The Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote="mjmaherjr" post=381601][quote="Beast of the East" post=381578]C [attachment=1353]84926419_10157315028398143_6086192675336224768_n.jpg[/attachment]

Someday soon, we need a heroic figure to rise out of the mud, reject party affiliation, and unite the good people of this country for a common good. It is wishful thinking for certain.

.[/quote][/quote]

What a hump! :)

Sorry Mike, couldn’t resist.
 
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=381547][quote="Making Plays" post=381543]Crazy how drastically 24 hours can change things, yesterday after that Georgetown win I was thinking they could possibly do something special in Big East tournament, worst case scenario the would still make an NIT and possible run there. Now everything is cancelled. These next couple of months without sports are going to be brutal. This is uncharted territory.[/quote]

Maybe this piece will put things in perspective for those that still can't grasp the the scale of what we are facing and how QUICKLY things are going to go from "what's the big deal" to "holy shit".
It's math related so it might be painful for some, but it's not in the context of horrifying virus comparisons so maybe that will make it easier to absorb: You'll probably have to open it in an incognito window since its behind a paywall...

[URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com...-matters-isnt-what-you-can-see-what-you-cant/[/URL][/quote]

Thank you for sharing the article.
 
For Tony :
But you're OK with Trump calling this a "Democrat inspired hoax?"

Yes because what he actually said was that the liberal left leaning media and their actors  are implying that the current administration (Trump) is not doing enough or has  been slow to take action and compared those politicized comments to the Russia, Ukraine and impeachment investigations.  He never said that the Covid-19 virus was a hoax.
What is disturbing is that Democrats have weaponized this pandemic  by introducing legislation that incorporate non-corona budget items that have zero to do with curbing the virus.

Or Trump bringing on his son-in-law, who knows nothing about infectious diseases, to help control the spread?

No but it is an all hands on deck approach so neither should you.

Or Trump cutting funding from the CDC months ago?

Months ago had nothing to do with $8 billion being made available last week.  There was no Corona virus outside of China 2 months ago.  He also didn't eliminate any department dealing with the development of infectious disease cures.  False or embellished news as usual.


Or Trump focusing on the economy, instead of stopping COVID-19, which would help the economy recover?

Why do you make it seem like they are mutually exclusive?  He's not doing one in favor of the other.  Sadly it may take the economy longer to get better than 99% of people who will contract the virus. 

The bottom line is that for the card-carrying democratic socialists nothing that this administration does will ever be enough.
Banning travel to and from China was seen as xenophobic.
Banning travel to and from Europe was driven by favoraticism.
The early ban on mostly Islamic countries active in terrorism was anti-Islamic.
White leftists labeling African American Republicans "racist".

That kind of twisted logic has given validity to anti Jewish rhetoric by
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.

As for my centrist leaning lefty SJUFAN2,  trying to edit or delete others views fits your profile for the shut them up, impeach the mother-effer approach to free speech.  If your view to national salvation is a future 80 year old president in the early stages of dementia then God help America and the world.
 
Last edited:
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=381626][quote="bamafan" post=381624][quote="SJUFAN2" post=381617][quote="Beast of the East" post=381578] Someday soon, we need a heroic figure to rise out of the mud, reject party affiliation, and unite the good people of this country for a common good. [/quote]

Sadly, we don't have time to wait for a superhero to materialize out of thin air and save the world, but fear not!

The day you are longing for is already here. And that unifier you are hoping for is named Joe Biden. He ain't perfect, not by a long shot. He's flawed just like all the rest of us, but he is a centrist, and he genuinely cares about ALL Americans, not just the 45% that got him elected, or the members of his golf club. He's the democrats version of John McCain. If a Republican can't support that type of democrat over the morally bankrupt, incompetent disaster that is DJ Trump, then they aren't honest partners in this great democratic experiment that is America. They are members of a cult.[/quote]
Yes the guy who doesn't know his wife from his sister because he has been losing his marbles for about a decade now. The guy in his late 70's who challenged a man who could kick his ass to a fight. Dems want Biden to choose Hillary for VP so if he wins the election they can declare him non compos mentis in 6 months and Hillary can become President.[/quote]

That's a new one. Might be time to swap out the tinfoil hat, seems to be rusting. :whistle:

How about we make a bet? If that happens, I'll vote GOP on the whole ticket. I've done it before, and as bad as this ass hat is as a POTUS, I'm a man of my word so I'll do it again. But when this paranoid delusion doesn't come to fruition, you have to vote for every Dem on the ticket where you live.

Deal?[/quote]
Sorry, I don't make deals with the devil. :evil: :lol:
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]For Tony :
But you're OK with Trump calling this a "Democrat inspired hoax?"

Yes because what he actually said was that the liberal left leaning media and their actors  are implying that the current administration (Trump) is not doing enough or has  been slow to take action and compared those politicized comments to the Russia, Ukraine and impeachment investigations.  He never said that the Covid-19 virus was a hoax.[/quote]

So the 'hoax' was how the left leaning media was covering the story? Your saying that when he said hoax, it wasn't that he was claiming the virus wasn't a danger, but that the left was making it political and that they weren't giving him enough credit for how he was preparing our response to this virus?
Boy he sure proved them wrong!
What he's said since this started...sure seems like he had a great handle on this and was being proactive. Ya know, instead of making it out to be nothing at all, and turning down testing kits.
[URL]https://twitter.com/SykesCharlie/status/1238132406642761728[/URL]

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]What is disturbing is that Democrats have weaponized this pandemic  by introducing legislation that incorporate non-corona budget items that have zero to do with curbing the virus.[/quote]

Show me please. Show me where that exists. And please highlight what you categorize as "non-corona budget items". Until then, I'm calling "shenanigans".

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump bringing on his son-in-law, who knows nothing about infectious diseases, to help control the spread?

No but it is an all hands on deck approach so neither should you.[/quote] Why all hands on deck? You guys have said there's nothing to be concerned about for weeks and weeks. You've said the media misrepresented how unprepared we are and politicized this. Which is it? That the media/left was correct and this is an extreme danger that's been poorly handled by this administration and now its all hands on deck time...or that their coverage and message is/was a hoax??

Can't be both. Because the coverage he/you are referring to was telling everyone that we aren't doing enough to prepare for what is coming.

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump cutting funding from the CDC months ago?

Months ago had nothing to do with $8 billion being made available last week.  There was no Corona virus outside of China 2 months ago.  He also didn't eliminate any department dealing with the development of infectious disease cures.  False or embellished news as usual.[/quote]

HORSECRAP. And dangerous horsecrap at that:
Trump asked for $2.5B in emergency funding two weeks ago. Democrats offered $8.5B. Thank you democrats.
[URL]https://nymag.com/intelligence...-for-usd2-5-billion-to-fight-coronavirus.html[/URL]

Oh, and he didn't shut down the CDC but he did eliminate the office in the white house that coordinated CDC efforts on things like this. And his budget proposal for this year which came out last month as this crisis was spreading worldwide called for a $9B cut to CDC funding. That was in Mid-February. 3 months after the outbreak in China became public, one month after the first cases started appearing outside of China and the first US citizen had tested positive in Asia, and just as people were getting sick here.
[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-m...-he-disbanded-his-global-health-team-n1153221[/URL]

So either he knew about what was coming and decided the best way to handle this was to cut funding to the CDC (which only a moron would conclude), or he didn't think it was a big deal and was carrying on with his plans to downsize essential services to US citizens. Again, can't be both. So which is it? He didn't see it coming and failed to do anything once it was out of China, or he saw it coming and thought the best way to handle it was to defund the CDC?

[URL]https://thehill.com/policy/fin...ef-holds-firm-on-cdc-cuts-amid-virus-outbreak[/URL]

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump focusing on the economy, instead of stopping COVID-19, which would help the economy recover?
Why do you make it seem like they are mutually exclusive?  He's not doing one in favor of the other.  Sadly it may take the economy longer to get better than 99% of people who will contract the virus.  [/quote]

They are not mutually exclusive, but they aren't mutually inclusive either. Trump's solution was to float the idea of a payroll tax cut to stimulate the market, which is NOT our economy. Think about that. What good is just lowering payroll taxes for the massive amounts of people who are going to lose their jobs? That extra 7% they get to keep in the paycheck they are no longer getting will be very helpful.

Addressing the market and ignoring the epidemic might inflate the market for a few days or a few weeks, but suppressing the epidemic would clearly have a positive impact on the economy and the market. He picked the course/action that dealt with the issue he cared most about, but passed on the one that would bring the most benefit to all. Why is that, do you suppose?

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]As for my centrist leaning lefty SJUFAN2,  trying to edit or delete others views fits your profile for the shut them up, impeach the mother-effer approach to free speech.  If your view to national salvation is a future 80 year old president in the early stages of dementia then God help America and the world.[/quote]

You are a tool. I haven't edited anything. NEVER, not once. There's a freaking tag at the bottom of each posts that shows when its been edited.. Nothing's been deleted from this thread either. To imply that I have is disingenuous and irresponsible. Not surprised about that though, facts aren't your strong suit.

For anyone that bothered to read through this or is in agreement with class of '72 on how evil the democrats are and how awesome Trump is, I will leave you with these two clips. Watch them and ask yourself this question: Tell me which side has your back during this crisis and which is chasing its tail (or worse):

This person who is on FOX representing the administration:
[URL]https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/1238387603034066944?s[/URL]=20

or

This person who is in congress trying to get free testing for everyone.
[URL]https://twitter.com/RepKatiePorter/status/1238147835859779584[/URL]

Elections have consequences America.
 
[quote="bamafan" post=381656][quote="SJUFAN2" post=381626][quote="bamafan" post=381624][quote="SJUFAN2" post=381617][quote="Beast of the East" post=381578] Someday soon, we need a heroic figure to rise out of the mud, reject party affiliation, and unite the good people of this country for a common good. [/quote]

Sadly, we don't have time to wait for a superhero to materialize out of thin air and save the world, but fear not!

The day you are longing for is already here. And that unifier you are hoping for is named Joe Biden. He ain't perfect, not by a long shot. He's flawed just like all the rest of us, but he is a centrist, and he genuinely cares about ALL Americans, not just the 45% that got him elected, or the members of his golf club. He's the democrats version of John McCain. If a Republican can't support that type of democrat over the morally bankrupt, incompetent disaster that is DJ Trump, then they aren't honest partners in this great democratic experiment that is America. They are members of a cult.[/quote]
Yes the guy who doesn't know his wife from his sister because he has been losing his marbles for about a decade now. The guy in his late 70's who challenged a man who could kick his ass to a fight. Dems want Biden to choose Hillary for VP so if he wins the election they can declare him non compos mentis in 6 months and Hillary can become President.[/quote]

That's a new one. Might be time to swap out the tinfoil hat, seems to be rusting. :whistle:

How about we make a bet? If that happens, I'll vote GOP on the whole ticket. I've done it before, and as bad as this ass hat is as a POTUS, I'm a man of my word so I'll do it again. But when this paranoid delusion doesn't come to fruition, you have to vote for every Dem on the ticket where you live.

Deal?[/quote]
Sorry, I don't make deals with the devil. :evil: :lol:[/quote]

Thought as much. What new in the Q-universe today?
 
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=381682][quote="Class of 72" post=381655]For Tony :
But you're OK with Trump calling this a "Democrat inspired hoax?"

Yes because what he actually said was that the liberal left leaning media and their actors  are implying that the current administration (Trump) is not doing enough or has  been slow to take action and compared those politicized comments to the Russia, Ukraine and impeachment investigations.  He never said that the Covid-19 virus was a hoax.[/quote]

So the 'hoax' was how the left leaning media was covering the story? Your saying that when he said hoax, it wasn't that he was claiming the virus wasn't a danger, but that the left was making it political and that they weren't giving him enough credit for how he was preparing our response to this virus?
Boy he sure proved them wrong!
What he's said since this started...sure seems like he had a great handle on this and was being proactive. Ya know, instead of making it out to be nothing at all, and turning down testing kits.
[URL]https://twitter.com/SykesCharlie/status/1238132406642761728[/URL]

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]What is disturbing is that Democrats have weaponized this pandemic  by introducing legislation that incorporate non-corona budget items that have zero to do with curbing the virus.[/quote]

Show me please. Show me where that exists. And please highlight what you categorize as "non-corona budget items". Until then, I'm calling "shenanigans".

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump bringing on his son-in-law, who knows nothing about infectious diseases, to help control the spread?

No but it is an all hands on deck approach so neither should you.[/quote] Why all hands on deck? You guys have said there's nothing to be concerned about for weeks and weeks. You've said the media misrepresented how unprepared we are and politicized this. Which is it? That the media/left was correct and this is an extreme danger that's been poorly handled by this administration and now its all hands on deck time...or that their coverage and message is/was a hoax??

Can't be both. Because the coverage he/you are referring to was telling everyone that we aren't doing enough to prepare for what is coming.

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump cutting funding from the CDC months ago?

Months ago had nothing to do with $8 billion being made available last week.  There was no Corona virus outside of China 2 months ago.  He also didn't eliminate any department dealing with the development of infectious disease cures.  False or embellished news as usual.[/quote]

HORSECRAP. And dangerous horsecrap at that:
Trump asked for $2.5B in emergency funding two weeks ago. Democrats offered $8.5B. Thank you democrats.
[URL]https://nymag.com/intelligence...-for-usd2-5-billion-to-fight-coronavirus.html[/URL]

Oh, and he didn't shut down the CDC but he did eliminate the office in the white house that coordinated CDC efforts on things like this. And his budget proposal for this year which came out last month as this crisis was spreading worldwide called for a $9B cut to CDC funding. That was in Mid-February. 3 months after the outbreak in China became public, one month after the first cases started appearing outside of China and the first US citizen had tested positive in Asia, and just as people were getting sick here.
[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-m...-he-disbanded-his-global-health-team-n1153221[/URL]

So either he knew about what was coming and decided the best way to handle this was to cut funding to the CDC (which only a moron would conclude), or he didn't think it was a big deal and was carrying on with his plans to downsize essential services to US citizens. Again, can't be both. So which is it? He didn't see it coming and failed to do anything once it was out of China, or he saw it coming and thought the best way to handle it was to defund the CDC?

[URL]https://thehill.com/policy/fin...ef-holds-firm-on-cdc-cuts-amid-virus-outbreak[/URL]

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump focusing on the economy, instead of stopping COVID-19, which would help the economy recover?
Why do you make it seem like they are mutually exclusive?  He's not doing one in favor of the other.  Sadly it may take the economy longer to get better than 99% of people who will contract the virus.  [/quote]

They are not mutually exclusive, but they aren't mutually inclusive either. Trump's solution was to float the idea of a payroll tax cut to stimulate the market, which is NOT our economy. Think about that. What good is just lowering payroll taxes for the massive amounts of people who are going to lose their jobs? That extra 7% they get to keep in the paycheck they are no longer getting will be very helpful.

Addressing the market and ignoring the epidemic might inflate the market for a few days or a few weeks, but suppressing the epidemic would clearly have a positive impact on the economy and the market. He picked the course/action that dealt with the issue he cared most about, but passed on the one that would bring the most benefit to all. Why is that, do you suppose?

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]As for my centrist leaning lefty SJUFAN2,  trying to edit or delete others views fits your profile for the shut them up, impeach the mother-effer approach to free speech.  If your view to national salvation is a future 80 year old president in the early stages of dementia then God help America and the world.[/quote]

You are a tool. I haven't edited anything. NEVER, not once. There's a freaking tag at the bottom of each posts that shows when its been edited.. Nothing's been deleted from this thread either. To imply that I have is disingenuous and irresponsible. Not surprised about that though, facts aren't your strong suit.

For anyone that bothered to read through this or is in agreement with class of '72 on how evil the democrats are and how awesome Trump is, I will leave you with these two clips. Watch them and ask yourself this question: Tell me which side has your back during this crisis and which is chasing its tail (or worse):

This person who is on FOX representing the administration:
[URL]https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/1238387603034066944?s[/URL]=20

or

This person who is in congress trying to get free testing for everyone.
[URL]https://twitter.com/RepKatiePorter/status/1238147835859779584[/URL]

Elections have consequences America.[/quote]

Politics aside, the dumbest question you could possibly ask, unless of course you are setting a trap is asking will the government provide testing for anyone who wants it.

In this environment especially, it would make zero sense for a perfectly healthy person who doesn't meet certain established criteria, for example, presenting known symptoms or coming in contact with someone who was diagnosed with the virus.

Creating that as a public expectation (that anyone can get tested on demand) is foolish unless the desire is to deliberately create a demand where the supply could not possibly be met.

If you didn't know, I have a clinical background and a postgraduate degree in medical marketing, and while I have no specific concentration in epidemiology have had a career in public health advocacy and have had dozens of health care facilities as clients.

Like everything in our spectrum, once your mind is made up, you hear what you want to hear and listen to those in control in the media that wants control of your decision making.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Beast of the East" post=381684]
Politics aside, the dumbest question you could possibly ask, unless of course you are setting a trap is asking will the government provide testing for anyone who wants it. [/quote]

Politics aside, That's not what she asked. She tried, and eventually got him, to invoke his authority to make sure that everyone CAN get tested without worrying about the cost. That the gov't will pay for what isn't covered by insurance, since 10% of the people in our country have no insurance, and 30-40 can't afford $1-2K out of pocket cost that their plan will make them pay for each person in their family that gets tested. Just need the tests ASAP. They aren't available right now unless you have connections.

[quote="Beast of the East" post=381684]In this environment especially, it would make zero sense for a perfectly healthy person who 't meet certain established criteria, for example, presenting known symptoms or coming in contact with someone who was diagnosed with the virus. [/quote]

Very true, and I totally agree. If you don't feel sick, stay away from your Dr's office and the ER. That's where the sick people are. If you feel symptoms, call your Dr before going there. If they don't have tests, they are just going to send you back home to self quarantine.

[quote="Beast of the East" post=381684]Creating that as a public expectation (that anyone can get tested on demand) is foolish unless the desire is to deliberately create a demand where the supply could not possibly be met. [/quote] She never said "on demand". This was about who pays for it WHEN you can get tested. Now everyone can get tested when they are available without having to choose between their health and those they come in contact with, and paying their mortgage and electric bill.

[quote="Beast of the East" post=381684]If you didn't know, I have a clinical background and a postgraduate degree in medical marketing, and while I have no specific concentration in epidemiology have had a career in public health advocacy and have had dozens of health care facilities as clients. [/quote]

[quote="Beast of the East" post=381684]Like everything in our spectrum, once your mind is made up, you hear what you want to hear and listen to those in control in the media that wants control of your decision making. [/quote]

As do you?

I'm fairly intelligent. I'm politically moderate, and a data driven person who isn't afraid to debate facts. I get my information from all sources, left, right, center, and I am not married to a position to the point that I'm incapable of changing my mid, or admitting if I'm wrong. I just need people to show me evidence of where I'm wrong, not propaganda and opinions. Still waiting on that.

I get that the media is a "for profit" business. That can lead to sensationalizing of information ("if it bleeds, it leads", etc) and can slant how it's presented. Ok, yes...the packaging your information comes in can be slanted. That doesn't mean the information in that package is. It's up to everyone to flex your grey matter and draw your own conclusions. It's way too easy, and far to dangerous, for people to to write off the news sources that they don't agree with as "fake news." Anyone that tells you that all news is fake is trying to sell you a different version of reality.

I can go online right now and find a 1,000 tweets, video's and articles before I finish lunch where our current administration is attacking the non right wing media as "fake news". That's just in 3 years. If I did the same exercise for the previous administration, I'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of instances that could be stretched to fall into that category.

by the way...thank you for a straightforward discussion in your last post. I appreciate your efforts at rational discourse.
 
[quote="The Gumbinator" post=381278][quote="L J S A" post=380909]Not sure if the news broke yet, but if you live in Franklin Square . . .[/quote]

Those of us who live in franklin square don’t appreciate you leaving us hanging...[/quote]

I come here for basketball. I made the post and haven't been back in this thread. And I didn't think it would be very hard for people to figure out what I was alluding to. And as far as what the other guy is saying, I didn't read any Franklin Square info on Facebook. If I were just trying to scare people and spread lies, I sure as shit wouldn't pick Franklin Square.
 
THE SATURDAY ESSAY / Wall Street Journal

When Epidemics Wreaked Havoc in America

Deadly infectious diseases were once common in the U.S., until science conquered them. In today’s crisis, it’s worth recalling those celebrated victories.

By David Oshinsky

March 13, 2020 1/ Wall Street Journal

It may have been the high point of America’s fragile love affair with medical science. “SALK’S VACCINE WORKS,” screamed the nation’s headlines on April 12, 1955. “POLIO IS CONQUERED.” An insidious childhood disease that came like clockwork each summer during the middle years of the 20th century, killing thousands and crippling many more, would be all but eradicated in the U.S. within a single generation.

Rarely, if ever, had a scientist received the instant adulation that awaited Jonas Salk. Tributes piled up, including the Congressional Gold Medal, awarded previously to the likes of Thomas Edison, Charles Lindbergh and General George C. Marshall. The Eisenhower White House circulated a memo suggesting a Rose Garden ceremony for maximum political gain: “We’ve [got to] show that the president is just as interested as [Franklin D. Roosevelt] in polio…to take away the perennial Democratic thunder.” Yet those who witnessed the event were touched by its simple humanity. “No bands played and no flags waved,” wrote a reporter who had followed Eisenhower for years. “But nothing could have been more impressive than this grandfather standing there and telling Dr. Salk in a voice trembling with emotion, `I have no words to thank you. I am very, very happy.’”



New vaccines soon followed—for measles, mumps and rubella. Coupled with earlier laboratory miracles, including the introduction of antibiotics like penicillin and streptomycin, Americans saw a huge jump in their life expectancy, driven by the precipitous decline of infectious diseases. The war against germs, it appeared, had become a rout.

The impact of disease on American history is a remarkably understudied subject. Textbooks give it short shrift in comparison to political, military, diplomatic and economic affairs, but the catalog of key episodes is long. We must not forget that the European conquest and settlement of the Americas were largely dependent on the deadly diseases the settlers brought; or that the grand plan of the Continental Congress to conquer Quebec in 1775 was halted, in large part, by a fearful smallpox outbreak among the troops; or that more American soldiers died from influenza during World War I than from battle wounds, in a pandemic that killed upward of 50 million people world-wide.

It takes the fear of a pandemic, as we are experiencing today with Covid-19, to remind us that infectious diseases were once so common, so deadly, that Americans had little choice but to accept the toll they exacted with stoicism and dread. Death by epidemic remained a natural, if depressing, part of American life until just a few generations ago.

Take yellow fever, for example. A virus transmitted by the bite of the female Aedes aegypti mosquito, with a mortality rate sometimes approaching 50%, it came to the Americas on slave ships from Africa. As trade routes expanded, it reached the port cities of North America, striking Philadelphia, the young nation’s capital, in 1793, where it killed at least 10% of the population and caused the federal government to temporarily disband. Most of Congress fled the city, as did President George Washington and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, an ardent defender of rural values, who found odd comfort amid the carnage. “The yellow fever will discourage the growth of cities in our nation,” he wrote a friend, “& I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man.”



Americans were stumped by its spread. The fact that a vector as tiny as a mosquito could cause a catastrophe of this magnitude was simply beyond anyone’s comprehension. Physicians blamed the disease on miasmas—the noxious vapors arising from corpses, rotting food, and swamp and sewer gases—that were believed to form dangerous airborne clouds. The diaries these doctors left behind show how completely they missed the signals that now seem so obvious today. All complained about mosquitoes swarming and biting, relentless and inescapable. One remarked that he’d never seen as many people “covered with blisters from their venomous operations.” Yet it would be another full century before Dr. Walter Reed confirmed the transmission of the disease by mosquito, which led, in turn, to the draining of swamps, the screening of windows, the development of insecticides and eventually a vaccine.

New York City also saw its share of epidemics. Hardly a decade went by in the 1700s without a serious smallpox eruption. One outbreak in 1731 killed more than 500 of the city’s 10,000 residents, roughly three times the percentage of New Yorkers who would die in the influenza pandemic of 1918.



As the city grew, quickly becoming America’s largest, observers described a pulsing new energy—“a sea of masts” in the harbor, “streets jammed with carts and wheel barrows, buildings “rising everywhere.” But that harbor became something ominous as well: a magnet for the world’s microbes and maladies. Diseases like scarlet fever, measles, typhus and “throat distemper” (diphtheria) came in giant waves. Yet for sheer terror, nothing quite matched cholera, which repeatedly brought New York to a stop.

A bacterial disease, spread through food and water contaminated by the excrement of infected victims, cholera causes the body to expel enormous quantities of liquids through vomiting and explosive diarrhea. There is no incubation period. The victim can be fine in the morning and dead by nightfall.


Having not a clue as to its cause, authorities blamed it on miasmas and slum-dwelling immigrants—in this case, the Irish. “As a class of people,” wrote one New York physician, “they are exceedingly dirty, exhausted by drunkenness, and crowded together in the worst portions of the city.” Certainly his last charge was true. Fleeing the rural starvation of Counties Cork, Kerry and Sligo for the slums of New York City, the Irish lived in ghastly squalor, using whatever water was at hand. In Five Points, their primary neighborhood, that meant a series of shallow wells polluted by fecal waste from backyard privies.



The result was predictable. The foreign-born accounted for 71% of the deaths from the 1832 cholera epidemic, at a time when immigrants were barely 10% of New York City’s population. Sympathy was in short supply. Indeed, the response from many quarters was even harsher than Jefferson’s view of Philadelphia. “Those sickened must be cured or die off,” wrote an unforgiving New York official, “& being chiefly of the very scum of the city, the quicker their dispatch, the sooner the malady will cease.”

How did other New Yorkers approach cholera? In medieval fashion: They quarantined the victims and then humbled themselves before God. Sermons, prayers and fasting were highly recommended; if all else failed, run like hell. One observer compared the exodus of “well-filled stage coaches” during the summer of 1832 to the stampede from Pompeii “when the red lava flowed.” Social distancing favored the rich. Those with means weren’t inclined to stick around.


Two decades later, a brilliant British physician named John Snow would introduce the modern field of epidemiology by mapping cholera deaths surrounding a polluted well in central London. He showed that the disease was transmitted not by noxious fumes in the atmosphere but rather by something in the drinking water, which he couldn’t actually see. His so-called Ghost Map convinced local authorities to remove the well’s pump handle—and the epidemic ceased. In 1884, German researcher Robert Koch identified that mysterious agent, Vibrio cholerae, under a microscope, a discovery that helped to demolish the miasma theory for good.

Some deadly diseases came and went; others, such as tuberculosis, typhoid fever and smallpox, lingered for centuries, despite medical breakthroughs that included Edward Jenner’s miraculous smallpox vaccine. In comparison to Europe, where bacterial research had begun in earnest by the mid-19th century, American medicine proved somewhat slow to give up old habits and ideas, from bleeding and purging the patient to the acceptance of germ theory, which stipulated that invisible organisms caused specific diseases and that antiseptic methods might be employed to halt their spread. In 1870, one child in five born in New York City would not live to see his first birthday, and 25% of those who did reach adulthood would die before the age of 30.



The unfettered optimism surrounding the era of Salk and miracle drugs was understandable, if somewhat premature. The U.S. had recently survived a depression and won a two-front global war. The atomic age had dawned. Science and technology were riding high. Nothing now seemed beyond the reach of the laboratory to heal or to prevent. Some spoke openly of a future without infectious disease. “Will such a world exist?” asked one prominent scientist. “We believe so.”

It hasn’t turned out that way. AIDS, SARS, MERS, Zika, Ebola, swine flu, superbugs—all bear witness to the arrogance of that remark. And yet it’s equally true that until a month or two ago, Americans went about their business without the slightest concern that an epidemic on the scale of smallpox or cholera or yellow fever might randomly strike them down.

There’s a reason we’re emotionally unprepared for what may lie ahead: We simply haven’t experienced the extreme cycles of infectious disease that previous generations were forced to endure. We’re in frightening new territory, wondering if there is enough protective equipment for medical personnel and first responders, if there are enough test kits and ventilators for possible victims, if an effective vaccine is really a year or so away.




Many wonder as well about the new dangers unleashed by globalization. Germs travel, and the consequences can be severe. But that’s the way it’s been for centuries, at an admittedly slower pace. Yellow fever and malaria came to North America from Africa; cholera and typhus rode the steamers and “coffin ships” that discharged immigrant cargo at our shores. History assures us that Covid-19 will be conquered by science and that another virus, originating in a bat cave, a pig farm or an open-air poultry market somewhere in the world, will rise up to take its place. That’s the nature of the beast.

In times like this, when anxiety turns so easily to fear, it sometimes helps to focus upon an optimistic vision of the future. For me, it’s the image of a war hero turned president tearfully thanking a selfless researcher for helping to save the children of the world.

Prof. Oshinsky is a member of the history department at New York University and director of the Division of Medical Humanities at NYU Langone Health. His book, “Polio: An American Story” won the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for history.
 
I have a memory (perhaps-false) of Jonas Salk on the Dick Cavett show and the studio audience rising in a spontaneous standing ovation. Rockaway lad who went to John Adams.
 
Ohio bishops give dispensation to not attend Mass this weekend and the next two.
 
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=381682][quote="Class of 72" post=381655]For Tony :
But you're OK with Trump calling this a "Democrat inspired hoax?"

Yes because what he actually said was that the liberal left leaning media and their actors  are implying that the current administration (Trump) is not doing enough or has  been slow to take action and compared those politicized comments to the Russia, Ukraine and impeachment investigations.  He never said that the Covid-19 virus was a hoax.[/quote]

So the 'hoax' was how the left leaning media was covering the story? Your saying that when he said hoax, it wasn't that he was claiming the virus wasn't a danger, but that the left was making it political and that they weren't giving him enough credit for how he was preparing our response to this virus?
Boy he sure proved them wrong!
What he's said since this started...sure seems like he had a great handle on this and was being proactive. Ya know, instead of making it out to be nothing at all, and turning down testing kits.
[URL]https://twitter.com/SykesCharlie/status/1238132406642761728[/URL]

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]What is disturbing is that Democrats have weaponized this pandemic  by introducing legislation that incorporate non-corona budget items that have zero to do with curbing the virus.[/quote]

Show me please. Show me where that exists. And please highlight what you categorize as "non-corona budget items". Until then, I'm calling "shenanigans".

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump bringing on his son-in-law, who knows nothing about infectious diseases, to help control the spread?

No but it is an all hands on deck approach so neither should you.[/quote] Why all hands on deck? You guys have said there's nothing to be concerned about for weeks and weeks. You've said the media misrepresented how unprepared we are and politicized this. Which is it? That the media/left was correct and this is an extreme danger that's been poorly handled by this administration and now its all hands on deck time...or that their coverage and message is/was a hoax??

Can't be both. Because the coverage he/you are referring to was telling everyone that we aren't doing enough to prepare for what is coming.

[quote="Class of 72" post=381655]Or Trump cutting funding from the CDC months ago?

Months ago had nothing to do with $8 billion being made available last week.  There was no Corona virus outside of China 2 months ago.  He also didn't eliminate any department dealing with the development of infectious disease cures.  False or embellished news as usual.[/quote]

HORSECRAP. And dangerous horsecrap at that:
Trump asked for $2.5B in emergency funding two weeks ago. Democrats offered $8.5B. Thank you democrats.
[URL]https://nymag.com/intelligence...-for-usd2-5-billion-to-fight-coronavirus.html[/URL]

Oh, and he didn't shut down the CDC but he did eliminate the office in the white house that coordinated CDC efforts on things like this. And his budget proposal for this year which came out last month as this crisis was spreading worldwide called for a $9B cut to CDC funding. That was in Mid-February. 3 months after the outbreak in China became public, one month after the first cases started appearing outside of China and the first US citizen had tested positive in Asia, and just as people were getting sick here.
[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-m...-he-disbanded-his-global-health-team-n1153221[/URL]

So either he knew about what was coming and decided the best way to handle this was to cut funding to the CDC (which only a moron would conclude), or he didn't think it was a big deal and was carrying on with his plans to downsize essential services to US citizens. Again, can't be both. So which is it? He didn't see it coming and failed to do anything once it was out of China, or he saw it coming and thought the best way to handle it was to defund the CDC?
Elections have consequences America.[/quote]

Thank SJJUFAN2 for answering my answers to Tony with your Party partisan views on the highlighted bullets.

First of all I stand by everything I said because I don't look at it from the political lense you seem to embrace by party line. I am neither a registered Democrat or Republican but have been Independent since you discovered your pubes.
I have supported both Democrats and Republicans and did not even vote for Donald Trump. In fact, I was even more adamant about not supporting the morally corrupt Ckintons again as I learned my lesson the second time around with Bill. I originally supported Barack Obama until the middle of his second term when his cumulative record proved him a great orator but could not walk-the-talk.
As for your nemesis Donald Trump I look at his promises and his deliverables and as much as he is easy to dislike his personality is not an issue with me. What he does is what matters.
That said, never in my life have I seen the major news media operate as if they were taking their political party positions from a secret Politburo headed by billionaire Democrat owners of those media outlets. That includes ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and many of their affiliate stations around the country. The party political bias of those numerous prime time "main stream" outlets vastly outnumber FOX news. All of the aforementioned seem to be in the business of shaping political opinion rather than reporting the "news".
Thus far only OTIS, an esteemed original moderator, posted this topic in the appropriate Players Lounge. You followed by starting an odd response in the Rookie forum entitled "OTIS". You then began your own Covid Virus thread for "updates" where you deleted comments and subsequently got no other input from the registered members here.
You claim to be a data driven person but you seem too lazy to get into the weeds with the numbers or readily available information. For example, I said "Democrats have weaponized this pandemic  by introducing legislation that incorporate non-corona budget items that have zero to do with curbing the virus.[/quote]
You said:
Show me please. Show me where that exists. And please highlight what you categorize as "non-corona budget items". Until then, I'm calling "shenanigans".
Well, just an hour ago Nancy Pelosi held a news conference about the democratic sponsored legislation saying they and the White House have agreed on the language of bill. THAT language included modifying pro abortion funding disguised as Family Aid.
Specifically, Chuck Schumer tried to inject language that would extend the Obama era driven contraceptive mandate that offers “free preventive care including contraception,” by “circumventing the provisions of the Hyde Amendment.
What does that have to do with testing for the Corona virus? Pay attention to the language and not just the numbers.

As far as defunding the CDC, as the COVID-19 disease caused by the new coronavirus has spread around the world, a number of politicians, news organizations and public figures have made the false claim that the Trump administration cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s anti-pandemic work in over 40 countries to just 10. The CDC has publicly denied this and the real story was about the Obama era 5 year non-renewable funding for that office that expired last year forcing reassignment of personnel. Why it surprised some of the Obama appointed executives in the program is a mystery. I would guess that their party affiliation had something to do with it. But that won't stop NY Times and Washington Post reporters asking the question as happened today.
Finally, you stated above
" So either he knew about what was coming and decided the best way to handle this was to cut funding to the CDC (which only a moron would conclude), or he didn't think it was a big deal and was carrying on with his plans to downsize essential services to US citizens."
What, in your jaded opinion, was the essential service deprived? Depriving Sierra Leone of this service?

I would love to hear your opinions on the comments I made regarding polarizing comments being made by Democrats and left leaning media that it is the right-wing media's racist efforts to rebrand the coronavirus as the “Wuhan” virus that matters in the discussion. The Chinese media picked up on our political divide and even speculated that the U. S. MILITARY planted the virus in Wuhan so it doesn't get labeled an ASIAN virus. In this sordid age of political correctness where what was wrong is now fashionable, when you want to tarnish someone who has a different viewpoint just call them a racist, a xenophobe or sexist.
Good night.
 
EXCELLENT post "Class of 72".

Some people are so full of visceral hatred for Trump that they blind themselves with the misinformation they are spuing. Glad you so eloquently exposed them.
 
No , Trump is certainly not perfect but , I can’t fathom why anyone would remotely believe that a Communist or , a dementia afflicted 78 year old , who is baffled by the simplest of questions and wants to kick some Union Members Ass for asking him a question would make a better President than Trump . The 2 Alternatives left on the Democratic stage are woefully unprepared to deal with any issue , let alone one as serious as this Virus . And , the Biden Boost from South Carolina that has propelled him to front runner status , will not hold up in the General Election . South Carolina is overwhelmingly Republican . He won’t win SC.
 
Hey Mario, Slyfox and Everyone Else

Knock off the Political Talk or this thread or it will be locked.

Paul makes this Forum available to you for FREE with not many Rules. One of the few Rules he has set however is that the site be a "Political Free Zone".

Rather than respect his wishes you and others "push the envelop" and disrespect Paul's Rule. Disappointing.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top