.

Trump set out the guidelines. At the same time, he's encouraging protests against states trying to follow the guidelines. Why is he making recommendations to states on the one hand and encouraging protests against them on the other. He's either dumber than a sack of hammers or dishonest.

Some did initially, but I suspect Republican governors are afraid asking now will incur the Orange Oaf's wrath, and that both Republican and Democratic governors don't trust the White House to do it correctly, or even do it at all as discontinuing tracing might become a political decision.

Straw man Alert!

Trying to laugh it off?

Why don't we have a President using the Defense Production Act to force companies to produce PPE like the mask that was available on Amazon? Why shouldn't grocery store clerks have access to a mask with a HEPA filter? Why shouldn't people have access to these masks?

 

You assumed that they are "NOT people who are calling for reopening parts of the economy." I can't understand what else you think they were protesting about.

Sending out ONE single INSANELY VAGUE tweet which which just said "liberate" is not encouraging protests against states.

Having over 300 million people walking around in PPE is not policy at the moment.

My understanding is that they are being saved for healthcare workers.

 

There are a lot of people who want to reopen parts of the economy who aren't covidiots.

Of course, it is. He's pressuring governors into opening their state economy.

It won't work because COVID-19 cases will jump and scare a substantial portion of the public into self-isolation. So, we're going to have a lot of COVID-19 and a lot scared people who won't being spending much money.

The governors most afraid of Trump are Republicans and they're going to get the most heat.

Why don't we have a President using the Defense Production Act to force companies to produce PPE like the mask that was available on Amazon? Why shouldn't grocery store clerks have access to a mask with a HEPA filter? Why shouldn't people have access to these masks?

Obtuse crap. The masks would be used to quickly control transmission in an area and protect people (and the health care system) that is taking care of COVID-19 patients for free. It would be a lot cheaper to give people n100 masks with HEPA filters than treat them in hospitals.

Do you like your health care? What do you think will happen if a lot of American families get medical bills for ten days in the ICU, five on a ventilator, and then have their mother or father die? Do you really think they're going to pay up?

Instead of giving their employers enough money to keep them on the payroll and hold on to their heath care, they're now unemployed without enough income to buy COBRA. Millions lost their health care in the middle of a pandemic that cost them their job.

Why do we have to "save" an item we can and do make in this country? Why hasn't Trump used the Defense Production Act to get these made?

 

Sure, but it seemed that you were saying that the "covidiots" were NOT protesting because they wanted to reopen parts of the economy, but rather for something else. If you did mean that, then perhaps you've realised that you have zero evidence for that, given that you seem to be saying something different now.

"Liberate" doesn't mean that.

If there was a demand for PPE then wouldn't companies voluntarily produce it? I believe that's how capitalism works.

Well they should. Are any grocery-store-related industry bodies/workers advocacy groups calling for workers to be able to have access to masks? If not, then it would seem to be something that you've just dreamed up, although it does seem like something which would be a good idea.

I thought that COVID-19 related medical bills being covered by the government which is funding hospitals with special COVID-19 funding. Not the case?

What is buying COBRA?

Don't you mean the other way around? That they lost their healthcare BECAUSE they lost their job? Yes, I understand that most Americans get their healthcare through their employer. - but if they loose their job, I would've assumed that their healthcare doesn't instantly disappear with their job.

 

Some covidiots are protesting lockdowns, not just pushing to open the economy. Again, it's the manner of protesting that I'm talking about.

It does in this context.

No, it isn't how capitalism works. Business will not gear up to produce a lot of PPE when the possibility exists a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine will slash demand. Nor will they pay a lot of their profits to companies like 3M who hold patents on approved equipment.

Do you really think they don't want something like this?

The masks would be used to quickly control transmission in an area and protect people (and the health care system) that is taking care of COVID-19 patients for free. It would be a lot cheaper to give people n100 masks with HEPA filters than treat them in hospitals.

Do you really think hospitals won't try to stick individuals with part of the bill? What will happen to non-COVID costs when hospitals are full?

What do you think it means?

Large employers in the U.S., those with 50 or more full-time workers, are required to provide health insurance to their qualifying employees by paying a part of insurance premiums. If an employee becomes ineligible to receive an employer's health insurance benefits—which can happen for a variety of reasons (such as getting laid off or falling below a minimum threshold number of hours worked per week)—the employer may stop paying its share of the employee's health insurance premiums. In that case, COBRA allows an employee and their dependents to retain the same health insurance coverage for a limited period of time, provided they are willing to pay for it on their own.

Under COBRA, former employees, spouses, former spouses, and dependent children must be offered the option of continued health insurance coverage at group rates, which otherwise would be terminated. While these individuals are likely to pay more for health insurance coverage through COBRA than they did as employees (because the employer will no longer pay a portion of the premium costs), COBRA coverage might be less expensive than an individual health insurance plan would be.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insurance/11/intro-cobra-health-insurance.asp​

Why would you assume their health care doesn't disappear when they lose their employer provided health care?

 

As part of the Defence Production Act, can't patents be temporarily scrapped? I would assume so considering that it's powerful enough to literally FORCE companies to produce things as you are suggesting should happen. Forcing companies to produce something is a WAY more authoritarian than temporarily removing a company's patent protection.

Why is what I think relevant? Again, are any grocery-store-related industry bodies/workers advocacy groups calling for workers to be able to have access to masks? If not, then it would seem to be something that you've just dreamed up.

No idea. Do you? If so, what leads you to this belief?

Why would it make a difference if the hospitals are full? Whether or not the hospitals are full or not, if the medical issue is non-COVID related, then I imagine that it will be the same as it was pre-COVID, that people will either be covered by their health insurance or have to pay out of their pocket if the medical treatment isn't covered my medicare or medicaid. Do I have this correct?

Well my assumption was correct wasn't it? Given that you have shown what COBRA does. From reading what you provided, it seems that if someone loses their job, COBRA kicks in if the former employee is willing to pay for it. I was actually thinking that the system may have been that in order to adjust to unemployment after being employed for a certain period of time, a former employee is protected by their insurance continuing without them having to pay. I wouldn't have thought that their former employer would necessarily be footing the bill, but perhaps government or just the insurance companies themselves not getting the premiums for a month or two. This would seem like a sensible, reasonable system.

 

IMO, you should give this a quick read:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950

Yes, "grocery-store-related industry bodies/workers advocacy groups" have called for better PPE.

The masks would be used to quickly control transmission in an area and protect people (and the health care system) that is taking care of COVID-19 patients for free. It would be a lot cheaper to give people n100 masks with HEPA filters than treat them in hospitals.

For the same reason a lot of doctors don't take Medicare patients. Rural hospitals will try to pass along the costs the feds won't cover.

Fat chance of an employer paying if the business is closed.

As I said, a lot of people can't afford COBRA and have no heath care.

 

Not zero, but very, very little. Even within Asia outbreaks were confined to a handful of nations. An outbreak confined to one part of one continent isn't worldwide, and thus not a pandemic.

 

So outside of Asia, there were no "outbreaks?" Just SOME transmission?

 

Very little transmission. A handful of cases at most.....but either you know this or you should.

 

My point is that it wasn't as you said, just "an outbreak confined to one part of one continent."

 

Look, I'm really not interested in getting involved in one of your mindless arguments. You are clearly an intelligent person, which makes it impossible to comprehend why you would spent your spare time in an endless succession of one line posts quibbling over definitions.

You have been provided with sufficient information to answer your original question. If you choose to ignore that in favour of an endless game of parsing & posting then good luck to you. I'm out.

If you ever decide you want to argue like a grown up - more than one line at a time and focusing on the argument rather than making people argue over one word at a time - then it might be worth my time to engage.

 

I'm not disputing that it wasn't a pandemic, I'm simply making the point that what you said is inaccurate. It wasn't merely "an outbreak confined to one part of one continent."