Trump Response to Covid-19

[Wayward Son]

I think this deserves it's own thread, apart from what we know about the virus and the proper responses to it.  One on how well Trump and his Administration are reacting to it.

So far, so bad.

I was reading his article on Trump ignoring his own CDC's advice on how to not spread the virus.

At the Pentagon, top military brass have been begun “social distancing” to avoid spreading disease. At the Capitol, legislators have been encouraged to forgo hand shakes and flash the “Star Trek” Vulcan greeting instead.

But at the White House, President Donald Trump is flouting his own government’s advice on how to stay safe. He continues to shake hands with supporters and visitors, hold large events and minimize the threat posed by a coronavirus outbreak that has infected more than 115,000 people and killed over 4,000 worldwide...

“I think it’s beholden upon our leaders to follow the public health recommendations that the CDC, the government, public health are recommending and to emulate those practices,” said Dr. Jason Farley, a nurse epidemiologist and professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing. He said that it sends “mixed messaging to the public” when recommendations aren’t heeded.

When it comes to Trump, he added, “There’s nothing special about being the president of the United States that protects you from a virus like this unless you’re following the practices recommended for every 70-year-old.”

Trump has repeatedly played down the risk, both to the public and himself, even as he claims that his administration is “taking this unbelievably seriously.”

“It will go away. Just stay calm,” Trump told reporters Tuesday. “Everybody has to be vigilant and has to be careful. But be calm. It’s really working out. And a lot of good things are going to happen.”

When it comes to Trump’s continued glad-handing, Vice President Mike Pence said Tuesday that’s unlikely to change despite going against the administration’s “broad recommendation” for other Americans.

“In our line of work, you shake hands when someone wants to shake your hand,” he said. “And I expect the president will continue to do that. I’ll continue to do it...”

Trump, at 73, is considered at higher risk, although his press secretary said Monday he “remains in excellent health...”

Overall, the CDC has suggested that workplaces encourage employees to stop shaking hands, use videoconferences for meetings when possible and hold meetings in well-ventilated spaces if meetings are necessary.

That hasn’t happened at the White House, where Trump, a self-professed “germophobe,” sat shoulder-to-shoulder Tuesday with aides and health insurance executives, traveled to Capitol Hill for a Senate lunch and awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom at a well-attended ceremony, where he also shook hands with those in the front row.

On Monday, Trump was spotted shaking hands with supporters on a tarmac in Florida. And on Thursday, he’s set to travel to the West Coast, where he’ll attend fundraisers and the annual gathering of the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas.

All that, despite the fact that Trump has already had personal contact with several individuals known to have been exposed to the virus. They include Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, who traveled aboard Air Force One with the president on Monday and found out midflight that he was among a handful of GOP lawmakers who were exposed to a person who tested positive for the virus after last month’s Conservative Political Action Conference...

Lawrence Gostin, a public heath expert and professor at Georgetown University, said he believed it would be appropriate to implement enhanced screening at the White House to keep the president and Cabinet safe.

“This is no different than being protected by a bullet from the Secret Service,” he said. “Not only should they be following general health advice we give to the public, they should be following much more rigorously ... because we can’t be in a political crisis at the same time we’re in a public health crisis...”

On Capitol Hill, Democratic lawmakers were barred from helping themselves to a breakfast buffet or touching serving utensils, and told to avoid kissing, hugging and shaking hands.

But not Trump — a pattern that Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, said appeared motivated by Trump’s desire to protect the economy in an election year.

“Right or wrong, the president’s decided he wants to minimize the economic impact of this pandemic. ... He’s trying to do everything he can to protect the economy by saying, ‘It will be over,’ ‘It’s not that bad,’ ‘Feel free to go places,’” Blendon said. While much uncertainly remains, “if it turns out to be more serious, the president’s contributing to people not protecting themselves.”

“The president should be keeping us safe. He shouldn’t be amplifying the risk,” added Gostin of Georgetown University.

“The message should be: Let’s have social distancing, let’s avoid the usual cultural symbols of shaking hands, let’s separate from one another and avoid either contracting or transmitting a very dangerous infection,” Gostin said. “And it’s baffling to me that the president, who should be the model of good behavior, is modeling exactly the opposite.”

In so many ways, it would be much easier for Trump to follow the CDC guidelines than the rest of us.  You gotta wonder why he is ignoring them.

[Crunch]

Shocking to hear that orange man bad.

[Wayward Son]

No, orange man stupid. 

You going to the next rally? 

[TheDeamon]

What I get from this is Orange Man and Pence both are trying to get infected.

I thought most Democrats would be eagerly awaiting Trumps encounter with Covid-19, and hope he becomes part of the mortality rate.

The Dems might win a Biden vs Pence race.

[Kasandra]

I hope Nancy's ready.

[Crunch]

No, orange man stupid. 

You going to the next rally? 

Went to an XFL game last weekend (awesome). Movie last night(Emma, pretty good). Out to dinner tonight.

With the incredible travel deals right now, I’m thinking I’ll take that $88 round trip to Napa and do a wine tour. Hotel is under $100/night but I’m thinking i can wrangle a free night after this weekend.

If there’s a rally anywhere near me, I’d go but anticipate crowds typical for a Trump rally and not really keen on camping out the night before to get in so I’d have to see.

Going to the coast this weekend, do a little sailing.


What are you doing, hunkering down in a closet? Or will you be going out?

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom praised the Trump Administration’s response to the Coronavirus outbreak Monday.

“We had a private conversation, but he said ‘We’re gonna do the right thing’ and ‘You have my support,'” Newsom said. “All of our support, logistically, and otherwise.”

“He said everything that I could have hoped for,” Newsom added. “Every single thing he said they followed through on.”

I know, doesn’t fit the narrative so you don’t post it and instead ignore it in favor of a bias confirming, orange man bad, hit piece.

You’re consistent.

[cherrypoptart]

I think Trump tonight is supposed to make a speech about it and I anticipate the threat level is going to be bumped up significantly. So far, I don't think nearly enough has been done to contain it but I guess I'll admit to being in the chicken little camp on this one.

I think it's starting to hit close to home now. And far from home too. We had whoever it was at CPAC expose it to Ted Cruz and another guy who are wisely self-quarantining just to be on the safe side. Of course we have the reports out of Italy. We saw what happened to the guys at the top in Iran who took it lightly. It's just reported that a British health minister got it. You had Boris Johnson saying he'd go to a hospital and shake everyone's hands. That's just absurd: "British Prime Minister Boris Johnson says the coronavirus won't stop him greeting people with a handshake, adding that he had shaken hands with everyone at a hospital where he said infected patients were being treated."

Trump is about to come around on this and see it for the total emergency that it is. Hopefully.

The thing I'd like to point out is that even if people like Boris Johnson aren't afraid of it, they should still be considerate of others and not spread it around recklessly. I hope he's changed his tune by now just like I hope Trump will. It's too late to get out of this without significant damage but it's never too late to try to do better to minimize it as much as possible, or at least practicable.

[wmLambert]

...It's too late to get out of this without significant damage but it's never too late to try to do better to minimize it as much as possible, or at least practicable.

It appears to most people that Trump jumped fairly early to control the spread of vectors, but also focused upon minimizing economic impact. He's used the bully pulpit fairly well, even with the "loyal opposition" decrying abject failure of everything he's done.

Tonight I'm sure he will use his new regulatory relaxation of rules to allow faster research. What else he says should be interesting.

[Crunch]

Stopping all travel to Europe (except UK, heh). The flow of people is really getting addressed aggressively.

It’s interesting to compare this to H1N1 in 2009. Trump is moving vastly more quickly and aggressively than Obama did on that.

[Kasandra]

Stopping all travel to Europe (except UK, heh). The flow of people is really getting addressed aggressively.

It’s interesting to compare this to H1N1 in 2009. Trump is moving vastly more quickly and aggressively than Obama did on that.

Please back up that claim.  (Hint: I'm pretty sure you're breathing too much bad FOX air)

[Crunch]

You can easily look it up, weird that you don't even try. Well, maybe not.

So here you go:

On 11 June 2009, the WHO declared an H1N1 pandemic, moving the alert level to phase 6, marking the first global pandemic since the 1968 Hong Kong flu. On 25 October 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama officially declared H1N1 a national emergency

Note, I'm not being critical here, just stating the facts.

So 4 months after WHO declared a pandemic, Obama declared a national emergency. WHO declared it yesterday and, while Trump has not declared a national emergency yet, I'm pretty sure he will before July. Trump has taken some pretty incredible steps in containing this over the last few weeks and seems to be willing to do more very quickly. Obama did not declare an emergency until the death toll exceeded 1000 (quite a few children). As of right now, we are at 38 and most are over 70.

Let's have some more comparison:

A few weeks ago, I think, I mused about some previous pandemic about which I’d forgotten, except that I bought masks, and noted a run on rice at Costco, That was the Swine Flu pandemic, of course. It was declared by the WHO to be A Thing in June 2009. I decided to go back to the StarTribune archives to see how it played out. From what I recalled, there was concern, but nothing like we're seeing today. See if you recall any of this, or your local variant.

April 28: Front page Sunday story., "Is This the Big One, and Are We Ready Here?"

May: few stories, precautions relaxed.

June 9: the graduation ceremony for a local high school at Target Center was using fist bumps instead of handshakes. Front page story, written without alarm: just a sign of the times.

June 12: Front page lead story, with 30 cases reported per day.

It looks really bad:<graphic>

An epidemiologist quoted says it's not the Spanish Flu, "but we just don't know." Public health officials criticize the press for giving the flu too much attention earlier in the year, then soft-pedaling the story when the lethality appeared much less than advertised.

Article notes that half the people who died from the swine flu were "young and healthy."

Let's just imagine how the news would handle that fact with COVID19.

June 21: 10 kids get swine flu at Muscular Dystrophy Camp; national organization cancels all summer camps.

Aug 7 2009: Hennepin County “ramps up” for a swine-flu surge, after a summer hiatus; 252 people had been hospitalized for the flu; the hospitals were preparing for 30-40% absenteeism in hospital workers due to the flu.

Sept 17: Headline, in Metro: Flu Cases Rapidly increasing. Twenty-eight percent of students at Elementary school kept home with flu or flu-like illness! TWENTY-EIGHT PERCENT!

Oct 6: Healthy first-grader dies of the flu. Front page news.

Oct 29 four months after the declaration of the pandemic: <graphic>

This is the only result for "Obama Flu" in 2009, except for a story about the new CDC director, who was appointed in May.
The article notes in the third Graf that 46 states have been hit, and the national death toll is more than 1,000.

Nov 05: Local cases appear to have peaked, with 182 people hospitalized the previous week, as opposed to 225 the week before that.

Nov. 12: China’s “aggressive steps appear to be paying off,” with the flu, although it reported 5,000 new cases in the last three days.

December: flu vaccines recalled for ineffectiveness; third wave of H1N1 predicted.

Feb 2010: the only stories concern free shots, and the fact that the usual flu season had been quite mild.

April: three stories, one of which describes how mint leaves can loosen phlegm, another concerning some local basketball players who won’t be playing because of flu-like symptoms. A story on the 8th notes two more deaths, bringing the state total up to 70.

May: a story about Tiger Woods dropping out of a tournament, which he hadn’t done for a while; last time was years ago, when he had the flu.

The global death toll, by the time it was over, was estimated at over half a million people.

Quite the contrast to current coverage!

So now is the part where you admit that facts, right?

[rightleft22]

Stopping all travel to Europe (except UK)

The US delay in testing pretty much means the houses our out of the barn.  By all means close the barn doors.
Stopping all travel from the US is likely the best bet in slowing this down.
 

[TheDrake]

All travel from the US? Or to the US?

Meanwhile, shouldn't we also stop all travel within the US? Just air travel, or trains, buses, and cars?

[Kasandra]

Those look like facts, but depending on the source might be questionable.  I won't spend the time finding out, so I'll accept the fact parts, but not the editorializing.

Note, I'm not being critical here, just stating the facts.

Of course not. I wouldn't expect you to take a position on facts.

So 4 months after WHO declared a pandemic, Obama declared a national emergency. WHO declared it yesterday and, while Trump has not declared a national emergency yet, I'm pretty sure he will before July. Trump has taken some pretty incredible steps in containing this over the last few weeks and seems to be willing to do more very quickly. Obama did not declare an emergency until the death toll exceeded 1000 (quite a few children). As of right now, we are at 38 and most are over 70.

But some facts are not shown in your sequence.  Are you unaware that Obama declared a public health emergency in April 2009?  Since you're reporting facts without bias, how is it possible that you omitted that?  Here are a few things that were done in response to that declaration:

The emergency declaration in the United States lets the government free more money for antiviral drugs and give some previously unapproved tests and drugs to children. One-quarter of the national stockpile of 50 million courses of antiflu drugs will be released.

Border patrols and airport security officers are to begin asking travelers if they have had the flu or a fever; those who appear ill will be stopped, taken aside and given masks while they arrange for medical care.

Note that in June when the WHO declared the pandemic, they also made clear they did so even though most cases were mild.  Studies showed that H1N1 had a mortality rate of .01%-.08% globally, which was about the same as ordinary flu.

No question that it was bad, as all viral outbreaks can be, but a vaccine was available in November 2009 (7 months after the public health emergency was declared) and over 3 billion doses were produced.  The pandemic subsided, but the disease is still out in the world.

[Kasandra]

Stopping all travel to Europe (except UK, heh). The flow of people is really getting addressed aggressively.

It’s interesting to compare this to H1N1 in 2009. Trump is moving vastly more quickly and aggressively than Obama did on that.

You think he stopped all travel to Europe?

[Crunch]

Those look like facts, but depending on the source might be questionable.  I won't spend the time finding out,

Everything after that is irrelevant.

[wmLambert]

The main difference that I see, is not about the flu vs. Covid-19 - but is about the media coverage and public panic which that caused.

Obama probably responded as conditions became an issue in the news and was never associated with being part of the problem.

Trump does not get that pass.

[Kasandra]

Those look like facts, but depending on the source might be questionable.  I won't spend the time finding out,

Everything after that is irrelevant.

Not to people who want a fuller picture than you provided.

[Seriati]

I think this is a particularly dangerous thread that reflects an increasingly common problem.  Wayward gets his news from the left, and therefore it's a "fact" in his mind that Trump's response is not only inadequate, but without historical precedent in the level of it's inadequacy.

Others get their news from the right and there it's a "fact" that not only has Trump done more than any President in history to slow or stop the spread - while trying to save the economy - the media has engaged in historical levels of propaganda to paint him as failing.

Which is correct?  Honestly, it takes an open mind and probably hours to figure out.  You can't rely on media sources because they've long since given up on reporting facts. 

So why is this thread so dangerous?  Because it's not here to actually spread information.  It's here to spread misinformation.  You started the thread Wayward, so compare an contrast Trump's response to the response of say 3 prior administrations to a similar situation, and tell us where he's faster or slower or whether his administration applied or failed to apply lessons learned.  Be particuarly careful not to attribute opinion as fact. 

Why did you focus on a tiny part of the response in selecting the material to start the thread, which has a much broader title?  It may appear I'm asking  for a lot of work, but hard to see how you can evaluate an administration's response without any sense of how administrations actually respond.  And you have to take some responsibility for creating yet another thread purpose designed to trigger no-nothing anti-tribe diatribes and their responses.

[NobleHunter]

While we'll probably have to wait until the after action report to find out, I suspect part of the botched response to COVID occurred below what Trump can be reasonably expected to have direct influence over. Between that and the Saudi/Russian price war over oil, a measure of the coming storm isn't Trump's fault. Even moreso since the global economy is going to go in the crapper regardless of how well the US deals with the virus. He's still screwing up in a spectacular fashion but it won't be all his fault.

And that doesn't even consider state- or municipal-level screw ups. Which begs the question of how much authority should the Federal government have in the case of an epidemic.

Seriati, the three prior administrations did not face similar situations. COVID appears to be notably different for other recent pandemics (I don't think any of them even approached 100k infections worldwide).

[Kasandra]

Why did you focus on a tiny part of the response in selecting the material to start the thread, which has a much broader title?  It may appear I'm asking  for a lot of work, but hard to see how you can evaluate an administration's response without any sense of how administrations actually respond.  And you have to take some responsibility for creating yet another thread purpose designed to trigger no-nothing anti-tribe diatribes and their responses.

Your post suggests that we can't evaluate what Trump has and is doing, that somehow we have to find out how much better or worse it is than what other administrations did.  That is the epitome of relative analysis.  If 60,000,000 to 150,000,000 people get the COVID-19 disease, which has a far higher mortality rate than other diseases, like the flu, which might have had infections in something like the same order of magnitude, then he did a pretty good job, right?

[Seriati]

While we'll probably have to wait until the after action report to find out, I suspect part of the botched response to COVID occurred below what Trump can be reasonably expected to have direct influence over.

"the botched response" assumes that it was botched.  What exactly was botched, specifically in the context of our actual laws, historical practice and legal powers of the government?

For example, it's not "botched" that we didn't impose mandatory quarantines, if the government doesn't have that legal authority.  Or banned travel if that's neither the plan nor the practice.

I mean on travel bans, Trump put in place restrictions on China travel on Jan 31st.

On Jan 27 Biden said this:  "I remember how Trump sought to stoke fear and stigma during the 2014 Ebola epidemic. He called President Barack Obama a “dope” and “incompetent” and railed against the evidence-based response our administration put in place — which quelled the crisis and saved hundreds of thousands of lives — in favor of reactionary travel bans that would only have made things worse."  https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/27/coronavirus-donald-trump-made-us-less-prepared-joe-biden-column/4581710002/  This is an Op Ed Biden pending that naturally is completely derrogatory of Trump and praising himself and Obama.  Sounds like Biden is flat out saying travel bans should not be used, that they are effectively "reactionary" (which could be code for racist) and make things worse.

At a campaign event on Jan 31, Biden said this:   “The American people need to have a president who they can trust what he says about it, that he is going to act rationally about it. In moments like this, this is where the credibility of the president is most needed, as he explains what we should and should not do. This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia – hysterical xenophobia – and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science.”  That's on the day, Trump imposed restrictions.  Sounds like Biden doubling down on travel restrictions being ineffective and racist.

Seven day's later is CNN still effectively saying that Trump's travel ban on people being in China was the wrong move and may actually make things worse. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/health/coronavirus-travel-ban/index.html.

That still hasn't changed, you can read anti-travel ban articles on CNN, the NYT's or virtually any left media today.  While I understand the technical points they are making, I think for something this communicable they are being absurd to make the argument that travel bans don't work.  China screwed everyone with their secrecy, they 100% are responsible for helping to turn this into a global pandemic, but they have been able to slow the spread with ruthless internal travel bans.

It's also true that large numbers of the cases in the US are directly connected to specific individuals who came in from infected regions, didn't "self quarantine" and managed to create epicenters.  There are several local ones where individuals not ignored those protocols they travel on mass transit, went to large events and parties, and in some cases continued to operate as religious leaders and meet with large numbers of people.  There are  articles out there today that say it violates the law to impose quarantines on them.

Seriati, the three prior administrations did not face similar situations. COVID appears to be notably different for other recent pandemics (I don't think any of them even approached 100k infections worldwide).

I said 3 prior, not the prior 3.  In any event, Obama/Biden dealt both with H1N1 - which was transmitted far more broadly and with no hope of containment; and the Ebola scare, which was far more fatal but 100% more containable.  The latter could be looked at in the context of a travel ban, the former in the context of public information, funding, emergency declarations and other responses.

I think we've all heard of the Spanish flu, and while it's from a different era, it certainly provides lessons.

Not to mention, up until we discovered anti-biotics, wide spread fatal illnesses were actually fairly common.  Is how to respond to them just forgotten knowledge?  Granted, travel today is like light speed compared to then, which explodes the expansion rate.

[wmLambert]

... it's not here to actually spread information.  It's here to spread misinformation.

There is another aspect than news from the Left vs. news from the Right. There is a middle ground, and I am personally aggravated that anything an honest broker puts out there is labeled Left or Right, when it is just correct. It is hard to get to the beginning of circular arguments,  but sometimes you can. When an argument is nailed down and one can suss out the parameters of the spread of incorrect data, it is the honest duty of all of us to try to dispel the disinformation. I get called out for this all the time, but actually check out the disinformation thoroughly before commenting upon it. I usually ask those who push it to please check what they are saying, but they just get mad, instead of getting smart.

[Seriati]

Why did you focus on a tiny part of the response in selecting the material to start the thread, which has a much broader title?  It may appear I'm asking  for a lot of work, but hard to see how you can evaluate an administration's response without any sense of how administrations actually respond.  And you have to take some responsibility for creating yet another thread purpose designed to trigger no-nothing anti-tribe diatribes and their responses.

Your post suggests that we can't evaluate what Trump has and is doing, that somehow we have to find out how much better or worse it is than what other administrations did.  That is the epitome of relative analysis.  If 60,000,000 to 150,000,000 people get the COVID-19 disease, which has a far higher mortality rate than other diseases, like the flu, which might have had infections in something like the same order of magnitude, then he did a pretty good job, right?

You tell me, or just continue with know nothing team responses.

What were the possible end results here given our actual options?  What decision tree points were failures - and yes that part is a relative analysis, declaring an emergency at day x+90 may be "too late" to achieve a specific positive result, but if the average for other admins was x +150 it's still remarkably faster.

If you want to "evaluate" Trump's responses then explain what the basis for your evaluation is.  Lately, my belief on your comments is the basis is:  whatever Trump did is wrong; and I don't have to explain what he should have done.  So prove me wrong, and tell us not only what was wrong, but what would have been right and how it was within his actual legal options to implement and justified by the information available at that time.

[Crunch]

Lately, my belief on your comments is the basis is:  whatever Trump did is wrong; and I don't have to explain what he should have done.nly what was wrong, but what would have been right and how it was within his actual legal options to implement and justified by the information available at that time.

This type of behavior is a symptom of COVEFE-16.

[Kasandra]

You tell me, or just continue with know nothing team responses.

Ping pong response.

This type of behavior is a symptom of COVEFE-16.

Interesting that you use one of Trump's many incoherent tweets as some sort of attack or defense, I can't tell which.

[Crunch]

This type of behavior is a symptom of COVEFE-16.

Interesting that you use one of Trump's many incoherent tweets as some sort of attack or defense, I can't tell which.

One of the more serious signs is a complete loss of sense of humor. You should self-quarantine immediately.

[Kasandra]

This type of behavior is a symptom of COVEFE-16.

Interesting that you use one of Trump's many incoherent tweets as some sort of attack or defense, I can't tell which.

One of the more serious signs is a complete loss of sense of humor. You should self-quarantine immediately.

I'm on the verge of self-isolating, but taking it one day at a time as new information comes out.  For instance, there haven't been any reported cases in the city I live in.  I found more beer in the cupboard, but 'll need more bourbon first.

[Wayward Son]

Earlier this week, I met with the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.

That's from Trump's speech last night.  It needs some amendment, though.

No, they did not say they will cover co-pays for treatment. And Trump’s statement about surprise medical billing is questionable.

As Vice President Mike Pence stated more accurately, the insurers agreed to cover coronavirus testing with no cost sharing — so no co-pays or deductibles. That assurance applies to tests that can confirm or rule out the virus, and doesn’t extend to treatment or to other tests that the patient’s doctor may order. Consumers should check with their insurance company because policies may vary on this. They should not count on the president’s word.

What’s more, in the process of diagnosing COVID-19, other tests may be ordered. Insurers have not pledged to waive cost-sharing for those. Co-pays and deductibles may apply for imaging tests such as X-rays or CT scans of the chest, for example, and hospital stays are also subject to cost-sharing.

Federal programs including Medicare, Medicaid, children’s health insurance and “Obamacare” all cover the coronavirus tests. Of particular importance, clinical diagnostic tests are covered under Medicare with no cost-sharing, a longstanding policy. However, cost-sharing may apply for other tests, such as imaging.

When people get sick from the coronavirus, there currently is no antiviral treatment that can cure the disease. Instead, the current treatment is geared to relieving patients’ symptoms and helping them to recover. For those who are very sick, that can involve using machinery to help them breathe. Insurers cover such treatment based on the terms of the individual’s health plan, including any applicable deductibles and co-pays.

As for “surprise billing,” that’s not something insurers can waive because they’re not the ones who do it. Doctors and hospitals generally spring those surprises.

Overall, says Karen Pollitz of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation: “We don’t have a rule yet that says all insurers must do ‘x,’ so flip your insurance card over and call the 800 number.”

So insurers have agreed to make the test free.  The rest is pure fantasy.

Nice to know the President's on top of this. 

[yossarian22c]

Trump:

"To keep new cases from entering our shores, we will be suspending all travel from Europe to the United States for the next 30 days.  The new rules will go into effect Friday at midnight.  These restrictions will be adjusted subject to conditions on the ground.

"There will be exemptions for Americans who have undergone appropriate screenings, and these prohibitions will not only apply to the tremendous amount of trade and cargo, but various other things as we get approval.  Anything coming from Europe to the United States is what we are discussing." 

Announcing these changes without being clear to Americans abroad how they were getting back home is troublesome. A couple other strange factors is that if you're in continental Europe it seems like you can just travel to the UK and fly from London. The UK hasn't implemented all of their new boarder enforcement yet. Also strange was the omission of South Korea on the banned list. They have the 3rd most active cases in the world.

For everyone who supports Trump and holds things up like the travel ban as him being effective at his job. He still isn't good at implementing the details. Establishing a travel ban with enough details that people have time to get home - or at least know the process for getting home. Getting all the source countries on the list. And getting testing up to speed in the US.

Trump likely isn't personally responsible for the botched roll out of the test kits inside the US. However, cutting the position of "senior director for global health security and biodefense" probably doesn't help matters when trying to coordinate a response to a disease like this. The US testing roll out has been a disaster. States and private labs are now scrambling to develop their own. So honestly I think we're way under-reporting cases right now because there aren't enough tests to go around.

[Seriati]

Kas makes a literal non-response, Wayward cites to a detailed response to a single line in a speech (which may or may not be actually correct), even though a speech is of necessity short and wouldn't cover all of those points and yoss adds as a throw away that Trump doesn't seem to be responsible for CDC delays but let's blame it on Trump because he did something different that isn't related.

The CDC's issues seem to be very largely bureaucratic and related to their processes for approving, testing and signing off on new treatments.  That's a process Trump has been railing against since before he was elected (and even passed right to try legislation to get around), and has no relation to not keeping a team permanently on staff.

So again the goal seems to be to spread misinformation or misleading takes on information, rather than to actually make a case for what is right or wrong about an approach.

[Crunch]

Look, you guys are gonna pick it apart no matter what. That's just a given, I'm surprised you haven't called that travel bans xenophobic (many on the left are). There is literally nothing Trump can do that you guys won't say it's wrong, or too late, or ... whatever.

It is clear how Americans abroad will get home.

The ban restricts European travelers from 26 countries for the next 30 days and will begin Friday. The U.K. and Ireland are exempt, and the suspension applies only to people, not cargo. American citizens will still be able to fly home, but after the start of the ban they will be subject to quarantine upon their return.

It's literally, get on a plane and come home. But, they can also stay where they are and roll the dice on getting back or stuck in the host country.

The European restrictions are because that's where cases are still increasing, it's where most of the virus is expected to come from. The rate of infection in South Korea is leveling off, that's why it was omitted according to officials.

We are absolutely underreporting cases. That's a fact. I know, we should have had COVID-19 test kits stockpiled starting years ago or something according to critics (should we start stockpiling COVID-23 kits now?).

Could things be better? Sure. Always room for improvement. But the frigging hysteria now is absurd.

[TheDeamon]

Lately, my belief on your comments is the basis is:  whatever Trump did is wrong; and I don't have to explain what he should have done.nly what was wrong, but what would have been right and how it was within his actual legal options to implement and justified by the information available at that time.

This type of behavior is a symptom of COVEFE-16.

Interesting that you use one of Trump's many incoherent tweets as some sort of attack or defense, I can't tell which.

One of the more serious signs is a complete loss of sense of humor. You should self-quarantine immediately.

I'm on the verge of self-isolating, but taking it one day at a time as new information comes out.  For instance, there haven't been any reported cases in the city I live in.  I found more beer in the cupboard, but 'll need more bourbon first.

Given the comment was Crunch to Seriati, both of whom have no history of animus towards each other. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it has a nearly 100% chance of being a joke which went completely over your head.

[fizz]

We are absolutely underreporting cases. That's a fact. I know, we should have had COVID-19 test kits stockpiled starting years ago or something according to critics (should we start stockpiling COVID-23 kits now?).

Well, the often mocked for its disorganization Italy have managed to do a total of 86000 tests at today, so I think something could have been done.

From what I read, production of new tests has been held back by a global shortage of a key component, reagents used to extract RNA from samples. The US was last in line putting its order in, for some reason.

[Crunch]

Well, looks like it’s out of control now. It’ll take drastic action to protect us.

First, copy Italy and lock it all down. Trump has to do it. Anything less simply won’t work. Total lockdown nationwide. Has to happen.

Second, we gotta postpone the election. It’s too dangerous to campaign, it’s too dangerous to have crowds go to the polls. The only fair thing, the right thing, is to push the election until it’s safe to hold it. Maybe next year, restart the primaries. Trump must postpone the election to save America.

Some of you may object but you have to consider the POTENTIAL. Once you account for the POTENTIAL, I’m sure all of you will agree that this must happen.

[rightleft22]

The cat is out of the bag and most of us will become infected at some point. I think the goal now is to flatten the curve so we don't overwhelm the health care system

To soon to call what should be done with the upcoming elections. A mouth or two from now we may be talking about the next thing...

[NobleHunter]

"the botched response" assumes that it was botched.  What exactly was botched, specifically in the context of our actual laws, historical practice and legal powers of the government?

For example, it's not "botched" that we didn't impose mandatory quarantines, if the government doesn't have that legal authority.  Or banned travel if that's neither the plan nor the practice.

I mean on travel bans, Trump put in place restrictions on China travel on Jan 31st.

On Jan 27 Biden said this:  "I remember how Trump sought to stoke fear and stigma during the 2014 Ebola epidemic. He called President Barack Obama a “dope” and “incompetent” and railed against the evidence-based response our administration put in place — which quelled the crisis and saved hundreds of thousands of lives — in favor of reactionary travel bans that would only have made things worse."  https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/27/coronavirus-donald-trump-made-us-less-prepared-joe-biden-column/4581710002/  This is an Op Ed Biden pending that naturally is completely derrogatory of Trump and praising himself and Obama.  Sounds like Biden is flat out saying travel bans should not be used, that they are effectively "reactionary" (which could be code for racist) and make things worse.

At a campaign event on Jan 31, Biden said this:   “The American people need to have a president who they can trust what he says about it, that he is going to act rationally about it. In moments like this, this is where the credibility of the president is most needed, as he explains what we should and should not do. This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia – hysterical xenophobia – and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science.”  That's on the day, Trump imposed restrictions.  Sounds like Biden doubling down on travel restrictions being ineffective and racist.

Seven day's later is CNN still effectively saying that Trump's travel ban on people being in China was the wrong move and may actually make things worse. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/health/coronavirus-travel-ban/index.html.

That still hasn't changed, you can read anti-travel ban articles on CNN, the NYT's or virtually any left media today.  While I understand the technical points they are making, I think for something this communicable they are being absurd to make the argument that travel bans don't work.  China screwed everyone with their secrecy, they 100% are responsible for helping to turn this into a global pandemic, but they have been able to slow the spread with ruthless internal travel bans.

It's also true that large numbers of the cases in the US are directly connected to specific individuals who came in from infected regions, didn't "self quarantine" and managed to create epicenters.  There are several local ones where individuals not ignored those protocols they travel on mass transit, went to large events and parties, and in some cases continued to operate as religious leaders and meet with large numbers of people.  There are  articles out there today that say it violates the law to impose quarantines on them.

Seriati, the three prior administrations did not face similar situations. COVID appears to be notably different for other recent pandemics (I don't think any of them even approached 100k infections worldwide).

I said 3 prior, not the prior 3.  In any event, Obama/Biden dealt both with H1N1 - which was transmitted far more broadly and with no hope of containment; and the Ebola scare, which was far more fatal but 100% more containable.  The latter could be looked at in the context of a travel ban, the former in the context of public information, funding, emergency declarations and other responses.

I think we've all heard of the Spanish flu, and while it's from a different era, it certainly provides lessons.

Not to mention, up until we discovered anti-biotics, wide spread fatal illnesses were actually fairly common.  Is how to respond to them just forgotten knowledge?  Granted, travel today is like light speed compared to then, which explodes the expansion rate.

All those words and you couldn't find any to discuss where the response is actually screwing up?

[Crunch]

What are the "actual" screw-ups?

[Wayward Son]

...Wayward cites to a detailed response to a single line in a speech (which may or may not be actually correct), even though a speech is of necessity short and wouldn't cover all of those points...

I'm sorry, Seriati, but what part of Trump's line was a completely and entirely untrue did you miss?

Earlier this week, I met with the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.

There is simply not a single point in that sentence that is true, except maybe him meeting with leaders of the health insurance industry.

According to my insurer, we still have copayments for treatment.

According to my insurer, there is no "extension" of coverage to anything Covid-19 related.  If it was covered before, it is still covered.  If it wasn't, you're SOL.

According to my insurer, they still only cover costs among preferred providers (which is mainly in-house).  If there are any unusual charges, like by some outside doctor or outside lab, you will still get charged extra, even if it wasn't your decision to use them.

Every single promise he made was false.  How much more detail do you need?

And these are the things most people were concerned about.  While knowing how much money he intends to loan small businesses to keep them afloat is good in the long term (in knowing they will still have jobs once this crisis is over), that's not their immediate concern.  Whether they will go bankrupt in the meantime is more pressing.

Trump told them not to worry.  They're covered.

It ain't true.

So why should they, or us, trust anything this man says when he can't get a few simple facts correct about a subject that most people consider really important?

He can't even get his own travel ban right. 

[Wayward Son]

Well, looks like it’s out of control now. It’ll take drastic action to protect us.

First, copy Italy and lock it all down. Trump has to do it. Anything less simply won’t work. Total lockdown nationwide. Has to happen.

Second, we gotta postpone the election. It’s too dangerous to campaign, it’s too dangerous to have crowds go to the polls. The only fair thing, the right thing, is to push the election until it’s safe to hold it. Maybe next year, restart the primaries. Trump must postpone the election to save America.

Some of you may object but you have to consider the POTENTIAL. Once you account for the POTENTIAL, I’m sure all of you will agree that this must happen.

You can almost hear Bill Maher saying it:

"I nailed it.  I told you Trump wouldn't leave the Presidency."

[Crunch]

...Wayward cites to a detailed response to a single line in a speech (which may or may not be actually correct), even though a speech is of necessity short and wouldn't cover all of those points...

I'm sorry, Seriati, but what part of Trump's line was a completely and entirely untrue did you miss?

Earlier this week, I met with the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.

There is simply not a single point in that sentence that is true, except maybe him meeting with leaders of the health insurance industry.

According to my insurer, we still have copayments for treatment.

According to my insurer, there is no "extension" of coverage to anything Covid-19 related.  If it was covered before, it is still covered.  If it wasn't, you're SOL.

According to my insurer, they still only cover costs among preferred providers (which is mainly in-house).  If there are any unusual charges, like by some outside doctor or outside lab, you will still get charged extra, even if it wasn't your decision to use them.

Every single promise he made was false.  How much more detail do you need?

And these are the things most people were concerned about.  While knowing how much money he intends to loan small businesses to keep them afloat is good in the long term (in knowing they will still have jobs once this crisis is over), that's not their immediate concern.  Whether they will go bankrupt in the meantime is more pressing.

Trump told them not to worry.  They're covered.

It ain't true.

So why should they, or us, trust anything this man says when he can't get a few simple facts correct about a subject that most people consider really important?

He can't even get his own travel ban right. 

According to my insurer, they're doing all that. No co-payments for testing or treating COVID-19. Anything covered previously is still covered, obviously, and that would include things like pneumonia or respiratory illnesses. It's not like they're gonna say that could be related to COVID-19 and refuse it.

So for me, every single promise he made was true. Maybe your provider sucks, ever think of that? Maybe not relying on a single anecdote to make a global pronouncement would be a good idea.

[fizz]

Well, *Italy* is going to postpone the administrative (local) elections that were planned during spring, plus a referendum, to a period between 15 October and 15 December.
Ofc we are used to not having fixed dates for elections, so its not a big deal.

I guess depending on how bad the epidemic will be by then you could consider it too... and maybe that was the plan all along! (just joking, if the thing were in doubt ;-))

[Crunch]

World Health Organization chief says Europe now the epicenter of the world's coronavirus pandemic.

So apparently the flight ban from Europe was pretty smart.

[TheDrake]

...Wayward cites to a detailed response to a single line in a speech (which may or may not be actually correct), even though a speech is of necessity short and wouldn't cover all of those points...

I'm sorry, Seriati, but what part of Trump's line was a completely and entirely untrue did you miss?

Earlier this week, I met with the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.

There is simply not a single point in that sentence that is true, except maybe him meeting with leaders of the health insurance industry.

According to my insurer, we still have copayments for treatment.

According to my insurer, there is no "extension" of coverage to anything Covid-19 related.  If it was covered before, it is still covered.  If it wasn't, you're SOL.

According to my insurer, they still only cover costs among preferred providers (which is mainly in-house).  If there are any unusual charges, like by some outside doctor or outside lab, you will still get charged extra, even if it wasn't your decision to use them.

Every single promise he made was false.  How much more detail do you need?

And these are the things most people were concerned about.  While knowing how much money he intends to loan small businesses to keep them afloat is good in the long term (in knowing they will still have jobs once this crisis is over), that's not their immediate concern.  Whether they will go bankrupt in the meantime is more pressing.

Trump told them not to worry.  They're covered.

It ain't true.

So why should they, or us, trust anything this man says when he can't get a few simple facts correct about a subject that most people consider really important?

He can't even get his own travel ban right. 

According to my insurer, they're doing all that. No co-payments for testing or treating COVID-19. Anything covered previously is still covered, obviously, and that would include things like pneumonia or respiratory illnesses. It's not like they're gonna say that could be related to COVID-19 and refuse it.

So for me, every single promise he made was true. Maybe your provider sucks, ever think of that? Maybe not relying on a single anecdote to make a global pronouncement would be a good idea.

Maybe you're one of the millions of people stuck on a HDHP, where copayments aren't even a thing. Maybe you're one of the millions of people who don't have a health plan at all. Ever think of that?

An anecdote? It's a *censored* prepared speech in teleprompter. There's no excuse for a lack of precision. Although I blame Trump less for that than his speechwriters - unless he flubbed the line, and we'll never know.

[Crunch]

Maybe you're one of the millions of people stuck on a HDHP, where copayments aren't even a thing. Maybe you're one of the millions of people who don't have a health plan at all. Ever think of that?

I did think of that. That's why I used my anecdotal story to prove that anecdotal stories are useless. Maybe you should think about that.

[TheDrake]

But you see, even one anecdote that refutes a statement refutes the statement. If you've made a logical assertion, it only takes one negative proof to refute the assertion. You don't have to take a survey about it and find out what percentage of people are not covering it.

I suspect they will all waive copayment, eventually, but as usual the administration sprung this so quickly that maybe the major insurers haven't passed the information down yet. Or maybe only a couple of the biggest insurers were included in "the leaders of the health insurance industry".

A better phrasing would probably couch the assertion in proper hedging language.

And in any event it should never have said "treatments" right? Can you at least admit that much?

[Crunch]

Yeah, he said treatments. I'm not sure if that was appropriate or not. I guess impeachment is the only option now.

[yossarian22c]

I'm not sure if that was appropriate or not.

Not. Just like announcing the travel ban from Europe but taking 2 hours to clarify what it meant for Americans abroad is not appropriate, even if a travel ban is. Just like announcing all trade was going to be subject to the travel restriction when there is no such ban is not appropriate. Just like downplaying the seriousness in the early days wasn't the right strategy. If every policy roll out is poorly communicated or bungled then we have a problem. The WH has already come out and retracted most of the parts about the insurance companies paying for everything.

Announcing Trump would negotiate a stimulus/response package with congressional republicans, ignoring democrats was a mistake. Pelosi still controls the house and trying to ignore that fact isn't going to get Trump anything.

[Crunch]

Sorry, what I meant was I don't know the content of the meeting so I don't know if Trump said something out of line or not based on what was discussed in the meeting.

I am 100% certain that clarifications are always going to be needed due to the intense interest in mischaracterizing everything Trump to paint it in the worst possible light imaginable. When the media willfully misinterprets what he says, it makes clarification necessary.

[Wayward Son]

So for me, every single promise he made was true. Maybe your provider sucks, ever think of that? Maybe not relying on a single anecdote to make a global pronouncement would be a good idea.

Except it isn't anecdotal.  Review my link to qfoxnew.com.  No insurance company said they were doing anything special about Covid-19, except not charging for the test.

And so what if it is anecdotal?  Trump said that "the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing."  Even one exception proves the lie.

Sounds like you have an exceptional insurer.  Do you ever pay co-pays at all?