Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Dwight Giles via Mercedes]

Yes that is the historical record.

Dwight Giles Jr.
Wickford RI

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 8:34 PM OK Don via Mercedes 
wrote:

> I read somewhere that the Spanish Flu originated in Kansas ... Spain was
> neutral at the time, so published news about the flu which warring
> countries did not for moral reasons, and others.
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
> >  Which was interesting because referring to pandemics by their country of
> > origin is very common, witness the Spanish Flu of 1918...
> > -Curt
> >
> > On Tuesday, June 16, 2020, 7:01:35 PM EDT, Mitch Haley via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Political science, AKA backlash against idiots claiming it was racist to
> > call it anything indicating its Chinese origins.
> > Mitch.
> >
> > On Tue, June 16, 2020 5:55 pm, Dwight Giles via Mercedes wrote:
> > > This is helpful
> > > Is there a scientific reason why you refer to it as Wuhan Red Death?
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
>
> --
> OK Don
>
> "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
> pause and reflect." Mark Twain
>
> “Basic research is what I’m doing when I don’t know what I am doing.”
> Wernher
> Von Braun
> 2013 F150, 18 mpg
> 2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
> 1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

Hypotheses have the origin being Kansas, East Asia (China) or Europe (France).

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/1/140123-spanish-flu-1918-china-origins-pandemic-science-health/
 


-D

> On Jun 16, 2020, at 8:34 PM, OK Don via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> I read somewhere that the Spanish Flu originated in Kansas ... Spain was
> neutral at the time, so published news about the flu which warring
> countries did not for moral reasons, and others.
> 
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
>> Which was interesting because referring to pandemics by their country of
>> origin is very common, witness the Spanish Flu of 1918...
>> -Curt
>> 
>>On Tuesday, June 16, 2020, 7:01:35 PM EDT, Mitch Haley via Mercedes <
>> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Political science, AKA backlash against idiots claiming it was racist to
>> call it anything indicating its Chinese origins.
>> Mitch.
>> 
>> On Tue, June 16, 2020 5:55 pm, Dwight Giles via Mercedes wrote:
>>> This is helpful
>>> Is there a scientific reason why you refer to it as Wuhan Red Death?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> OK Don
> 
> "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
> pause and reflect." Mark Twain
> 
> “Basic research is what I’m doing when I don’t know what I am doing.”  Wernher
> Von Braun
> 2013 F150, 18 mpg
> 2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
> 1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

Understand that the desire to document firearm injuries isn’t a “stand alone” 
research desire of the CDC, and never has been.

The CDC has a separate research arm called the “Injury Center” that has been 
around for decades. It’s focus is on prevention of injury and violence, focused 
on drug abuse (overdoses), suicide prevention and what is known as “ACEs”, or 
adverse childhood experiences such as violence, abuse or neglect. They provide 
a reporting system for public health known as “WISQARS” that has been used for 
many years as a trusted source of the leading causes of death in our country 
for research, the media and even insurance companies. This research includes 
data on deaths from firearms.

The CDC has never “agitated” for research on firearm injuries. It’s been doing 
it for decades.

When the Dickey Amendment was passed in 1997, the CDC’s funding for firearms 
research was cut by the amount of funding from the CDC’s budget that had been 
used in prior years for such research. Understand that the Dickey Amendment did 
not prevent the CDC from conducting firearms research, it prevented it from 
conducting any research that would “advocate or promote gun control”.

The CDC still collects data on firearm deaths, but they do not conduct public 
health research on the effects of firearms on our society. They have a very 
limited discretionary budget to dedicate to firearm violence research and 
prevention. What this really filters down to is preventing the CDC from 
conducting research that could lead to an understanding of the issues of gun 
violence and how to reduce the rate of firearm related injuries and deaths.

Comprehensive research on firearm related injuries could answer a lot of 
questions as to how to motivate people to store guns safely, how to promote or 
teach gun safety, etc.

Just like seat belts, ABS and airbags, all of which were the products of 
research on deaths related to automobile accidents and resulted in fewer 
deaths, research related to firearm injuries could provide much the same means 
of interventions. Public health is not about reducing risk, it’s about making 
things safer. Think reduced tobacco use, bike helmets, fences around pools. 
These don’t eliminate hazards, they make them safer.

Interestingly enough, Dickey co-wrote an op-ed piece in the Washington Post in 
2015 that his actions were wrong. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/time-for-collaboration-on-gun-research/2015/12/25/f989cd1a-a819-11e5-bff5-905b92f5f94b_story.html
 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/time-for-collaboration-on-gun-research/2015/12/25/f989cd1a-a819-11e5-bff5-905b92f5f94b_story.html>

-D


> On Jun 16, 2020, at 5:32 PM, Greg Fiorentino via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> << How this epidemic could be unfolding as it has under the CDC's nose in its 
> own backyard is a huge black eye for the organization and I would argue for 
> the country.>>
> 
> Yes!
> 
> What I saw was that the CDC accepted the authority and lead of the WHO, and 
> the WHO was in the pocket of the CCP. That was one of the problems.
> 
> A second problem is that the CDC had become politicized. A few years back 
> some in the CDC were agitating to get involved in research on firearms 
> injuries. Prioritizing an issue that has nothing to do with virology is an 
> indication to me that they were losing their direction, much in the same way 
> that a mayor concentrating on climate change may lose sight of controlling 
> crime.
> 
> A third problem is the media reporting that makes it difficult to have good 
> data. Here I mean information and emphasis presented in the mainstream media. 
> I was watching carefully, and it looked to me like POTUS followed the advice 
> of Fauci and Birx quite closely, but that such advice was not always good 
> advice. But many reports in the media gave the impression that he did not.
> 
> Ultimately, the US response should not be measured against losses in war, but 
> against real-world results in other advanced countries. We should have done 
> better, but we were far from the worst.
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mercedes [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] On Behalf Of Karl 
> Wittnebel via Mercedes
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 2:03 PM
> To: Mercedes Discussion List
> Cc: Karl Wittnebel
> Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
> 
> Agreed about Iceland, in some sense. In general I am not a fan of such
> comparisons, but actually their per capita international travel exposure is
> far higher than ours. They had a lot of separate introductions of the
> virus, and they were travelers from many countries. The useful bit of the
> comparison is as a model of what a public health response should look like.
> Let the health department solve communicable public health problems. Fo

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[OK Don via Mercedes]

I read somewhere that the Spanish Flu originated in Kansas ... Spain was
neutral at the time, so published news about the flu which warring
countries did not for moral reasons, and others.

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

>  Which was interesting because referring to pandemics by their country of
> origin is very common, witness the Spanish Flu of 1918...
> -Curt
>
> On Tuesday, June 16, 2020, 7:01:35 PM EDT, Mitch Haley via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
>  Political science, AKA backlash against idiots claiming it was racist to
> call it anything indicating its Chinese origins.
> Mitch.
>
> On Tue, June 16, 2020 5:55 pm, Dwight Giles via Mercedes wrote:
> > This is helpful
> > Is there a scientific reason why you refer to it as Wuhan Red Death?
>
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>

-- 
OK Don

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
pause and reflect." Mark Twain

“Basic research is what I’m doing when I don’t know what I am doing.”  Wernher
Von Braun
2013 F150, 18 mpg
2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

Coronavirus is far from over. But you are right - there will always be
another epidemic. This is a good reason to invest in public health capacity
- it comes in handy for subsequent outbreaks.

A lot of this response has been driven by the novel nature of the disease.
The outbreak is still evolving. The shutdown definitely slowed the disease
down and gave us more time to deal with the outbreak. As we develop more
familiarity with the disease our responses will be more nuanced and fact
based rather than panic based.

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 2:42 PM Meade Dillon via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> Some asked a question earlier in this thread about how the Wuhan Red Death
> compares to past pandemics.  Earlier I had looked at numbers from past
> epidemics, and I was struck by the pattern that these tend to occur about
> every ten years, especially in recent history.
>
> Asian Flu, 1957-58.  116,000 US deaths, US population was ~172 million
>
> Hong Kong Flu, 1968, 100,000 US deaths, population was ~201 million
>
> Avian Flu, 1997, isolated to Hong Kong with 18 deaths
>
> SARS, 2003, world wide only ~8000 were infected and ~780 died.
>
> H1N1 swine flu, 2009-10, 12,469 US deaths, population was ~309 million
>
> MERS, Outbreak in 2012, total to date of 2494 cases, 858 deaths, mostly in
> Saudi Arabia and Korea.
>
> WRD outbreak, 2020, 119,000 US deaths so far, population is ~331 million
>
> So far, the Asian Flu of '57-'58 and the Hong Kong Flu of '68 killed a
> higher percentage of our population than the current WRD virus.  We did not
> lock down our economy and suffer a recession back then, something to
> remember the next time one of these comes around.
> -
> Max
> Charleston SC
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Curt Raymond via Mercedes]

 Which was interesting because referring to pandemics by their country of 
origin is very common, witness the Spanish Flu of 1918...
-Curt

On Tuesday, June 16, 2020, 7:01:35 PM EDT, Mitch Haley via Mercedes 
 wrote:  
 
 Political science, AKA backlash against idiots claiming it was racist to
call it anything indicating its Chinese origins.
Mitch.

On Tue, June 16, 2020 5:55 pm, Dwight Giles via Mercedes wrote:
> This is helpful
> Is there a scientific reason why you refer to it as Wuhan Red Death?



___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

  
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Mitch Haley via Mercedes]

Political science, AKA backlash against idiots claiming it was racist to
call it anything indicating its Chinese origins.
Mitch.

On Tue, June 16, 2020 5:55 pm, Dwight Giles via Mercedes wrote:
> This is helpful
> Is there a scientific reason why you refer to it as Wuhan Red Death?



___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Dwight Giles via Mercedes]

This is helpful
 Is there a scientific reason why you refer to it as Wuhan Red Death?

Dwight Giles Jr.
Wickford RI

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 5:04 PM Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> Agreed about Iceland, in some sense. In general I am not a fan of such
> comparisons, but actually their per capita international travel exposure is
> far higher than ours. They had a lot of separate introductions of the
> virus, and they were travelers from many countries. The useful bit of the
> comparison is as a model of what a public health response should look like.
> Let the health department solve communicable public health problems. For
> more details of their experience, see:
>
>
> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/06/08/how-iceland-beat-the-coronavirus
>
> The problem with the CDC is that they were not allowed to play their normal
> role in either the public facing side of this or in the response. They
> normally tell the administration what to say, rather than vice versa. Had
> they been in control the response would have been far more classic "ramp up
> the testing". True they messed up testing assay selection in the beginning,
> but they should have moved immediately to a back up plan for increasing the
> testing and this was not done. We can speculate about why this failure to
> increase testing occurred, but I would submit that it was not because a
> bunch of people at the CDC who basically live for epidemic response
> suddenly decided it was not necessary.
>
> As mentioned, neither De Blasio nor Cuomo listened to the NYC health
> department, who were telling them for over three weeks that they should be
> closing schools etc. before NYC did so. Finally when deblasio agreed to
> close schools, Cuomo stated he had no authority to do so because new jersey
> and CT needed to be involved as well and only the state can coordinate
> that. So they got into a pissing match after delaying longer than they
> should have. The results were clear. The lesson should be: listen to your
> technocrats and do what they tell you to do.
>
> There will always be disagreements about why things happen but this is how
> I see it. The CDC is world renowned or has been. It has played huge roles
> in outbreak investigation and control around the world for decades. How
> this epidemic could be unfolding as it has under the CDC's nose in its own
> backyard is a huge black eye for the organization and I would argue for the
> country. It is sad state of affairs. For whatever reason they have not been
> able to lead a world-class response to something that is their bread and
> butter.
>
> Happy to contribute whatever I can in terms of practical steps.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 10:57 AM Scott Ritchey via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
> > Karl,
> >
> > Thank you for your thoughtful and extensive reply.  The
> personal-protection
> > guidance (masks, groups, outdoors vs indoors, etc.) is particularly
> useful.
> > I agree that we need a much better National response for the day a truly
> > evil bug comes along.
> >
> > I don't think the Iceland experience is comparable to the US; Iceland is
> a
> > remote island with little international travel and a population smaller
> > than
> > Bakersfield, CA.
> >
> > I find it hard to reconcile the NYC COVID experience and preparedness
> with
> > a world-class health department.
> >
> > Finally, being retired and having a smart phone, I watched the daily
> > briefings from the COVID Task Force and Cuomo, at least until they became
> > redundant.  My recollection of the CDC doctors' role is quite different
> > from
> > your description.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >  -Original Message-
> >  From: Karl Wittnebel
> >  Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 2:04 PM
> >
> > At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
> > diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried
> out
> > by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
> > pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
> > the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
> > department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all
> in
> > telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
> > ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
> > politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
> > argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
> > take
> > any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms of
> > disease control.
> >
> > Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
> > and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
> > national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
> > York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
> > Their politicians chose 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Meade Dillon via Mercedes]

Some asked a question earlier in this thread about how the Wuhan Red Death
compares to past pandemics.  Earlier I had looked at numbers from past
epidemics, and I was struck by the pattern that these tend to occur about
every ten years, especially in recent history.

Asian Flu, 1957-58.  116,000 US deaths, US population was ~172 million

Hong Kong Flu, 1968, 100,000 US deaths, population was ~201 million

Avian Flu, 1997, isolated to Hong Kong with 18 deaths

SARS, 2003, world wide only ~8000 were infected and ~780 died.

H1N1 swine flu, 2009-10, 12,469 US deaths, population was ~309 million

MERS, Outbreak in 2012, total to date of 2494 cases, 858 deaths, mostly in
Saudi Arabia and Korea.

WRD outbreak, 2020, 119,000 US deaths so far, population is ~331 million

So far, the Asian Flu of '57-'58 and the Hong Kong Flu of '68 killed a
higher percentage of our population than the current WRD virus.  We did not
lock down our economy and suffer a recession back then, something to
remember the next time one of these comes around.
-
Max
Charleston SC
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

Agreed about Iceland, in some sense. In general I am not a fan of such
comparisons, but actually their per capita international travel exposure is
far higher than ours. They had a lot of separate introductions of the
virus, and they were travelers from many countries. The useful bit of the
comparison is as a model of what a public health response should look like.
Let the health department solve communicable public health problems. For
more details of their experience, see:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/06/08/how-iceland-beat-the-coronavirus

The problem with the CDC is that they were not allowed to play their normal
role in either the public facing side of this or in the response. They
normally tell the administration what to say, rather than vice versa. Had
they been in control the response would have been far more classic "ramp up
the testing". True they messed up testing assay selection in the beginning,
but they should have moved immediately to a back up plan for increasing the
testing and this was not done. We can speculate about why this failure to
increase testing occurred, but I would submit that it was not because a
bunch of people at the CDC who basically live for epidemic response
suddenly decided it was not necessary.

As mentioned, neither De Blasio nor Cuomo listened to the NYC health
department, who were telling them for over three weeks that they should be
closing schools etc. before NYC did so. Finally when deblasio agreed to
close schools, Cuomo stated he had no authority to do so because new jersey
and CT needed to be involved as well and only the state can coordinate
that. So they got into a pissing match after delaying longer than they
should have. The results were clear. The lesson should be: listen to your
technocrats and do what they tell you to do.

There will always be disagreements about why things happen but this is how
I see it. The CDC is world renowned or has been. It has played huge roles
in outbreak investigation and control around the world for decades. How
this epidemic could be unfolding as it has under the CDC's nose in its own
backyard is a huge black eye for the organization and I would argue for the
country. It is sad state of affairs. For whatever reason they have not been
able to lead a world-class response to something that is their bread and
butter.

Happy to contribute whatever I can in terms of practical steps.


On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 10:57 AM Scott Ritchey via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> Karl,
>
> Thank you for your thoughtful and extensive reply.  The personal-protection
> guidance (masks, groups, outdoors vs indoors, etc.) is particularly useful.
> I agree that we need a much better National response for the day a truly
> evil bug comes along.
>
> I don't think the Iceland experience is comparable to the US; Iceland is a
> remote island with little international travel and a population smaller
> than
> Bakersfield, CA.
>
> I find it hard to reconcile the NYC COVID experience and preparedness with
> a world-class health department.
>
> Finally, being retired and having a smart phone, I watched the daily
> briefings from the COVID Task Force and Cuomo, at least until they became
> redundant.  My recollection of the CDC doctors' role is quite different
> from
> your description.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Scott
>
>  -Original Message-
>  From: Karl Wittnebel
>  Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 2:04 PM
>
> At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
> diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
> by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
> pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
> the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
> department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
> telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
> ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
> politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
> argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
> take
> any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms of
> disease control.
>
> Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
> and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
> national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
> York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
> Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
> initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
> dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
> people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
> of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
> need help with technical aspects as well as 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Scott Ritchey via Mercedes]

Karl,

Thank you for your thoughtful and extensive reply.  The personal-protection
guidance (masks, groups, outdoors vs indoors, etc.) is particularly useful.
I agree that we need a much better National response for the day a truly
evil bug comes along.

I don't think the Iceland experience is comparable to the US; Iceland is a
remote island with little international travel and a population smaller than
Bakersfield, CA.

I find it hard to reconcile the NYC COVID experience and preparedness with
a world-class health department.

Finally, being retired and having a smart phone, I watched the daily
briefings from the COVID Task Force and Cuomo, at least until they became
redundant.  My recollection of the CDC doctors' role is quite different from
your description.  

Thanks.  

Scott

 -Original Message-
 From: Karl Wittnebel 
 Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 2:04 PM

At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them take
any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms of
disease control.

Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are
most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a
consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a
fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health
people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures, travel
restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working together
consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem.
Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response
entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for themselves
isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the CDC have
considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways they have
not been so far.

Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight
on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of
knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red
22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted
him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and
doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied
more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much
muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do,
mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states
what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had
the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile
and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible
for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has
definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of
it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and
policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was a
big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then declare
victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on into
election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it should,
and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a strong
chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace
interventions anyway.

The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never
going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy
would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to
fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Mitch Haley via Mercedes]

What about H3N2?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_flu_pandemic

Of course SARS-CoV was worse, and MERS-CoV a lot worse than CoV19, but
comparatively very very few people got those.

HA-MRSA killed 100k in USA in 2002, and didn't end there, but that's
bacteria, not viral.

On Sun, June 14, 2020 1:53 pm, Peter Frederick via Mercedes wrote:
> The only one we've had that gets close to the same description of
> CoVid-19 is the H1N1 flu a few years back.


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Craig via Mercedes]

On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 09:27:17 -0400 Dan Penoff via Mercedes
 wrote:

> I work with and have been trained as a part of my job to interact and
> respond with FEMA for such events, so I’m very familiar with what could
> be done and how it would be managed. No one ever gave the order or
> provided direction. This is the direct responsibility of the office of
> the President to DHS, under which FEMA acts. Period.

Every other FEMA action I have heard of required the locals (governor,
etc.) to request help, as our federal system requires.


Craig

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Mitch Haley via Mercedes]

On Mon, June 15, 2020 5:12 pm, Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes wrote:
> Timing is about right from loosening restrictions
>  2-3 weeks ago.

And how would that timing fit in with the beginning of the George Floyd
protest gatherings around May 26th?

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[archer75--- via Mercedes]

My thanks too, Karl. You've taken the time to give us very valuable information.
Gerry

On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 15:39:22 -0500
OK Don via Mercedes  wrote:

> Thanks Karl, for taking the time to give us a simple, factual, explanation.
> 
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:46 PM Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
> > At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
> > diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
> > by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
> > pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
> > the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
> > department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
> > telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
> > ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
> > politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
> > argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
> > take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms
> > of disease control.
> >
> > Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
> > and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
> > national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
> > York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
> > Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
> > initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
> > dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
> > people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
> > of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
> > need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are
> > most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a
> > consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a
> > fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health
> > people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures,
> > travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working
> > together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem.
> > Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response
> > entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for
> > themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the
> > CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways
> > they have not been so far.
> >
> > Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight
> > on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of
> > knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red
> > 22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted
> > him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and
> > doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied
> > more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much
> > muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do,
> > mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states
> > what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had
> > the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile
> > and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible
> > for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has
> > definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of
> > it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and
> > policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was
> > a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then
> > declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on
> > into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it
> > should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a
> > strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace
> > interventions anyway.
> >
> > The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never
> > going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy
> > would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to
> > fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a
> > national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate,
> > and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local
> > health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged
> > behind tremendously for unclear reasons while 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

We in CA have been loosening the reins to let this thing run a bit. Not
everyyhing is open, but more things are than before. It was really shut
down for awhile. People in town are still pretty cautious and traffic is
still way down, but picking up.

We are doing a lot of testing, and are down To about 5% positive results
now, which is borderline adequate. 3% is better to be sure you are testing
enough to pick up all cases. But we are close. You just schedule a drive up
appointment and they swab your nose in a few locations. You are supposed to
have some symptoms but everyone can get tested if they have a runny nose
etc.

LA was ticking up a bit even before things oficially opened back up. Lowest
we got was 31 cases in house and now it is back up to 43 steadily
increasing over a week. Timing is about right from loosening restrictions
2-3 weeks ago. We in socal represent the lions share of disease activity in
the state, with LA, san diego, riverside, Orange County and san Bernardino
rounding out the top 5 counties. LINK:

https://public.tableau.com/views/COVID-19PublicDashboard/Covid-19Public?:embed=y&:display_count=no&:showVizHome=no

I drove out to Santa Paula the other day, about an hour northwest, North of
Ventura. Very different feel. Ate in a restaurant and when I walked in with
a mask on everyone stared at me like I was from Mergatroid. The servers had
masks on but nobody else did. Basically nobody is masked up out there. I
suspect most of rural CA is similar. It maps well with disease activity.

I think LA county has a lot of low income people in very high density
apartment sharing situations because housing is so expensive here that
people are forced into that type of arrangement. We see a huge spread
(about 55%of cases per the website above) among Latinos and I think this
housing issue may be the main cause. I do not know if that is driving the
spread over the past week or not. 56% of total cases but 38% of total
population. I will look into the uptick a bit more but honestly that
website is not the easiest to get trend data from.

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 12:08 PM Curt Raymond  wrote:

> Hey Karl,
>
> Any idea why California has cases rising so quickly? It was interesting to
> see California do well early on but in about a week I expect to see the
> number of cases in California exceed New Jersey where the rise in cases has
> dramatically slowed.
>
> -Curt
>
> On Monday, June 15, 2020, 2:46:19 PM EDT, Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
>
> At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
> diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
> by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
> pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
> the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
> department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
> telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
> ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
> politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
> argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
> take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms
> of disease control.
>
> Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
> and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
> national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
> York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
> Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
> initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
> dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
> people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
> of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
> need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are
> most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a
> consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a
> fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health
> people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures,
> travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working
> together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem.
> Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response
> entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for
> themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the
> CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways
> they have not been so far.
>
> Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight
> on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[OK Don via Mercedes]

Thanks Karl, for taking the time to give us a simple, factual, explanation.

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:46 PM Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
> diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
> by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
> pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
> the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
> department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
> telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
> ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
> politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
> argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
> take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms
> of disease control.
>
> Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
> and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
> national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
> York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
> Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
> initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
> dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
> people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
> of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
> need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are
> most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a
> consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a
> fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health
> people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures,
> travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working
> together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem.
> Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response
> entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for
> themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the
> CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways
> they have not been so far.
>
> Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight
> on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of
> knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red
> 22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted
> him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and
> doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied
> more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much
> muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do,
> mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states
> what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had
> the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile
> and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible
> for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has
> definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of
> it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and
> policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was
> a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then
> declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on
> into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it
> should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a
> strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace
> interventions anyway.
>
> The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never
> going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy
> would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to
> fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a
> national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate,
> and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local
> health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged
> behind tremendously for unclear reasons while the disease became more and
> more established and the lockdown dragged on with no clear national
> strategy or even any defined national goals for controlling the disease.
> E.g. Do we tolerate a certain infection rate, or try for zero? Work it
> through with the states until everyone has a 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Curt Raymond via Mercedes]

 Hey Karl,
Any idea why California has cases rising so quickly? It was interesting to see 
California do well early on but in about a week I expect to see the number of 
cases in California exceed New Jersey where the rise in cases has dramatically 
slowed.
-Curt

On Monday, June 15, 2020, 2:46:19 PM EDT, Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes 
 wrote:  
 
 At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms
of disease control.

Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are
most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a
consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a
fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health
people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures,
travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working
together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem.
Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response
entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for
themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the
CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways
they have not been so far.

Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight
on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of
knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red
22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted
him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and
doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied
more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much
muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do,
mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states
what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had
the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile
and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible
for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has
definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of
it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and
policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was
a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then
declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on
into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it
should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a
strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace
interventions anyway.

The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never
going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy
would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to
fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a
national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate,
and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local
health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged
behind tremendously for unclear reasons while the disease became more and
more established and the lockdown dragged on with no clear national
strategy or even any defined national goals for controlling the disease.
E.g. Do we tolerate a certain infection rate, or try for zero? Work it

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious
diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out
by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel
pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive
the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health
department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in
telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political
ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the
politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would
argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them
take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms
of disease control.

Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources
and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on
national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New
York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance.
Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials
initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly
dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger
people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most
of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments
need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are
most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a
consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a
fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health
people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures,
travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working
together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem.
Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response
entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for
themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the
CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways
they have not been so far.

Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight
on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of
knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red
22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted
him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and
doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied
more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much
muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do,
mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states
what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had
the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile
and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible
for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has
definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of
it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and
policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was
a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then
declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on
into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it
should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a
strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace
interventions anyway.

The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never
going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy
would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to
fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a
national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate,
and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local
health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged
behind tremendously for unclear reasons while the disease became more and
more established and the lockdown dragged on with no clear national
strategy or even any defined national goals for controlling the disease.
E.g. Do we tolerate a certain infection rate, or try for zero? Work it
through with the states until everyone has a set of goals they can live
with.

I think it is a mistake to look at this through a political lens primarily.
The virus doesnt care. The two sides in this are pro human and pro virus.
Yes the talking heads will try to score political points but trying to say
the CDC or doctors or hospitals acting 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes]

Thanks, Peter.

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 1:54 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> The only one we've had that gets close to the same description of CoVid-19
> is the H1N1 flu a few years back.  That one turned out, fortunately, to be
> far less virulent and far less transmissible that early indications, so it
> was not declared a pandemic.  Certainly here it was just a bad flu season.
>
> Of course we have a vaccine that more or less works for influenzas, and
> even if the vaccine isn't exactly right, it reduces severity in most
> cases.  Don't have anything yet for this one, speculation and "educated
> guesses" aside.
>
> FEMA did not exist yet for the 1950' flu pandemic.
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Peter Frederick via Mercedes]

The only one we've had that gets close to the same description of CoVid-19 is 
the H1N1 flu a few years back.  That one turned out, fortunately, to be far 
less virulent and far less transmissible that early indications, so it was not 
declared a pandemic.  Certainly here it was just a bad flu season.

Of course we have a vaccine that more or less works for influenzas, and even if 
the vaccine isn't exactly right, it reduces severity in most cases.  Don't have 
anything yet for this one, speculation and "educated guesses" aside.

FEMA did not exist yet for the 1950' flu pandemic.
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes]

"any of the past pandemics"

What earlier pandemic can be compared to this one?

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:37 AM Meade Dillon via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> Was FEMA activated for any of the past pandemics?  What was different about
> this pandemic that rated FEMA to be activated?
>
> The main issue that I see is that we relied on a terribly flawed model at
> the start, and were operating without a clear understanding of the virus,
> and then the media began stoking the fear, and in every way that the
> President tried to lead, he was viciously attacked and resisted, called a
> racist and mocked.
> -
> Max
> Charleston SC
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 9:28 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
> > I can’t speak for Karl, but from what I’ve seen the places that were the
> > least affected were those that were aggressive about testing and contact
> > tracing as soon as things started. We may not be able to cure this
> > currently, but if we can accurately track the infections and those
> exposed
> > to it, we could control the spread far better than we currently have.
> >
> > FEMA has mobilization protocols for events such as this and they even
> > practice for it, but they weren’t mobilized nor involved for the most
> part,
> > other than being directed to intercept or impound supplies for states and
> > private entities for Federal use. FEMA also has very close coordination
> > with state, local and tribal government entities that allows them to
> > mobilize on short notice and with clearly defined framework and protocols
> > for a response to the event.
> >
> > Look up:
> >
> > NDMS (National Disaster Medical System)
> > NRCC (National Response Coordination Center)
> > DMAT (Disaster Medical Assistance Teams)
> >
> > I work with and have been trained as a part of my job to interact and
> > respond with FEMA for such events, so I’m very familiar with what could
> be
> > done and how it would be managed. No one ever gave the order or provided
> > direction. This is the direct responsibility of the office of the
> President
> > to DHS, under which FEMA acts. Period.
> >
> > -D
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 14, 2020, at 2:14 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Karl, Your comments stimulate many questions in my mind.
> > >   As individuals. What should we be doing that we are not doing
> > (behavior, supplements, etc)?
> > >   Specifically what National leadership do you mean (CDC, POTUS,
> > legislators)?
> > >   Does National leadership have jurisdiction or do state/local
> > authorities have jurisdiction?
> > > ...What has National leadership failed to do?
> > >   Is contact tracing really viable (considering the virus was
> widespread
> > before we knew it was here)?
> > >   Why were/are we (the US) so slow with tests, treatments, etc.
> > >   How does this all end?  Do we all get it eventually?  Does it die
> out?
> > >   What are we proles to make of the flip-flop guidance from the experts
> > (masks, isolate indoors, etc.)?
> > >   Who can we believe?  So much seems politically driven, even medical
> > "experts".
> > >   I'm an 70+ year old asthmatic and SWMBO is in her 80s with heart
> > issues so we are hermits, mostly.
> > > Thanks for any insights,
> > > Scott (a skeptic)
> > >
> > >> -Original Message-
> > >> From: Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes
> > >>
> > >> It isnt really a balance. The shut down was just to buy time, and it
> > worked, but
> > >> at tremendous cost. The basics of mask wearing, testing and contact
> > tracing to
> > >> isolate and quarantine positives and their contacts involve relatively
> > minimal
> > >> cost, and no threat to civil liberties. And this works. Iceland never
> > shut down at
> > >> all. They just tested lots of people from the first reported case
> > onward, and
> > >> had a team of 50 people testing and tracing the contacts and telling
> > them to
> > >> stay home for two weeks. They have close to zero daily new cases. That
> > is all
> > >> we need to do nationally, but everybody is too busy whining to get on
> > board
> > >> and there is no real leadership at the national level.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 9:08 AM Floyd Thursby via Mercedes <
> > >> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The balance that is the main challenge is how to maintain an economy,
> > >>> allow personal rights, and mitigate disease spread. Everyone has the
> > >>> answer depending on various orientations but none of them seem to
> > >>> strike the balance effectively.  I have just kinda decided to go
> about
> > >>> life, take some precautions, but recognizing sooner or later getting
> > >>> infected is a high probability no matter what.  A vaccine is a long
> > >>> time away, if it would even be effective
> > >>>
> > >>> --FT
> > >>>
> > >>> On 6/13/20 11:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes wrote:
> >  Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With
> >  

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Meade Dillon via Mercedes]

Was FEMA activated for any of the past pandemics?  What was different about
this pandemic that rated FEMA to be activated?

The main issue that I see is that we relied on a terribly flawed model at
the start, and were operating without a clear understanding of the virus,
and then the media began stoking the fear, and in every way that the
President tried to lead, he was viciously attacked and resisted, called a
racist and mocked.
-
Max
Charleston SC


On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 9:28 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> I can’t speak for Karl, but from what I’ve seen the places that were the
> least affected were those that were aggressive about testing and contact
> tracing as soon as things started. We may not be able to cure this
> currently, but if we can accurately track the infections and those exposed
> to it, we could control the spread far better than we currently have.
>
> FEMA has mobilization protocols for events such as this and they even
> practice for it, but they weren’t mobilized nor involved for the most part,
> other than being directed to intercept or impound supplies for states and
> private entities for Federal use. FEMA also has very close coordination
> with state, local and tribal government entities that allows them to
> mobilize on short notice and with clearly defined framework and protocols
> for a response to the event.
>
> Look up:
>
> NDMS (National Disaster Medical System)
> NRCC (National Response Coordination Center)
> DMAT (Disaster Medical Assistance Teams)
>
> I work with and have been trained as a part of my job to interact and
> respond with FEMA for such events, so I’m very familiar with what could be
> done and how it would be managed. No one ever gave the order or provided
> direction. This is the direct responsibility of the office of the President
> to DHS, under which FEMA acts. Period.
>
> -D
>
>
> > On Jun 14, 2020, at 2:14 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> > Karl, Your comments stimulate many questions in my mind.
> >   As individuals. What should we be doing that we are not doing
> (behavior, supplements, etc)?
> >   Specifically what National leadership do you mean (CDC, POTUS,
> legislators)?
> >   Does National leadership have jurisdiction or do state/local
> authorities have jurisdiction?
> > ...What has National leadership failed to do?
> >   Is contact tracing really viable (considering the virus was widespread
> before we knew it was here)?
> >   Why were/are we (the US) so slow with tests, treatments, etc.
> >   How does this all end?  Do we all get it eventually?  Does it die out?
> >   What are we proles to make of the flip-flop guidance from the experts
> (masks, isolate indoors, etc.)?
> >   Who can we believe?  So much seems politically driven, even medical
> "experts".
> >   I'm an 70+ year old asthmatic and SWMBO is in her 80s with heart
> issues so we are hermits, mostly.
> > Thanks for any insights,
> > Scott (a skeptic)
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes
> >>
> >> It isnt really a balance. The shut down was just to buy time, and it
> worked, but
> >> at tremendous cost. The basics of mask wearing, testing and contact
> tracing to
> >> isolate and quarantine positives and their contacts involve relatively
> minimal
> >> cost, and no threat to civil liberties. And this works. Iceland never
> shut down at
> >> all. They just tested lots of people from the first reported case
> onward, and
> >> had a team of 50 people testing and tracing the contacts and telling
> them to
> >> stay home for two weeks. They have close to zero daily new cases. That
> is all
> >> we need to do nationally, but everybody is too busy whining to get on
> board
> >> and there is no real leadership at the national level.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 9:08 AM Floyd Thursby via Mercedes <
> >> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The balance that is the main challenge is how to maintain an economy,
> >>> allow personal rights, and mitigate disease spread. Everyone has the
> >>> answer depending on various orientations but none of them seem to
> >>> strike the balance effectively.  I have just kinda decided to go about
> >>> life, take some precautions, but recognizing sooner or later getting
> >>> infected is a high probability no matter what.  A vaccine is a long
> >>> time away, if it would even be effective
> >>>
> >>> --FT
> >>>
> >>> On 6/13/20 11:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes wrote:
>  Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With
>  little to
> >>> no
>  testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.
> 
>  On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
>  mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
> >  Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+
> > deaths
> >>> in
> > the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that
> period.
> 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

I can’t speak for Karl, but from what I’ve seen the places that were the least 
affected were those that were aggressive about testing and contact tracing as 
soon as things started. We may not be able to cure this currently, but if we 
can accurately track the infections and those exposed to it, we could control 
the spread far better than we currently have.

FEMA has mobilization protocols for events such as this and they even practice 
for it, but they weren’t mobilized nor involved for the most part, other than 
being directed to intercept or impound supplies for states and private entities 
for Federal use. FEMA also has very close coordination with state, local and 
tribal government entities that allows them to mobilize on short notice and 
with clearly defined framework and protocols for a response to the event.

Look up:

NDMS (National Disaster Medical System)
NRCC (National Response Coordination Center)
DMAT (Disaster Medical Assistance Teams)

I work with and have been trained as a part of my job to interact and respond 
with FEMA for such events, so I’m very familiar with what could be done and how 
it would be managed. No one ever gave the order or provided direction. This is 
the direct responsibility of the office of the President to DHS, under which 
FEMA acts. Period.

-D


> On Jun 14, 2020, at 2:14 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Karl, Your comments stimulate many questions in my mind.
>   As individuals. What should we be doing that we are not doing (behavior, 
> supplements, etc)?
>   Specifically what National leadership do you mean (CDC, POTUS, legislators)?
>   Does National leadership have jurisdiction or do state/local authorities 
> have jurisdiction?
> ...What has National leadership failed to do?
>   Is contact tracing really viable (considering the virus was widespread 
> before we knew it was here)?
>   Why were/are we (the US) so slow with tests, treatments, etc.
>   How does this all end?  Do we all get it eventually?  Does it die out?
>   What are we proles to make of the flip-flop guidance from the experts 
> (masks, isolate indoors, etc.)?
>   Who can we believe?  So much seems politically driven, even medical 
> "experts".
>   I'm an 70+ year old asthmatic and SWMBO is in her 80s with heart issues so 
> we are hermits, mostly. 
> Thanks for any insights,
> Scott (a skeptic)
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes
>> 
>> It isnt really a balance. The shut down was just to buy time, and it worked, 
>> but
>> at tremendous cost. The basics of mask wearing, testing and contact tracing 
>> to
>> isolate and quarantine positives and their contacts involve relatively 
>> minimal
>> cost, and no threat to civil liberties. And this works. Iceland never shut 
>> down at
>> all. They just tested lots of people from the first reported case onward, and
>> had a team of 50 people testing and tracing the contacts and telling them to
>> stay home for two weeks. They have close to zero daily new cases. That is all
>> we need to do nationally, but everybody is too busy whining to get on board
>> and there is no real leadership at the national level.
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 9:08 AM Floyd Thursby via Mercedes <
>> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> The balance that is the main challenge is how to maintain an economy,
>>> allow personal rights, and mitigate disease spread. Everyone has the
>>> answer depending on various orientations but none of them seem to
>>> strike the balance effectively.  I have just kinda decided to go about
>>> life, take some precautions, but recognizing sooner or later getting
>>> infected is a high probability no matter what.  A vaccine is a long
>>> time away, if it would even be effective
>>> 
>>> --FT
>>> 
>>> On 6/13/20 11:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes wrote:
 Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With
 little to
>>> no
 testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.
 
 On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
 mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
 
>  Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+
> deaths
>>> in
> the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
> It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to
> really prove those numbers.
> Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that
>>> having
> a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
> Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having
> very low numbers in the initial 4 months.
> -Curt
> 
> On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via
> Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
>  https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
> 
> 1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies,
> the overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Scott Ritchey via Mercedes]

Karl, Your comments stimulate many questions in my mind.
   As individuals. What should we be doing that we are not doing (behavior, 
supplements, etc)?
   Specifically what National leadership do you mean (CDC, POTUS, legislators)?
   Does National leadership have jurisdiction or do state/local authorities 
have jurisdiction?
...What has National leadership failed to do?
   Is contact tracing really viable (considering the virus was widespread 
before we knew it was here)?
   Why were/are we (the US) so slow with tests, treatments, etc.
   How does this all end?  Do we all get it eventually?  Does it die out?
   What are we proles to make of the flip-flop guidance from the experts 
(masks, isolate indoors, etc.)?
   Who can we believe?  So much seems politically driven, even medical 
"experts".
   I'm an 70+ year old asthmatic and SWMBO is in her 80s with heart issues so 
we are hermits, mostly. 
Thanks for any insights,
Scott (a skeptic)

> -Original Message-
> From: Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes
> 
> It isnt really a balance. The shut down was just to buy time, and it worked, 
> but
> at tremendous cost. The basics of mask wearing, testing and contact tracing to
> isolate and quarantine positives and their contacts involve relatively minimal
> cost, and no threat to civil liberties. And this works. Iceland never shut 
> down at
> all. They just tested lots of people from the first reported case onward, and
> had a team of 50 people testing and tracing the contacts and telling them to
> stay home for two weeks. They have close to zero daily new cases. That is all
> we need to do nationally, but everybody is too busy whining to get on board
> and there is no real leadership at the national level.
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 9:08 AM Floyd Thursby via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
> > The balance that is the main challenge is how to maintain an economy,
> > allow personal rights, and mitigate disease spread. Everyone has the
> > answer depending on various orientations but none of them seem to
> > strike the balance effectively.  I have just kinda decided to go about
> > life, take some precautions, but recognizing sooner or later getting
> > infected is a high probability no matter what.  A vaccine is a long
> > time away, if it would even be effective
> >
> > --FT
> >
> > On 6/13/20 11:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes wrote:
> > > Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With
> > > little to
> > no
> > > testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
> > > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>   Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+
> > >> deaths
> > in
> > >> the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
> > >> It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to
> > >> really prove those numbers.
> > >> Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that
> > having
> > >> a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
> > >> Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having
> > >> very low numbers in the initial 4 months.
> > >> -Curt
> > >>
> > >>  On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via
> > >> Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>   https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
> > >>
> > >> 1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies,
> > >> the overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1%[
> > >> https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the
> > >> range of a strong seasonal influenza[
> > >> https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).
> > >>
> > >> 2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general
> > population
> > >> of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car
> > >> ride
> > to
> > >>
> work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1].
> > The
> > >> risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild
> > >> or
> > no
> > >> symptoms were not taken into account.
> > >>
> > >> Max Dillon
> > >> Charleston SC
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> > >>
> > >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > >>
> > >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> > >>
> > >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > >>
> > >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > --
> > --FT
> >
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To 

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

It isnt really a balance. The shut down was just to buy time, and it
worked, but at tremendous cost. The basics of mask wearing, testing and
contact tracing to isolate and quarantine positives and their contacts
involve relatively minimal cost, and no threat to civil liberties. And this
works. Iceland never shut down at all. They just tested lots of people from
the first reported case onward, and had a team of 50 people testing and
tracing the contacts and telling them to stay home for two weeks. They have
close to zero daily new cases. That is all we need to do nationally, but
everybody is too busy whining to get on board and there is no real
leadership at the national level.


On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 9:08 AM Floyd Thursby via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> The balance that is the main challenge is how to maintain an economy,
> allow personal rights, and mitigate disease spread. Everyone has the
> answer depending on various orientations but none of them seem to strike
> the balance effectively.  I have just kinda decided to go about life,
> take some precautions, but recognizing sooner or later getting infected
> is a high probability no matter what.  A vaccine is a long time away, if
> it would even be effective
>
> --FT
>
> On 6/13/20 11:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes wrote:
> > Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With little to
> no
> > testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> >>   Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+ deaths
> in
> >> the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
> >> It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to really
> >> prove those numbers.
> >> Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that
> having
> >> a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
> >> Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having very low
> >> numbers in the initial 4 months.
> >> -Curt
> >>
> >>  On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via Mercedes <
> >> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>   https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
> >>
> >> 1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the
> >> overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1%[
> >> https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the range
> >> of a strong seasonal influenza[
> >> https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).
> >>
> >> 2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general
> population
> >> of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride
> to
> >> work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1].
> The
> >> risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or
> no
> >> symptoms were not taken into account.
> >>
> >> Max Dillon
> >> Charleston SC
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>
> >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>
> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>
> >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>
> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>
> >>
> --
> --FT
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

It could. Hospitals can do a lot of things to convert non ICUs to vent
floors and redeploy staff. At some point it gets ugly. We are all waiting
for the other shoe to drop after a few weeks of loosening lockdown without
any coherent tracing system in place.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 1:16 PM Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> But if the disease spreads won't that overload the hospitals?
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:14 PM Craig via Mercedes 
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 12:19:34 -0400 Meade Dillon via Mercedes
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > Our numbers in SC are also rising, both infections and deaths, but they
> > > are still extremely low compared to places like NY.
> > >
> > > This country has suffered many pandemics in the past, we seem to get
> one
> > > about every ten years.  Sometimes we go extreme in isolation /
> > > quarantine, sometimes we just shrug and go on with life.
> >
> > The whole point of isolation, "flattening the curve", and other such
> > things was to not overload hospitals and other health care facilities.
> > It was not to stop the spread of the disease.
> >
> > It seems many have forgotten the original purpose.
> >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

Yes the hospitalization rate is lower than what everybody first thought.
That is why you didnt see filled mercy ships or whateber they are called.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 2:07 PM Clay via Mercedes 
wrote:

> That would be worth trying.  AK is all in an uproar about this silly bug.
> Daily threat assessments and confusing statistics.  The take away is that
> there are over 1000 EMPTY beds and under 50 hospitalized WRD people.  Been
> that way for ages.  The numbers are rising for infected, but that is due to
> more people coming in than any actual spread.  Except for the idiots who
> put recuperating WRD people into a care home which infected a whole passel
> of people.  Malfeasance is the greater danger than some virus.
>
>
> clay
>
> I have no pronouns please do not refer to me.
>
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2020, at 12:15 PM, Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> > But if the disease spreads won't that overload the hospitals?
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:14 PM Craig via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 12:19:34 -0400 Meade Dillon via Mercedes
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Our numbers in SC are also rising, both infections and deaths, but they
> >>> are still extremely low compared to places like NY.
> >>>
> >>> This country has suffered many pandemics in the past, we seem to get
> one
> >>> about every ten years.  Sometimes we go extreme in isolation /
> >>> quarantine, sometimes we just shrug and go on with life.
> >>
> >> The whole point of isolation, "flattening the curve", and other such
> >> things was to not overload hospitals and other health care facilities.
> >> It was not to stop the spread of the disease.
> >>
> >> It seems many have forgotten the original purpose.
> >>
> >>
> >> Craig
> >>
> >> ___
> >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>
> >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>
> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>
> >>
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
>
>
>
> clay
>
> I have no pronouns please do not refer to me.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Clay via Mercedes]

That would be worth trying.  AK is all in an uproar about this silly bug.  
Daily threat assessments and confusing statistics.  The take away is that there 
are over 1000 EMPTY beds and under 50 hospitalized WRD people.  Been that way 
for ages.  The numbers are rising for infected, but that is due to more people 
coming in than any actual spread.  Except for the idiots who put recuperating 
WRD people into a care home which infected a whole passel of people.  
Malfeasance is the greater danger than some virus.


clay 

I have no pronouns please do not refer to me.



> On Jun 13, 2020, at 12:15 PM, Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> But if the disease spreads won't that overload the hospitals?
> 
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:14 PM Craig via Mercedes 
> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 12:19:34 -0400 Meade Dillon via Mercedes
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Our numbers in SC are also rising, both infections and deaths, but they
>>> are still extremely low compared to places like NY.
>>> 
>>> This country has suffered many pandemics in the past, we seem to get one
>>> about every ten years.  Sometimes we go extreme in isolation /
>>> quarantine, sometimes we just shrug and go on with life.
>> 
>> The whole point of isolation, "flattening the curve", and other such
>> things was to not overload hospitals and other health care facilities.
>> It was not to stop the spread of the disease.
>> 
>> It seems many have forgotten the original purpose.
>> 
>> 
>> Craig
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
>> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 



clay 

I have no pronouns please do not refer to me.




___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Clay via Mercedes]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-test-false-negative-1.5610114

with false negative tests coming at over 25% there is no reliability to any of 
the data pumped out.  They even admit the surmised WRD gets the corpse declared 
as SARS-Cov2 on the death count.  Everybody is postulating and posturing about 
the truth.  It is all theatre and lies.  The first wave should have been 
allowed to proceed unimpeded and then some clamping down could take place. Now 
we get headlines proclaiming millions of lives saved by destroying the world 
economy.  May as well say it is billions.

Looking at mortality figures for British Columbia, there have been more drug 
related deaths this year than from WRD.  The record fatalities from drugs was 
170 in May 2020.  Vastly more than from some minor virus.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/overdose-deaths-bc-1.5607792

clay 

I have no pronouns please do not refer to me.



> On Jun 13, 2020, at 7:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With little to no
> testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.
> 
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
>> Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+ deaths in
>> the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
>> It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to really
>> prove those numbers.
>> Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that having
>> a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
>> Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having very low
>> numbers in the initial 4 months.
>> -Curt

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes]

But if the disease spreads won't that overload the hospitals?

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:14 PM Craig via Mercedes 
wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 12:19:34 -0400 Meade Dillon via Mercedes
>  wrote:
>
> > Our numbers in SC are also rising, both infections and deaths, but they
> > are still extremely low compared to places like NY.
> >
> > This country has suffered many pandemics in the past, we seem to get one
> > about every ten years.  Sometimes we go extreme in isolation /
> > quarantine, sometimes we just shrug and go on with life.
>
> The whole point of isolation, "flattening the curve", and other such
> things was to not overload hospitals and other health care facilities.
> It was not to stop the spread of the disease.
>
> It seems many have forgotten the original purpose.
>
>
> Craig
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Craig via Mercedes]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 12:19:34 -0400 Meade Dillon via Mercedes
 wrote:

> Our numbers in SC are also rising, both infections and deaths, but they
> are still extremely low compared to places like NY.
> 
> This country has suffered many pandemics in the past, we seem to get one
> about every ten years.  Sometimes we go extreme in isolation /
> quarantine, sometimes we just shrug and go on with life.

The whole point of isolation, "flattening the curve", and other such
things was to not overload hospitals and other health care facilities.
It was not to stop the spread of the disease.

It seems many have forgotten the original purpose.


Craig

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Meade Dillon via Mercedes]

Our numbers in SC are also rising, both infections and deaths, but they are
still extremely low compared to places like NY.

This country has suffered many pandemics in the past, we seem to get one
about every ten years.  Sometimes we go extreme in isolation / quarantine,
sometimes we just shrug and go on with life.
-
Max
Charleston SC


On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:59 AM OK Don via Mercedes 
wrote:

> Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With little to no
> testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
> >  Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+ deaths in
> > the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
> > It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to really
> > prove those numbers.
> > Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that
> having
> > a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
> > Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having very low
> > numbers in the initial 4 months.
> > -Curt
> >
> > On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> >  https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
> >
> > 1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the
> > overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1%[
> > https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the range
> > of a strong seasonal influenza[
> > https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).
> >
> > 2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general
> population
> > of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride
> to
> > work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1]. The
> > risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no
> > symptoms were not taken into account.
> >
> > Max Dillon
> > Charleston SC
> >
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
>
> --
> OK Don
>
> "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
> pause and reflect." Mark Twain
>
> “Basic research is what I’m doing when I don’t know what I am doing.”
> Wernher
> Von Braun
> 2013 F150, 18 mpg
> 2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
> 1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Floyd Thursby via Mercedes]

The balance that is the main challenge is how to maintain an economy, 
allow personal rights, and mitigate disease spread. Everyone has the 
answer depending on various orientations but none of them seem to strike 
the balance effectively.  I have just kinda decided to go about life, 
take some precautions, but recognizing sooner or later getting infected 
is a high probability no matter what.  A vaccine is a long time away, if 
it would even be effective


--FT

On 6/13/20 11:58 AM, OK Don via Mercedes wrote:

Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With little to no
testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:


  Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+ deaths in
the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to really
prove those numbers.
Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that having
a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having very low
numbers in the initial 4 months.
-Curt

 On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

  https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest

1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the
overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1%[
https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the range
of a strong seasonal influenza[
https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).

2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population
of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to
work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1]. The
risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no
symptoms were not taken into account.

Max Dillon
Charleston SC


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com



--
--FT


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[OK Don via Mercedes]

Our numbers are still rising in this part of the country. With little to no
testing we will probably never know the full extent of the disease.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 PM Curt Raymond via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

>  Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+ deaths in
> the US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period.
> It'll take a long time before we antibody test enough people to really
> prove those numbers.
> Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that having
> a bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results.
> Brazil's numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having very low
> numbers in the initial 4 months.
> -Curt
>
> On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
>  https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
>
> 1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the
> overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1%[
> https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the range
> of a strong seasonal influenza[
> https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).
>
> 2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population
> of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to
> work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1]. The
> risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no
> symptoms were not taken into account.
>
> Max Dillon
> Charleston SC
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>

-- 
OK Don

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
pause and reflect." Mark Twain

“Basic research is what I’m doing when I don’t know what I am doing.”  Wernher
Von Braun
2013 F150, 18 mpg
2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Curt Raymond via Mercedes]

 Still pretty hard to really prove that data isn't it? 100,000+ deaths in the 
US in 4 months is 3x+ what the flu would get over twice that period. It'll take 
a long time before we antibody test enough people to really prove those numbers.
Based on how the US numbers continue to inch down I'm thinking that having a 
bad "early" COVID season might be a good thing for our later results. Brazil's 
numbers are terrible and rising and thats after having very low numbers in the 
initial 4 months.
-Curt

On Friday, June 12, 2020, 4:20:37 PM EDT, Max Dillon via Mercedes 
 wrote:  
 
 https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest

1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the overall 
lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 
0.1%[https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the range of 
a strong seasonal 
influenza[https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).

2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population of 
school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to 
work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1]. The risk 
was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms 
were not taken into account.

Max Dillon
Charleston SC


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

  
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

[MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study

[Max Dillon via Mercedes]

https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest

1. According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the overall 
lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 
0.1%[https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/] and thus in the range of 
a strong seasonal 
influenza[https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/en/publications/covid-19] (flu).

2. Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population of 
school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to 
work[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1]. The risk 
was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms 
were not taken into account.

Max Dillon
Charleston SC


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com