U.S. to close..

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I have an idea for pushing US vaccine uptake north of 90%: drop coverage of COVID-19 illness from all insurance plans.

They tried similar during prohibition...lacing alcohol with poison...lots of dead people. People still bought bootleg alcohol.

Of course, you are solving a non-existent problem. For the next few months, the line waiting for the vaccine is bigger than the available number of doses. By the time, we have more doses than people waiting, it's going to be a non-issue as the virus will be fading away.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

It was an intentional choice to lie about mask effectiveness. That falls outside of oops, we didn't have a plan and didn't understand.

But if you get caught in a lie, doubling down and refusing to admit it was a lie, only makes people more distrustful. You come out and openly admit you F#%# Up and are trying to make it right.

OK, I see your point. I can't disagree.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Singularity

I completely agree with this, but I don't agree that prohibiting the sale of N95 masks would have prevented N95s from being sucked into the general population (i.e. away from front-line folks, principally medical). People went to fisticuffs over so little as toilet paper. So how to say "where a mask but not the N95 ones, they're for medical"? That's sort of like telling the mob "okay, everyone needs to grab a parachute and jump out of the plane as the wings are about to fall off. But the medical people get first dibs at the modern parachutes, everyone else grab a WWI surplus chute."

You can disagree with me here, but I think we can both agree that some % of N95 in the supply chain got sucked away in the first place, and I'm biased to say that whatever % that was...was too much.

The boy who cried wolf thing is most correct. Mixed-messaging, poor preparation and leadership by CDC (not orange guy) is the murderer who didn't go to jail here. For that matter, because of orange guy, the murders are practically the heroes. People like their villains where sometimes the supreme doofus distracts from the cunningly negligent/incompetent.

Most CDCs around the world will have to examine their epidemic / pandemic responses after all this dies down. No doubt given the time spread , next time we won’t be prepared either

However Ive followed the CDC , ECDC , & WHO outpourings. Were they consistent , no they were not , mainly because public health was not prepared and little was known about the spread mechanisms . Certainly in Europe , based on the Italian experience , the main concern was overwhelming ICU capacity , and most initial public health advice was aimed at that . This was especially true of countries with below par icu capacity

Advice from public health was also clearly influenced by political pressure , such pressure was either overtly applied or covertly applied, ( reopening schools being a key inflection point ) , this often lead to differences in advice and of course the media love to play on differences

It was clear that public health advice begin trying to take decisions solely on “ data based analysis “ , which the early focus on “ numbers” , however this tended to introduce too much lag time in decisions , it’s noticeable thatb2nd wave responses are largely time related rather then wait for the outcome data. Of course that’s because public health better understands the disease progression and is trying to be proactive rather then reactive in the first wave

Having listened to Blix and Fauci , I’ve found their advice has largely been consistent with European public health advice

But what’s different, uniquely in the “ western world” has been Trumps concerted attempts to either wish Covid away ( Kung Flu etc ) , trivialise it’s impact , or actively sideline his public health officials and their advise and to compound that by adding his own wacko advise.

This was clearly done because trump was ( rightly ) scared that the economy and back lash would damage his re-election and trump is a psychopathic narcissist, he only cares about himself and he will sacrifice any moral perspective to further his own personal gain.

Covid sadly can’t be “ fired “ , or doesn’t jump when Donald says how high , hence of course as a result of the chaotic US response, it has run rampant. Yet the US clearly has the economic , organisational and technical ability to be a leader in Covid handling

The sad thing is that once you politicise public health, your supporters see all contrary advise as fake and the message is totally lost
Contrast the position the US would have been in if there was a concentrated and consistent federal and state response

The CDC is perhaps the worlds foremost authority of these types of issues , yet it has been denigrated by its own countries administration , that’s not good in any mans language

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

They tried similar during prohibition...lacing alcohol with poison...lots of dead people. People still bought bootleg alcohol.

Of course, you are solving a non-existent problem. For the next few months, the line waiting for the vaccine is bigger than the available number of doses. By the time, we have more doses than people waiting, it's going to be a non-issue as the virus will be fading away.

Correct , people don’t realise that huge volumes have already been manufactured awaiting approval , the main issue isnt availability , it’s , like in war, logistics

Here there no line , they come to you

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Most CDCs around the world will have to examine their epidemic / pandemic responses after all this dies down. No doubt given the time spread , next time we won’t be prepared either

However Ive followed the CDC , ECDC , & WHO outpourings. Were they consistent , no they were not , mainly because public health was not prepared and little was known about the spread mechanisms . Certainly in Europe , based on the Italian experience , the main concern was overwhelming ICU capacity , and most initial public health advice was aimed at that . This was especially true of countries with below par icu capacity

Advice from public health was also clearly influenced by political pressure , such pressure was either overtly applied or covertly applied, ( reopening schools being a key inflection point ) , this often lead to differences in advice and of course the media love to play on differences

It was clear that public health advice begin trying to take decisions solely on “ data based analysis “ , which the early focus on “ numbers” , however this tended to introduce too much lag time in decisions , it’s noticeable thatb2nd wave responses are largely time related rather then wait for the outcome data. Of course that’s because public health better understands the disease progression and is trying to be proactive rather then reactive in the first wave

Having listened to Blix and Fauci , I’ve found their advice has largely been consistent with European public health advice

But what’s different, uniquely in the “ western world” has been Trumps concerted attempts to either wish Covid away ( Kung Flu etc ) , trivialise it’s impact , or actively sideline his public health officials and their advise and to compound that by adding his own wacko advise.

This was clearly done because trump was ( rightly ) scared that the economy and back lash would damage his re-election and trump is a psychopathic narcissist, he only cares about himself and he will sacrifice any moral perspective to further his own personal gain.

Covid sadly can’t be “ fired “ , or doesn’t jump when Donald says how high , hence of course as a result of the chaotic US response, it has run rampant.

The sad thing is that once you politicise public health, your supporters see all contrary advise as fake and the message is totally lost
Contrast the position the US would have been in if there was a concentrated and consistent federal and state response

The CDC is perhaps the worlds foremost authority of these types of issues , yet it has been denigrated by its own countries administration , that’s not good in any mans language

I generally agree with all of this, but one question --

What exactly is wrong, in practical terms, about the pandemic response in the U.S.? The political culture of course is horrible, and other than the Operation Warp Speed, apparently nothing of any value came from the Executive Branch. But the U.S. is a federal republic like Germany, with most of policymaking done on the state, not level. So what prevented the states from formulating and implementing good policy?

I have been studying Minnesota, which is interesting to me since this state is largely settled by Swedish and Finnish immigrants, and has climate and demographics and culture a lot like the Nordic countries. There is a lot of information about pandemic measures on the Minnesota state government site, and it looks pretty good to me.

So what's the actual deal?

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Some medical grade masks would have made it out to the general public anyway, with a prohibition on sales (they did even with the mixed messages as many people understood they were being a fed a line of BS).

But a prohibition on sales to the general public would have had similar impacts on availability for medical professionals (probably better)....all without the mixed messages. In many ways, it would have been easier as you could more easily trace manufacturers & sellers and hold the accountable if they weren't following the rules.

No disagreement with your logic. I'm admittedly biased to make worse assumptions about certain factors, including a relative lack of teeth to enforce regulations in the first place, particularly on such widely dispersed small-object sized goods with a high gray/black market value in the midst of a panic.

But separate from all that, there is the larger calculus of CDC's basic approach with a complicated twist about masks: "How much will it raise a panic if we ~ban sale of N95s. How much will that effect the economy, etc." Summarizing much, CDC's approach from the beginning that was "we have no evidence of _______, therefore we must be very careful about doing anything that would cause more harm than good" (e.g. harm to the economy, panic, societal disruption, etc).

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I generally agree with all of this, but one question --

What exactly is wrong, in practical terms, about the pandemic response in the U.S.? The political culture of course is horrible, and other than the Operation Warp Speed, apparently nothing of any value came from the Executive Branch. But the U.S. is a federal republic like Germany, with most of policymaking done on the state, not level. So what prevented the states from formulating and implementing good policy?

I have been studying Minnesota, which is interesting to me since this state is largely settled by Swedish and Finnish immigrants, and has climate and demographics and culture a lot like the Nordic countries. There is a lot of information about pandemic measures on the Minnesota state government site, and it looks pretty good to me.

So what's the actual deal?

I'm not going to suggest the US political response has been great by any means but if the following is to be believed, even in a country that has done well by many accounts, there is political infighting.

There has long been a strong political faction in Germany wanting a stronger EU (which Germany tends to dominate coincidentally)...Since emergency approval is at the state level in the EU, the EU can't issue emergency approval...hence a political standoff appears to be delaying approval of the vaccine.

https://news.yahoo.com/eu-bring-forw...144258914.html

Of course, I didn't get why it took so long in the US after it was obvious, it was going to be approved. The people on the committees had nothing more important to do and the meetings could all be held remotely, so travel to get everyone into the same room wasn't an issue. If they needed information, those with the info would have dropped everything to get it to them.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Singularity

But separate from all that, there is the larger calculus of CDC's basic approach with a complicated twist about masks: "How much will it raise a panic if we ~ban sale of N95s. How much will that effect the economy, etc." Summarizing much, CDC's approach from the beginning that was "we have no evidence of _______, therefore we must be very careful about doing anything that would cause more harm than good" (e.g. harm to the economy, panic, societal disruption, etc).

We were closing down airports and businesses. There were a host of major panic inducing govt responses. I doubt reserving masks for medical professionals would have created any additional panic.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Things change, good leadership adapts to that change , hence advise and rules change over time as events and situations unfold

Our leaders are sadly not infallible, I’ve met our prime minister in a pub , he’s just as infallible as me

There is a difference between being infallible and outright lying.

Also, you can adapt without lying.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

OK, I see your point. I can't disagree [that US authorities initially lied about mask effectiveness].

Sorry, nowhere can I find where they actually lied to the public about "mask effectiveness". I do see people in this thread cherry-picking quotes to manufacture or bolster this impression. A page or so back I linked to CNN coverage from end of February/early March which presented longer quotes from the head people.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

What exactly is wrong, in practical terms, about the pandemic response in the U.S.? The political culture of course is horrible, and other than the Operation Warp Speed, apparently nothing of any value came from the Executive Branch. But the U.S. is a federal republic like Germany, with most of policymaking done on the state, not level. So what prevented the states from formulating and implementing good policy?

First, you'd need an assessment of the effectiveness of one federal and 50+ different response plans. Singularity's opinion there is quite low, and he knows this stuff better than most. But past that... the US results can also be explained by two words: acceptance and compliance.

I mean, if people are still twisting themselves into knots (as above re masks) to blame everything on "gummint"... there's little desire from a significant percentage of the US public to abandon partisan games long enough to be responsible, and the rest are left confused by the conflicting coverage (eg Faux vs CNN)

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I'm not going to suggest the US political response has been great by any means but if the following is to be believed, even in a country that has done well by many accounts, there is political infighting.

There has long been a strong political faction in Germany wanting a stronger EU (which Germany tends to dominate coincidentally)...Since emergency approval is at the state level in the EU, the EU can't issue emergency approval...hence a political standoff appears to be delaying approval of the vaccine.

https://news.yahoo.com/eu-bring-forw...144258914.html

Of course, I didn't get why it took so long in the US after it was obvious, it was going to be approved. The people on the committees had nothing more important to do and the meetings could all be held remotely, so travel to get everyone into the same room wasn't an issue. If they needed information, those with the info would have dropped everything to get it to them.

There is actually a strong movement in Germany for a weaker EU or at least “ two speed EU “ not the other way around , that’s the public mood not the political mood

In the EU , Medicine approval is always at a national level , member states have always had the right to locally approve drugs. This is how the UK, while still within the EMA umbrella was able to approve the vaccine. The Germans could have done something similar if they wished

However it has become custom and practice ( and it saves companies applying to individual countries ) to allow the EMA to approve , and for EU national medicines boards to follow suit. Merkel was quite right to state they were waiting for EMA approval to prevent the unedifying sight of individual countries running around trying to get Phizer to make individual applications etc.

Also EU purchases of the vaccine are being done centrally , so it’s further logic to approve it centrally

But there is no political stand-off , the Uk is not buying centrally and had to make Phizer apply locally , it would not have made sense for the Germans to do so, as while they might approve it quicker , they won’t get it quicker

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

. . . But past that... the US results can also be explained by two words: acceptance and compliance.

I mean, if people are still twisting themselves into knots (as above re masks) to blame everything on "gummint"... there's little desire from a significant percentage of the US public to abandon partisan games long enough to be responsible, and the rest are left confused by the conflicting coverage (eg Faux vs CNN)

Sounds reasonable, but specifically, what?


Was it also like that in say Minnesota, a deep blue state with apparently very well run state government?


We talk a lot in generalities on here, and that's fine for what it is, but what are the specific failures?

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

We were closing down airports and businesses. There were a host of major panic inducing govt responses. I doubt reserving masks for medical professionals would have created any additional panic.

It's one thing to tell people we're closing down certain businesses and another to suggest that the air is not safe to breath.

Otherwise I suggest that empathy for the medical folks...even in the worst of days....has not prevented people from conducting themselves in a manner that is known to be harmful (where I mean engaging in uselessly risky behavior...e.g. rallies). Too large a percentage of frogs are comfortable with boiling water, no matter who needs to clean up the mess....they get paid anyway, right? It's their job, hospitals are designed to run at maximum capacity, and so-forth.

[Franziska]

@goboatingnow

Actually, while you are right regarding the common EU approval.

The statement:

"There is actually a strong movement in Germany for a weaker EU or at least “ two speed EU “ not the other way around , that’s the public mood not the political mood".

is not correct when it comes to the phrase the Germans want a weaker EU.

That might be right for some right wing AFD voters but most certainly not the majority.
All large parties, CDU, CSU, FDP, Green Party and SPD are clearly supporting and backing the EU and a large proportion of the population does this too.

Why do I know that? Easy, I live in Germany.

What many miss though is that the EU can take faster decisions and that not all 27 member states need to agree on each and everything to take decisions. This is really a big burden for the current EU. We do need reforms.
Regarding the two spped Europe, well, you may be right there. Maybe those countries which take pride in democracy and civil rights should firm a more united core.
If there are countries that are not supporting those common values we should invite them to think about whether this is the right way, but we should also allow them to leave should they decide so.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

There is actually a strong movement in Germany for a weaker EU or at least “ two speed EU “ not the other way around , that’s the public mood not the political mood

In the EU , Medicine approval is always at a national level , member states have always had the right to locally approve drugs. This is how the UK, while still within the EMA umbrella was able to approve the vaccine. The Germans could have done something similar if they wished

However it has become custom and practice ( and it saves companies applying to individual countries ) to allow the EMA to approve , and for EU national medicines boards to follow suit. Merkel was quite right to state they were waiting for EMA approval to prevent the unedifying sight of individual countries running around trying to get Phizer to make individual applications etc.

Also EU purchases of the vaccine are being done centrally , so it’s further logic to approve it centrally

But there is no political stand-off , the Uk is not buying centrally and had to make Phizer apply locally , it would not have made sense for the Germans to do so, as while they might approve it quicker , they won’t get it quicker

I didn't mean to imply Germany is a monolithic entity. There are factions all around...but we are talking about politics, so what the politicians do is what counts and they still are have a pretty strong Pro-EU stance (though as you indicate the public is starting to push back).

The rest of your comment basically mirrors the article and in normal times, a single central process is more efficient. But as you say, the German state has the right to issue an emergency authorization but apparently for political reasons to bolster the EU, they have chosen to wait.

I have no doubt if Germany gave emergency authorization, Phizer would have started shipping as soon as it was official even if the EU as a whole hadn't approved.