How to re-open the country and control COVID-19 #coronavirus

Thoughts of a Mathematician

This article assumes that federal, state, county, and city governments, having jurisdiction over a particular location, act in coordination and agreement. This agreement is referred to here as the government’s decision. Any such decision would likely comprise actions by the government and reasonable and easy to follow recommendations to public.

1.     Metrics

“If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it” is applicable here. To control COVID-19, we need to measure the percentage of infected, immune, and naïve individuals in each location and age group. The most popular metrics – the number of tested positively and the number of deaths – are not very useful.

 The best way to measure the spread of COVID-19 is to perform random testing of the population. 500 random tests in a location with the population of 1-10 million would provide a sufficiently accurate picture, while only using a small fraction of available test kits. Such testing can be performed daily using a small fraction of available test kits.

The local government can accomplish that by offering free COVID-19 tests to randomly chosen drivers on the roads, students on campuses, children in schools, passengers in airports and other public transportation. Like in surveys, the raw results should be normalized to reflect the whole population.

2.     Lifting Restrictions: Go-Stop-Go

A good technique for re-opening the country (state, city, or county) is to temporarily lift most restrictions for a three-day-period – from the nearest Monday to Wednesday. People will enjoy a short week, after a long period of forced idleness. More importantly, this would allow the government to closely observe the situation for the rest of the week. The median incubation period of COVID-19 is 5 days, so about half of the symptomatic cases, exposed in the Monday-Wednesday period will appear before the next Monday. The number of cases that would appear later can be calculated. Unless there is an unexpected rise in hospitalizations or new patterns of symptoms, the same restrictions are lifted permanently, per location. The “location” means a county, a city, a metro, or a small New England state. Large states, like California, Washington, and even New York comprise multiple locations with different conditions.

This Go-Stop-Go approach to lifting restrictions is preferable to their gradual relaxation, in which case we would always be a few days behind the actual developments.

3.     Differentiation

Obviously, there are differences between locations depending on the infection levels, population density, transportation modes etc. The most heavily infected areas might benefit from continued stay-at-home recommendations.

The COVID-19 death rates sharply vary depending on age. Only a small percentage of deaths occur in people below 50 (see CDC data on COVID-19 statistics page on April 15), Most of those individuals had known pre-existing conditions, mostly hypertension and diabetes. See the New York’s dashboard.

It seems that in most areas, people below 50 and without the described pre-existing conditions, can return to their ordinary lives, except for some high-risk activities.

On the other hand, additional caution and help can be recommended for those who are 65+. They might even need isolation from family members who go to work. Measures to actively protect the elderly and vulnerable might include:

  •  Delivery of groceries & other necessities to their homes, rather than requiring them to go out in public.
  • Encouraging their employers to provide them paid vacations.
  • Giving free lodging, if anybody in their household is symptomatic or has tested positive for COVID-19.

The CDC should stop using the phrase ‘community spread’. COVID-19 transmission cannot be traced, which is the definition of community spread. However, COVID-19 is not a plague, as is the implied connotation and sense of panic when using the term “community spread”.

4.     Immediate Priorities

In my opinion, when the country goes back to work, the priority should be to ramp up preparedness for any dangerous mutations of CoV2. This would also be a useful step in preparing for future pandemics. For example, we need to quickly increase the surge capacity of the health care system, rather than to try bending the curve to meet its limits. The surge capacity might be free of most regulations and even be of lower grade than the regular capacity.

Another surprisingly ignored measure is to arrange separate hospitals for epidemic victims, while keeping other hospitals safe from the infection. Stephen McIntyre tweeted a week ago:

I saw an interview with an experienced US doctor on epidemics in the Third World. They set up field hospitals for epidemic patients so that ordinary hospitals can continue without getting infected. Domestically, US did exact opposite. Allowed epidemic patients to disrupt [the whole health care system]. Worse than the Third World.

5.     Remarks

We need to hear more from real doctors (who see patients), rather from the Swamp dwellers like the AMA, other entities blindly following climate cult, the fake news media, and the UN bodies.

The government has some emergency powers for use in emergencies. However, the current COVID-19 situation falls far from the emergency, possibly except for the New York metro area. Thus, state governments, with possible exception of the New York and New Jersey, don’t have emergency powers. No level of government has the constitutional right to decide what we, the people, do. Whether we go out, stay at home, work or don’t work, these are OUR decisions. They cannot order us to stay home to save statistical lives, even if those statistics are correct – which isn’t usually the case, when a government tries to overstep its authority.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 15, 2020 10:10 pm

This statement says it all, “The most heavily infected areas might benefit from continued stay-at-home recommendations.”

We should not allow this in a free society – if it is mandatory. There are several cures available that can arrest new cases until there is a vaccine.

‘Live free or die’ might be a literal mantra at this point.

The CDC says doctors and hospitals kill 100,000 patients per year from preventable hospital infections. When the virus eclipses that figure by a factor of 10 come back and talk to me. Until then, we can muddle through with the tools we have.

old white guy
Reply to  archie
April 16, 2020 3:35 am

Get up, get out and get at it. Stop with the insanity it has not saved one single life.

Doug Huffman
Reply to  old white guy
April 16, 2020 8:26 am

We’re waiting … waiting … waiting for nothing to happen, as commanded by our elect.

Damocles’ Sword of Truth must needs cut long and wide and deep when this is over, that it not happen again – next fall.

Roger welsh
Reply to  old white guy
April 16, 2020 9:18 am

100% agree.

Reply to  archie
April 16, 2020 3:52 am

Quite a bit more than 100K; think it’s around 250,000. It’s the 3rd leading cause of death in the US (JAMA, 1999; John Hopkins, 2016), at least.

Reply to  icisil
April 16, 2020 6:32 am

Add in about half the COVID deaths so far which seem to be destructive misuse of ventilators.

Reply to  greg
April 16, 2020 7:01 am


It seems that the protocols around the use of ventilators are under review-

Reply to  kakatoa
April 16, 2020 8:01 am

That is very welcome. But how many nosocomials are going to be swept under the rug of COVID-19 ?

Reply to  kakatoa
April 16, 2020 8:08 am

– Absolutely. When using ventilators, 50% or more die, a large percentage have permanent lung damage, and only a precious few are helped. You are doing it wrong. Isn’t it time to consider something else?

I could just see how that would fly at any place I worked.
“Hey boss. I have a fantastic idea for a product that will sell millions. Unfortunately 50% of the users will die and 40% more will be maimed, but you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.”

That’s what blindly following “the protocol” because it is the accepted protocol, developed by “experts” gets you when something new comes along and the protocol isn’t working.

Time to try something else that works; develop a better or improved protocol or even one that works most of the time. When you come up with something where only 25% die, why would anyone continue to follow the old protocol that doesn’t fix the problem? Yeah, the new one doesn’t either, but it’s a major improvement.

Note well, you can’t be held responsible if you “followed the protocol.”

Reply to  kakatoa
April 17, 2020 3:29 pm

Re-invent the Iron Lung:
– far less invasive
– no damage to the larynx
– patient need not be sedated
– negative pressure is far less dangerous to the lungs
– easy to take a patient on- and off- treatment temporarily
I suspect the main advantage of the respirator is that it takes less space in the hospital store-room.

Reply to  greg
April 17, 2020 2:45 am

In my country, patients are not put on mechanical ventilation until their SPO2 drops below 90% +-, or they can no longer breath unassisted. Can’t say about other countries.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  icisil
April 16, 2020 11:28 am

This has the same issue of misassignment of cause that CoVID deaths do in some locations. Medical errors are very common, in part because medical care is highly complex with a myriad of decisions and processes and it is just too easy to make mistakes. That said attributing 250,000 deaths to medical error is based on assuming the deaths would not have occurred without the error. That is clearly true in some cases but in many it is quite likely that the individual was in a precarious position and unlikely to survive much longer. That is the nature of the sickest folks we have in hospitals. If someone dies in hospital that doesn’t mean that any medical error that occurred was the cause. I don’t know what the real attribution rate should be, and as a physician interested in health system improvement I strongly support measures to reduce medical errors, but I think we need to be a bit more realistic about the quality of statistics we use. This would be very helpful in the CoVID case where modeling seems to described a different parallel universe to the one I inhabit.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
April 16, 2020 12:37 pm

Same standard as attributing deaths “due to” COVID-19. A significant percentage would have died soon anyway and the virus just took them out ahead of schedule.

Apples to apples: If we’re in a panic because 200,000 people “might die” from COVID-19, why do we ignore 250,000 who “probably” die each year due to medical errors?

Logic and Reason
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
April 16, 2020 1:49 pm

Regarding attribution, we should see the weekly death attributions for all major causes of death, so that we can compare that to past years. I would be very suspicious if in the months of March & April, the number of people who died from heart disease, diabetes, stroke, cancer, dementia, and just plain old age dropped by around 30,000 or so compared to past averages.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
April 16, 2020 5:03 pm

Alan, they are doing that. Death rates have undoubtedly markedly increased:

“….New York cardiac emergency calls:
From March 20 to April 5, 2019, cardiac calls averaged 69 a day in New York City, with an average of 27 deaths — 39 percent of the calls.

For the same period this year, cardiac calls averaged 195 a day, with an average of 129 deaths, meaning 66 percent of those calls involved a death.

The difference has become more pronounced as the disease has spread.

From March 30 to April 5, 2019, there were an average of 69 calls a day for cardiac patients and 26 deaths, meaning 38 percent of the calls.

For March 30 to April 5, 2020 — the week ending Sunday — cardiac calls averaged 284 a day, with 200 deaths a day. Seventy-two percent of the calls ended in death.

The numbers for Sunday were the highest yet. Out of 322 cardiac calls, 241, or almost 75 percent, ended in death….”

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
April 16, 2020 5:04 pm

“…The public cemetery on Hart Island New York is seeing an increase in burials—from 24 a week to 24 a day

With record-breaking coronavirus-related deaths overwhelming morgues and mortuaries in New York City, the public cemetery on Hart Island is seeing an increase in burials—from 24 a week to 24 a day. By April 13, more than 10,000 people in the city had died from COVID-19, after daily deaths surpassed 700 for five days.

Some coronavirus victims are being laid to rest at Hart Island, in Long Island Sound, just east of the Bronx. Since 1869, the wind-swept, mile-long island with rocky shores and crumbling buildings has taken in the bodies of people with no known next of kin, including those who have died from diseases of epidemic proportions.

Mayor Bill de Blasio says the Hart Island cemetery is accommodating only unclaimed victims of COVID-19, along with people who have died of other causes….”

Steven Fraser
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
April 16, 2020 1:46 pm

This is headed in 2 directions: From CMS, COVID patients are re-imbursed to the Hospitals at a higher rate, and Intubations are triple $.

On the other side… In WA, they have learned that putting a patient on their side is more effective for Oxygenation… just like for cystic fibrosis.

Reply to  archie
April 16, 2020 4:28 am

Trump is going to announce today a plan for reopening the US.

Reply to  archie
April 16, 2020 4:41 am

Agree mostly. Also note:

The measurement should be not on cases but hospital admissions. Recall that all the blather about “flattening the curve” was only to attempt to make sure the “hospitals were not overwhelmed”. the “savings” in the deaths were solely, and only, to avoid “excess deaths” due to “overwhelmed”. Honest medical staffs talk about “potential surges”. Then the spin of “surge cold be due to non-compliance” of the isolation, etc., orders.

As some have noted, social distancing, stay-at-home effects only begin to appear in the “cases” about three weeks after the measures are put in place. This has NOT occurred. The cases/deaths peaked then begin to decline before the effect could be measured. Then the guidelines of how to prepare death certificates were altered to include “suspicion” of CV-19 even if tested negative. Which allows them to report “new spikes” since some have gone back and restated their death counts using “suspicion” . Compare even to CDC’s counting HIV deaths to include those “diagnosed with HIV but may have died from other causes.”

The bottom line: Nothing to date will keep you from being exposed to the virus, it’s just, at best, when. If you’re in a State where your Governor has banned the malaria drug either as a preventative or treatment, which would have saved your life if you develop a severe case of CV-19, then I’m “suspicious” you’re gonna die.

Some enterprising investigative journalist will write a best seller regarding, at this point, to be a complete failure of all the government experts regarding surveillance, detection, treatment and care, crisis response, promoting hysteria, pumping up case/death counts and, perhaps worst of all, sending the world economies into near depression — all for a contagion that “might have swamped”.

And this play acting simply continues the fictions, myths and hysteria by the same “experts”. The sad and sobering part is we’ll all likely have this repeated, forever, just like the great climate scam.

Reply to  cedarhill
April 16, 2020 6:35 am

Mostly agree with you as well, but fundamentally, isolation and quarantining work and social distancing had to have some effect. Transmission is a function of many factors but contact is primary.

Perhaps increased testing and discovery of new cases have hidden these effects because of insufficient testing at the early stages of this pandemic. Little regarding this pandemic has been under control to allow sufficient understanding of the many variables at play.

One truly isolated will not get exposed. One can argue whether true isolation is possible. In many circumstances it is. With regard to HCQ, where is it banned?

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 6:55 am

HCQ, where is it banned? Navada and some other state with a TDS Dem governor who puts political points scoring above the lives and healths of those who elected him/her/

Perhaps increased testing and discovery of new cases have hidden these effects

that is certainly the case in France where testing has been rising exponentially and has masked the peak in daily cases. It is clear in Italy and Spain.

comment image

US is less clear , probable because there are different groups of infected populations evolving , relatively independently and the restrictions have not been nation wide.

Here is a provisional graph of US cases. The model fit is more tenuous as to what parameters fit since the initial growth is not as ‘exponential’ as the european countries. The break point is still fairly evident.

The down swing is also less marked. Ultimately that may be a good thing. Flattening to far just pushes the peak out months into the future and high case numbers become a new normal in hospitals.

comment image

Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 7:30 am

Apparently in Nevada, hospital doctors may prescribe the drugs, but restrictions apply to clinics and private offices, so as to “prevent hoarding”.

What’s your take on flattening only postpones the cases and deaths (in order to prevent overwhelming the healthcare system)? The purported outcome in several Asian locales to me suggests that something else is at play, perhaps a pseudo herd immunity.

Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 8:04 am

Could you be more specific ? I can’t comment of “several Asian”.

SK clamped down hard but will now forever live in fear and totalitarian surveillance.

Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 8:24 am

Look at S. Korea, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia, even Wuhan and China. The curve has been more than just flattened.

New cases are very low, there is a relatively sharp and distinct peak. Of course we can’t totally believe the data from China, but they didn’t get on top of it early there, like perhaps in S. Korea. Ideas?

Richard M
Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 9:43 am

Scissor, I think the one commonality of those Asian nations is widespread use of masks. I think that is equivalent to social distancing with essential services excluded. Both allow some minor spread of the disease.

Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 10:20 am

Richard M, I think you may be right about the use of masks in Asia. It’s a well accepted and practiced habit there, especially during flu season.

I’m critical of China on their hygiene practices, but that doesn’t extend to their mask wearing.

Curious George
Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 2:02 pm

“Apparently in Nevada, hospital doctors may prescribe the drugs, but restrictions apply to clinics and private offices, so as to “prevent hoarding”. Very nice. If you believe that HCQ may help in early stages of the disease, in Nevada you are out of luck – unless you belong to the mob.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  cedarhill
April 16, 2020 6:43 am

As some have noted, social distancing, stay-at-home effects only begin to appear in the “cases” about three weeks after the measures are put in place.

“Some” was Monckton advancing ad hoc arguments to make the introduction line up with the peak in cases to prop up his faith based claim that confinement was working and it could be seen in the data. (Though he never explained how this could be seen in his graphs).

If you look at the analysis I posted earlier, looking at d/dt( daily new cases ) , there is a clear and marked change at +10 days, not 3 weeks. That seems consistent with it being the effect of confinement measures.

comment image

Tom Abbott
Reply to  cedarhill
April 16, 2020 6:47 am

” Recall that all the blather about “flattening the curve” was only to attempt to make sure the “hospitals were not overwhelmed”

It’s easy to call it “blather” *now*, after the fact. You have the luxury of hindsight. The people who instituted “social distancing” didn’t have this luxury. They didn’t know how infectious this disease was nor how fatal it might turn out to be, and so took the necessary steps to fight the virus if it turned out to be “worse than we thought”.

It didn’t turn out to be worse than we thought (it’s still not good), but criticizing the initial actions isn’t taking everything into consideration.

Critics need to put themselves in the shoes of the decision makers. Anybody can Monday-morning quarterback.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 16, 2020 9:04 am

Perfect comment Tom!

Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 16, 2020 11:09 am

In that case, they need to end the general lockdown now.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 16, 2020 11:57 am

This is fair comment. I would add a couple of additions. First we should be very careful about how we choose and who we chose to be decision-makers. In my world the majority of health system administrators and many at the political level were chosen in an environment that rewards complacency and obedience not decision making. Poor performers tend to surround themselves with other poor performers and as a result, apart form our regional public health officers, many of those making decisions presently are not effective decision-makers. They make decisions based on the precautionary principle (a flawed method) and don’t adequately account for the costs of their decisions against whatever perceived benefit they anticipate. We should work to ensure those who will make critical decisions during times of crisis are equipped and motivated to do so effectively.

The second point is that good decision-makers when working through crisis with a large amount of uncertainty, use contingency thinking. They recognize and make clear the areas of uncertainty, they acknowledge their decisions may be in error, they plan for how to detect and respond to error in advance and are not shy about admitting error and redirecting. I don’t see a lot of evidence of this happening in my jurisdiction at present. The political environment makes it very difficult to do this effectively as it is a gotcha contest where any sign of weakness or error turns into a hit job.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
April 16, 2020 1:09 pm

I agree with much of this. The poisonous politics make for incentives and disincentives that are counterproductive. Doing something no matter how stupid is necessary because passivity can always be attacked. An example of that might be shutting down upstate New York instead of certain counties or demanding to shut down Wyoming.

But a good example of contingency thinking is to consider using HCQ despite limited evidence and to build up a stockpile of it in case it proves out.

The unknown risk that R0 is very high coupled with unknown fatality rates justified a prudent approach. You may denigrate this as the precautionary principle, but luck seems to favor those who prepare.

Once there is hazy evidence that things are not as bad as feared, the wise person calculates the future cost benefit of maintaining or changing policy. That too is happening as we speak. To compare the immediate risks of covid-19 to the far-off imaginary risks of “climate change” and categorize both as the precautionary principle is not reasonable.

So as Tom said, don’t be a Monday morning quarterback.

Reply to  cedarhill
April 16, 2020 6:57 am

Surveillance? One of the main jobs of health services during an epidemic? The CDC has done almost none. Doing a sloppy job of counting deaths and counting test results from an ill defined subset of the population does not count as surveillance.

Serum Antibody Tests with >90% accuracy (excellent accuracy for surveilance– if not for testing individuals) have been available for the SARS-CoV-2 virus since January. They continue to pretend it was OK to avoid gathering the data required for proper epidemiological surveillance. Surveillance is typically the main job of health agencies during an epidemic…perform testing for tracking the geographic and the numerical penetration of infection and managing quarantines based on that data if necessary.

The data would have been easy enough to acquire. So, here we are 3 and maybe 4 months into the epidemic (don’t know for lack of data…some say 5 months) and we don’t have a handle on the most basic and important datum…the % of the population that has immunity…and nobody questions why it is that we don’t yet know…we dont yet know what we need to know when we could have.

We desperately need this information NOW for managing the reopening of the economy.
So now the Governors will be scrambling to get the testing done. Better late than never, but we should never entrust the Federal Government with tasks involving life and death…or the health of the entire world economy. The CDC couldn’t foresee the need for PPE…so we shouldn’t be too surprised when easily obtained KEY data is never acquired. Science and Government never mix.

Reply to  DocSiders
April 16, 2020 7:40 am

1. Metrics are critical as Mr. Goldstein says. In crises like this, unfortunately, testing is an abysmal situation. As several others have pointed out, the tests themselves may not be fit for purpose and false and positive rates are not really known. Bad test results are misleading but that’s where we are.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 12:00 pm

Fair comment an that is why ruining the metrics and introducing cross sectional seroprevalence studies is now among the highest priorities. Once we have a reasonable estimate of what proportion of th population have been infected at various stages of the epidemic we will be able to make better plans.

It is a given that we are in the very early days of a new human infection, so it is asking a lot to have reliable testing available so early on and, it is a tribute to how fast the technology and skills have evolved that we even have the testing we are using today, imperfect though it may be.,

Reply to  archie
April 16, 2020 8:54 am

Amen! Thanks for this article, one of the best I’ve yet to read on the subject.

April 15, 2020 10:21 pm

Most excellent! Well presented, well argued, well done.


Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 1:08 am

Dosage Forms & Strengths
NOTE: Chloroquine phosphate 16.6 mg is equivalent to 10 mg chloroquine base

Indicated for prophylaxis of malaria in geographic areas where resistance to chloroquine is not present
500 mg (300-mg base) weekly on the same day each week; begin 1-2 weeks before travel, during travel, and for 4 weeks after leaving endemic area
Indicated for acute attacks of malaria due to P. vivax, P. malariae, P. ovale, and susceptible strains of P. falciparum
Acute attack
1 g (600-mg base) PO, THEN
500 mg (300 mg-base) PO after 6-8 hr THEN
500 mg (300 mg-base) PO at 24 hr and 48 hr after initial dose
Total dose of 2500 mg (1500 mg-base) in 3 days

Or 1.5 grams-base in 3 days.

Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 1:45 am

” the lethal dose of chloroquine or an adult is estimated at
30–50 mg/kg ”

If weigh 90 kg, then 90 x 30–50 is 2700 – 4500 mg

Hmm, which is probably/maybe means lethal if take 2.7 to 4.5 grams per day.
So, would guess, maybe not first day but probably the second day.
Or maybe if taking weekly, maybe the second week.

Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 4:03 am

The protocols for HCQ are typically 400 mg/day for 5 days. Nowhere near a lethal dose.

Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 5:58 am

The Brazilian study of the use of chloroquine to treat COVID-19 was just stopped because of the high number of deaths and heart problems in the group using the high dose (600mg twice a day).
“On day six of the trial, 11 patients had died and a quarter of those getting the higher dosage showed abnormal electrical activity in the heart.”
The number of patients in the study was 81.

Phil Rae
Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 5:59 am

Drug toxicity is usually expressed as an LD50 – the dose that would statistically result in the death of 50% of those taking it. And, yes, that toxic dose is for “acute dosage” – the specified quantity taken all at one time……not spread over days!

Drugs like chloroquine with short half-lives are quickly cleared from the body by metabolism & excretion so taking therapeutic doses on multiple days dies NOT result in toxicity!

So, there is no logical reason, based on toxicity, to withhold treatment with chloroquine in those cases deemed likely to benefit by the attending physician.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 10:28 am

The reason that the patients did not die immediately is because the HCQ in the blood stream increases over time until the excretion rate, which is proportional to the total concentration in the blood, equals the daily intake rate. Although, that may never happen if the person is untypically sensitive to the toxin. That is, the person may die before the concentration in the blood reaches the same level as the dosage.

LD50 (Lethal Dose, 50% subjects) is calculated based on acute toxicity, or a single dose. There are many toxins that can be tolerated (or at least one survives) with a single threshold dose. However, in chronic poisoning (as in industrial settings with continuous exposure over long periods of time) sub-lethal doses can accumulate (more rapidly with long half-lives) and eventually the person or animal exposed succumbs. Paris Green (an arsenic compound) used to be used in paints and printed wallpapers. It was not dangerous with a single casual exposure. However, those living in a house with it were continuously exposed and often died from it.

So, these discussions about the acute toxicity of chloroqine and its variants are mainly applicable to those ignorant enough to ingest aquarium cleaner. However, my concern here is about those advocating HCQ sulfate over an extended period of time, and who obviously know little about the behavior of chronic poisoning. They think that if someone starts to show cardiac problems the doctor can just stop administering the HCQ and everything will be fine. Because of a ~one month half-life, that isn’t the case. And, there is no known way to speed up HCQ excretion, such as using chelating agents with heavy metal poisoning.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 10:35 am

You claimed, “Drugs like chloroquine with short half-lives are quickly cleared from the body by metabolism & excretion …” Can you provide a citation to support the claim of short half-lives? If I remember correctly, my rheumatologist told me that HCQ has a half-life of about 27 days. In any event, I have previously posted a link that claimed that HCQ can be found in the system for years after someone stopped using HCQ.

When people make claims such as yours, which is not common knowledge, and can have serious medical consequences, I really would appreciate citations to back up your claim.

Ian W
Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 10:59 am

COVID-19 causes a lot of heart damage.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infects host cells through ACE2 receptors, leading to coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-related pneumonia, while also causing acute myocardial injury and chronic damage to the cardiovascular system. Therefore, particular attention should be given to cardiovascular protection during treatment for COVID-19.

It looks like the COVID-19 effects on the heart were being blamed on HCQ

There are reports of a large increase in cardiac arrests in NYC – possibly for the same reason.

William Astley
Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 9:47 am

Stop Spreading Fake News!!!!
Stop Spreading a Lie!!!!

A half truth is a lie. There are in vitro tests with live virus that support what is stated below.

Is what is written below clear?

The prescribed Doses of Chloroquine to ‘fight’ covid-19 are ridiculously high and dangerous!!!!

And THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT: Chloroquine is absolutely useless in fighting the virus without Zinc supplements!!!!

Peer reviewed studies have shown: Chloroquine is a Zinc Ionophore (it gets a tiny amount of zinc into our cells).

And Peer Reviewed studies have shown: That a tiny amount of Zinc in our cells stops the covid virus from replicating.

And a Jewish physician has treated 700 of covid patients with the low dosage Chloroquine and Zinc supplements without almost 100% success rate.

The cure for covid-19 is Chloroquine 30 mg/day plus 30 mg/day of Zinc. The amount of Zinc is the same as current Zinc supplements sold in drugstores.

The amount of Chloroquine is the lowest prescribed amount and in vitro tests show that it is more than sufficient to get the free Zinc in our blood stream into the cell.

The +2 Charged Zinc ion requires the Chloroquine….

To get into our negative charged cells.

The micro amount of Zinc in out cells…

… stops the covid virus from replicating by making the ACE-2 molecule in our cells slightly positive.

Chloroquine Is a Zinc Ionophore
Jing Xue1,2, Amanda Moyer1 , Bing Peng1,3, Jinchang Wu2 , Bethany N. Hannafon1 , Wei-Qun Ding1 * 1 Department of Pathology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States of America, 2 Department of Radio-Oncology, Nanjing Medical University Affiliated Suzhou Hospital, Suzhou, China, 3 Department of Pharmacology, School of Pharmacy, Xuzhou Medical College, Xuzhou, China

Video that explains how Zinc stops the virus from replicating in our cells.

William Astley
Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 11:51 am

This is a link to the Chloroquine and Zinc supplements treatment used by the Jewish doctor.

Note he treated people after the virus had replicated in them and hence used larger amounts of the drugs.

A lower dosage option is possible because it is before the virus can replicate.

In vitro studies show a very small amount of Chloroquine (around 10 mg/day) is sufficient to enable free zinc ions in the blood (we need zinc supplements to get free zinc ions) to enter our cells and stop the virus from connection to the ACE-2 molecule and reproducing.

Also there is evidence that people who are zinc deficient:
Vegetarians and the Elderly are more susceptible to the virus. The evidence is they and everyone else should be taking Zinc supplements to help their body fight the virus.

“I blended the two treatments from South Korea and France and made a three drug regimen which are hydroxychloroquine, which is the common denominator by both treatments, then I used zinc, and azithromycin. The virus gets inside the cell and begins to hijack the cell industrial machinery. It is well known that zinc interrupts that. So, the concept is that it interferes in the replication of the virus,” said Dr Zelenko while revealing about his course of treatment.

“But the problem with zinc is that it does not get inside the cell very easily, only very small percent gets in. What is interesting is that hydroxychloroquine is a ionic core; so it is the key that opens the canal and facilitates the work of the zinc. When you have a severe viral infection, it is well known that you can get a secondary infection, so I believe the zithromax is there as a precaution and if there begins a bacteria process, it kills it before it causes a bigger problem,” he went on to add.

This is the Jewish physician that treated 700 sick covid patients with higher dosage Chloroquine and Zinc supplements with close to 100% success rate.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  William Astley
April 17, 2020 8:07 am

When you have many standards, you don’t have any standard. At the core of the problem is that the use of HCQ as a treatment for COVID-19 is experimental and there isn’t any agreement, even among physicians, let alone laymen commenting here, as to what the best regimen is. The poorly designed trials of various physicians, often supported here by laymen who get on their favorite ‘Hobby Horse,’ are much like throwing pasta at the wall to see if it sticks. At issue is that the Scientific Method is being ignored, and those who insist on rigorous trials are being castigated by those who I doubt could design a controlled medical trial if their lives depended on it, which they may.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 2:18 am

Generally good but go-stop-go will take longer than suggested.

Monday to Wednesday. People will enjoy a short week, after a long period of forced idleness. More importantly, this would allow the government to closely observe the situation for the rest of the week. The median incubation period of COVID-19 is 5 days, so about half of the symptomatic cases, exposed in the Monday-Wednesday period will appear before the next Monday.

comment image

Time from confinement to detectable change in case data was 10d in Italy and Spain. Probably adds delays before people put their life at risk by going to a hospital plus a testing delay. You then need at least 5-7d of data to form even at tentative conclusion of the impacts of any change.

So a more realistic delay between changing course and modifying strategy may be more like 15-17 days.

“If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it”

I think the analysis I have shown above gives a sensitive means of detecting short term change. By looking at the second differential ( acceleration ) of total case numbers it accentuates high frequency change usually invisible in the smooth curve of total cases / deaths.

However, this does mean you don’t do dumb shit like adding in 3700 “presumed” cases half way through the data set. If you do that you have NO IDEA where you have been or where you are going .

NYC must have a dataset based on consistent sampling otherwise managing the crisis is impossible.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 2:57 am

Russell, it seems you can find nothing wrong with what the author wrote, so you attack me. Brilliant plan.

But you don’t have either the brains or the balls to come up with your own bullshit, so you link to some slimy website that pretends to be WUWT to fool the unwary.

There, they claim that the dosage of chloroquine that I took (3 x 500 mg tablets/day, which is 900 mg of base) is lethal … hilarious. They’re telling me that I’m dead. What they don’t seem to understand is that the lethal dose needs to be taken all at once. The drug is eliminated in 24 hours.

In addition, they are confusing chloroquine phosphate (typically 500 mg tablets) with the actual amount of chloroquine base (typically 300 mg in each tablet). I took three tablets, which as I said above is 900 mg of base, just under one gram.

A lethal dose for someone of my size (75 kg) is between two and one-quarter to three and three-quarters grams in one dose. I took less than a gram.


You are lower than pond scum, your polpette are as yet undescended, and you are incapable of even the simplest arithmetic.


Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 4:35 am

I’ll definitely have to remember that saying about not having the brains or the balls. Good saying.

paul courtney
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 7:14 am

Willis said “your polpette are as yet undescended….”
Never took anatomy, do they descend in utero? ‘Cause Mr. Seitz often is a bit shrill, something didn’t drop. Thank you for dropping on him.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  paul courtney
April 16, 2020 12:11 pm

Since most babies emerge head first and their Mom’s spend much of the pregnancy upright, it might be more accurate to say the “polpette” ascend in uterus. In reality they do neither. The develop attached to a structure colourfully referred to as the gubernaculum (I know it sounds alike a sharp, stainless steel gripping thing that makes you want to cross your legs). As the fetus grows the gubernaculum holds those precious seed makers in one place. The body lengthens but the testes are held in place till they reside in that artfully dangling package of potential pain.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 8:33 am

Seitz linked to a slimy website that pretends to be WUWT

Misfeasance of the worst kind.
I suggest identifying this person and banning her/him/it.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 9:32 am

I initially was confused when I followed his fake link…then J noticed the VV instead of a W. Who does this kind of crap. Nice put down Willis!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 10:45 am

You claimed, “The drug is eliminated in 24 hours.” That seems suspect since the prophylactic use is weekly. Logically, one would want to replenish the HCQ in one’s system before it became too low to be effective. The alternative to one large weekly dose would be small daily doses. Can you provide a citation for your claim?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
April 17, 2020 8:40 am

Since I have not heard back from you, I will supply what I have found regarding your claim “The drug is eliminated in 24 hours.”

Half-life: Terminal elimination half-life:

In blood: Approximately 50 days.
In plasma: Approximately 32 days.

Steady state concentration in whole blood (achieved at 6 months):

Renal; 23 to 25% of hydroxychloroquine excreted unchanged in the urine. Hydroxychloroquine is excreted very slowly; may persist in urine for months or years after medication is discontinued

William Astley
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 12:41 pm

We need to stop fighting and solve a problem. What is the issue we are fight about?

The virus is thing must connect to a single molecule type in our cells, ACE-2. Our smart cells take Zinc (Z +2) and make that molecule ACE-2 slightly positive….

…. which stops the thing, the virus from replicating.

No replication, no virus.

What are you guys talking about?

Zinc is used in every cell in our body.

It is known that vegetarians, who as a group Zinc are deficient, do worse than the general population against covid.

It is known that the elder, who are also Zinc deficient, do worse than the general population against covid.

It appears, the Herd has a Zinc deficiency which when corrected will help stop the covid virus.

And if we take Zinc Supplements and a small amount of a Zinc Ionosphere such as Chloroquine that stops the virus from replicating.

Zn 2+ Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity In Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture

Zinc deficiency linked to immune system response, particularly in older adults

Zinc helps against infection by tapping brakes in immune response

Zinc helps against infection by tapping brakes in immune response

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 3:53 am


OK doomer

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
April 16, 2020 7:59 am

Nice spoofed web name. I’m not clicking that, thank you very much.

April 15, 2020 10:22 pm

And, what happened actually in Fort Detrick, July 2019?

Reply to  Alex
April 16, 2020 12:38 am

Ft. Detrick had no infectious microorganisms escape containment to the outside as verified by the US Army Medical Research Institute & operated under the Federal Select Agent ( agent = pathogen) Program. Tthe CDC exercised oversight shutting it down over federal compliance regulations described below.

After 2018 spring flooding it’s wastewater system for decontamination had to be rebuilt & the more complicated new installation was subsequently deemed unacceptable for safe resumption of operation. There were also regulatory issues with unmet recertification requirements of some people involved in biological containment.

Reply to  gringojay
April 16, 2020 1:29 am

“Ft. Detrick had no infectious microorganisms escape containment to the outside as verified by the US Army Medical Research Institute & operated under the Federal Select Agent ( agent = pathogen) Program. ”

You believe that?
Italy reports the epidemic began as early as in October 2019. Although the doctors could not classify the strange pneumonia at that time.

Reply to  Alex
April 16, 2020 3:44 am

now Im damned curious
I had a 3 day fever , I couldnt force to break with seriously nasty neuralgia ,cough breathless event that actually had me so seedy I signed into hospital last yr around oct
nasal swab was indeterminate for flu or rhinovirus etc
which was weird AND annoying as i felt so lousy but they couldnt say wtf? I had
lungs were crap and 2 courses abiotics to sort of fix it
took me weeks to get over it and i still have a niggly spot makes me cough
now I reckon I might even suss out their offers of testing wider populations
have to admit I would find it amusing if in the middle of BFnowhere some traveller brought it to our town back then and I was a mug to catch it.
hadnt occurred that it may have been circulating far longer than admitted to and elsewhere than china

Reply to  ozspeaksup
April 16, 2020 3:58 am

Try to do the antibody check

Reply to  ozspeaksup
April 16, 2020 7:06 am

that would not tell what he had last year, it could tell him what it wasn’t.

Reply to  Alex
April 16, 2020 12:00 pm

, – Yes, & you are entitled to believe the worst about anything you choose. Maybe your innuendo can convince some other WUWT readers if you stick to posting correlations.

April 15, 2020 11:11 pm

The diagnostic tests aren’t reliable. See the links to WHO, CDC, manufacturers etc here:

At least read this, which is anonymous to save the doctor’s job but very convincing.

But is it worth it for a “lethal new disease” that only kills the very old and the mortally ill? (also known as seasonal flu)

Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 1:06 am

The author you cite doesn’t understand the first thing about clinical in vitro diagnostics.

If your sputum tests positive for the virus by PCR, that is the best evidence available quickly that you are infected. There are all sorts of caveats, like the fact that not all virus particles are infectious. That’s true of all viruses. PCR is so sensitive that it even picks up dead virus particles. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.

If a patient comes in with fatigue and a dry cough, the doctor might order a battery of Blood tests. If it comes back with severe anemia and COVID positive, that doesn’t mean that COVID caused the severe anemia. The doctor needs to use their medical training to decide how to treat the whole patient and the symptoms they are having, a positive PCR test isn’t telling the doctors to turn their brain off and only treat one thing.

Some covid tests could cross react with SARS virus, since they are closely related. But SARS hasn’t been seen in any patient in 15+ years, so my guess is that if your test is positive it’s probably from the current worldwide pandemic not the one that caused a tiny outbreak decades ago.

It’s possible for tests to give inaccurate results, and some are better than others. Doctors try to minimize this problem by testing people with the right kind of symptoms. If you have symptoms and get a positive PCR test, you should take it seriously and be glad that testing is available so quickly to the extent it is.

Reply to  Ktm
April 16, 2020 1:24 am

But you are not answering the point. What’s the false positive rate? Every test has a false positive rate, but for COVID nobody seems to know. But if the infection rate us low then even a small false positive rate produces wildly wrong data.

Say the infection rate is 2%, and you have a test with a false positive rate of 2% – which is relatively small. Test 1,000 people. 20 of them have the disease, but your false positives are 2%x(1,000-20), which is another 20 people. So you actually only have half the number of infections you think you do. At a 5% false positive rate less than a third of your cases are actually infected.

Unless I’ve missed it, nobody knows either the underlying infection rate or the false positive rate of the test. So we literally do not know how many people are actually infected. And that’s before we discuss false negatives.

Reply to  Phoenix44
April 16, 2020 8:07 am

Wm. Briggs had a write-up in March about why even a good test will give plenty of false positives:

“Bayes Theorem and Coronavirus: The Chance You Have It & The Chance You Die”

Reply to  Phoenix44
April 16, 2020 11:27 am

Every EUA test out there shows the data you’re looking for in the IFU posted on the FDA website.

The hologic test shows that they tested 69 known positive specimens and all 69 were detected by the hologic assay, so sensitivity was 100%. They tested 109 known negative samples, and all 109 were detected as negative by the assay, so specificity was 100%.

If your doctor orders a test, they probably won’t tell you which one it is, and they might not know. But over time I’m sure the poor performing tests will get weeded out and better performers will fill the need.

Most of the criticism swirling around is based on generalities, when specific information about test performance metrics is freely available to the public.

Supply concerns are another thing, and less transparent to the general public.

Reply to  Ktm
April 17, 2020 5:55 am

As the author of one of the articles cited, and director of labs that do RT-qPCR testing regularly, I’m pretty sure I know more about it than you.

The CDC kit originally targeted 3 genetic markers (N1, N2, and N3) but CDC threw out N3 and eliminated confirmation for positive results. The N1 primers not homologous to targets as admitted by CDC’s method and this has been additionally tested using western blot techniques. Mock samples of uninfected A549 cells (cancerous alveolar epithelial cells) tested positive as SARS-COV-2, providing further proof of the problem.

Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 6:04 am

From the 2nd article

This is why you’re hearing that most people with COVID-19 are showing nothing more than cold/flu like symptoms. That’s because most Coronavirus strains are nothing more than cold/flu like symptoms. The few actual novel Coronavirus cases do have some worse respiratory responses, but still have a very promising recovery rate, especially for those without prior issues.

So what exactly is causing those worse respiratory responses? Here are a few that I think are possible factors:

Factor 1 – Iatrogenic increase of infection risk
* The SARS-2 virus, like the SARS-1 virus, infects lung cells via the ACE2 enzyme
* ACE inhibitors (ACEi) prescribed for hypertension and some other conditions cause increased ACE2 expression in the lungs, likely potentiating more severe infections.
* ACE2 decreases as infection increases.

Factor 2 – Iatrogenic increase of inflammatory cytokines by destabilization of ACE/ACE2 balance
* Covid patients admitted to hospitals, at some point have their ACEi treatments stopped, which causes ACE to increase (ACEi half life is about 12 hours; virtually gone from system in about 3.5 days).
* ACE and ACE2 counter-regulate each other to maintain system balance. ACE promotes inflammatory factors (cytokines); ACE2 promotes anti-inflammatory factors.
* So as ACE2 decreases and ACE increases, immune system goes wildly out of balance (cytokine storm).

Factor 3 – Iatrogenic increase of thrombosis risk
* As ACE increases, PAI-1 increases, which increases inhibition of tPA (breaks up blood clots).
* Consequently, thrombosis risk increases.

Factor 4 – Iatrogenic lung damage (ARDS) caused by wrong diagnosis and treatment protocol
* Based on bad information from China, covid patients are assumed to have acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
* Hospitals follow a protocol that stipulates putting ARDS patients on ventilators with high PEEP (pulmonary end expiry pressure) and low oxygen.
* However, astute doctors around the world have noticed that many covid patients do not have typical ARDS symptoms, and warn that intubating these patients with high PEEP may be causing the ARDS they are trying to treat.

So there you have 4 iatrogenic factors that possibly are causing severe infections, and cytokine storms and pulmonary microvascular thromboses that most ICU covid patients die of.

Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 6:57 am

In several hot spots, such as NYC, one can see in the death statistics the waning of flu and increase in COVID-19. That’s not an illusion.

Sure there are groups that are ‘adjusting’ data for political and monetary reasons, but this disease is real and is not just a sleight of hand trick, and although the deaths are most the old with other illnesses, it is not just a cold or flu.

Even if it only killed the old and mortally ill, it’s still lethal. It does infect and kill more than just those folks.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 10:24 am

The problem I have, is that many are treating this as if even mere exposure to it is a death sentence. Nothing could be further from the truth, but that is not the impression many are getting with all the lock-downs and constant warnings/death counts.

Reply to  Paul Penrose
April 16, 2020 12:03 pm

That’s true, the fear mongering is especially strong with this disease.

Mike Dubrasich
April 15, 2020 11:14 pm

Yes yes yes.

Random test for antibodies — similar to opinion polling. Daily update. Cheap and fast. Best way to track population immunity. Excellent suggestion (others also have made it). And do some real, open source code modelling. Eschew dark models by dubious “experts”.

I would add mandatory active virus testing of certain groups, such as health care and nursing home workers likely to infect the most at-risk individuals.

Open the schools. Yes, the children are little bags of germs, but they don’t die of this cold/flu/plague. They spread immunity. Their parents need to be infected. Sorry, but that’s coming anyway.

I would add boosting treatment options by increasing the availability of HCQ and other ionophores (green tea extract) and vitamin zinc. Encourage (subsidize) general use before infection. That will make cases milder. Then let the doctors treat their patients without interference by politics.

Encourage (do not mandate) social distancing, spit shields in stores, masking. Make it fun with DIY fashion masks (free patterns, sew your own). Supply everybody with ample single use latex gloves.

If I was the governor, I would also close the abortion clinics. We need their PPE for saving lives, not taking them.

Reply to  Mike Dubrasich
April 16, 2020 2:03 am

They spread immunity. Their parents need to be infected. Sorry, but that’s coming anyway.

Obviously SARS died out because we all became infected.

Reply to  commieBob
April 16, 2020 8:41 am

Yeah, why did SARS die out? It’s possibly the same mechanism at work.

John Moore
Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 5:56 pm

SARS died out because it was contained using standard techniques: contact tracing and quarantine. COVID19 seems well controlled in Taiwan, which started using the same tactics in January well before it got out of hand.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike Dubrasich
April 16, 2020 6:59 am

“Yes yes yes.

Random test for antibodies — similar to opinion polling. Daily update. Cheap and fast. Best way to track population immunity. Excellent suggestion (others also have made it).”

Yes, there does seem to be a lot of discussion about this particular method lately.

We’re going to get this all figured out eventually. The sooner the better. We need to get our testing up to speed, and it seems to be coming up to speed fairly quickly.

April 15, 2020 11:31 pm

In addition to the excellent procedures/protocols suggested, it is also imperative to urgently run regional Wuhan flu antibody testing so we know what the actual death rate is, the number of people already immune, and the number of people who were asymptomatic after contracting the disease.

It’s absolutely absurd that regional Wuhan flu antibody testing only recently started when accurate antibody test kits have been available since the end of February…

If the government doesn’t know what the actual denominator is, it’s impossible to accurately calculate the Wuhan flu’s true death rate, which is imperative to determine rational policies to address the situation.

According to antibody test results in other countries, it seems the Wuhan flu’s death rate is around 0.3~0.4%, which is an order of magnitude less than the initially assumed death rate, which was used to justify governments shutting down the global economy and the US’ passage of a $6 trillion Wuhan flu health bill.

Reply to  SAMURAI
April 16, 2020 2:38 am

Death rate also depends on how you treat patients. If you start early with HCQ and cast the testing net wide instead of waiting till people need ICU and destroying their lungs with PEEP you also lower the mortality rate.

Raoult’s team in Marseilles test all comers and treat everyone +ve unless the cardiologist advises against it.

So far they have 10 deaths out of 2500 patients.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 3:53 am

wait till you see the age distribution of his patients.
basic stuff

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 5:43 am


We already HAVE some of that. Have you not seen the figures? Note also the ‘chronic conditions’ (Cancer, Diabetes, Coronary artery disease, Hypertension, Chronic respiratory diseases, Obesity) figures:

Reply to  _Jim
April 16, 2020 6:28 am

The Treatment either works, or somehow only healthy people are seeing him/being selected, or doctor is committing fraud somehow in his study. I don’t see anyway other these 3 possibilities.

Reply to  _Jim
April 16, 2020 7:48 am

Thanks for the link.

Poor clinical outcome ( ICU or >10d hospitalisation ) 4.3% of group mean age 69. Half of whom had hypertension another 20% coronary artery disease. Most of those would be on ACEi or ARBs as in Italy.

Good outcome 92% mean age 42.

Remainder were not cleared of the virus.

Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 5:38 am


I completely agree. It’s difficult to understand the animosity the Left seems to have against hydroxychloroquine, which seems to have overwhelming evidence that it is one of the best drugs to save lives and speed recovery from the Wuhan flu.

My guess is that it is mostly (not all) from Leftists’ suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome… From other rational people, it could just be from healthy skepticism.

Regardless, given the 10’s of thousands of Wuhan flu suffers who have been treated with hydroxychloroquine, we should soon have sufficient to determine its efficacy.

Reply to  SAMURAI
April 16, 2020 7:05 am

There also seems to be some push by the left to conflate chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) when we already know that HCQ is safer from lower side effects. This is criminal if medical personnel are doing the same.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 8:21 am

Many like the Guardian are willingly conflating it with fish tank cleaner !!

Firstly they mis-report Trump saying ” maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t. We don’t know” as “Trump endorses HCQ” or Trump “touting” suspect drug.

Once that have totally misrepresented him they can start attacking the straw man they’ve built. Poor old HCQ and anyone whose life may have been saved by it get written off as collateral damage in the need to be able to snipe petty points at Trump.

That is how much the TDS impaired left really “cares” about anyone.

Then there is also the medical establishment which are pill-pusher and totally dependent on the largesse of Big Pharma for research funds and free holidays and conference expenses.

They are totally compromised by conflicts of interest which is obvious in the way the clinical trials are being rigged to ensure HCQ fails.

However, I don’t thing there is “overwhelming evidence”, there is interesting data from patient care.

Reply to  SAMURAI
April 16, 2020 8:44 am

I understand the desire to to discredit hydroxychloroquine, it is the main stream media like Bloomberg.

HCQ is off patent, and does not make millions for big pharma, hence the touting of redmisivar (sp?) which is new and expensive.

Also, the MSM media (yes mostly leftists) does not want an effective treatment. This maximizes the fear and control available over the population.

I worry they will rig the trials to fail, like using a wrong dosage, or not adding the zinc.

April 15, 2020 11:34 pm

The outcome we want is maximum economic gain with minimum risk of the virus spreading out of control THe outcome we need to avoid is to allow the virus to start spreading, without any actual economic gain. Your idea is an interesting one, but needs to be tested against that.

We therefore need input from businesses as well as epidemeologists. Can businesses work on a three-day basis or do they need to stagger the days (e.g. to fill the shops). Will people actually go to shops and restaurants or will they stay at home?

Also, in my view, your ‘remarks’ are unfortunate. They show a heavy political bias which detracts from the rest of your points. Your bias towards input from front line medics is a weakness, as these medics only see waht is in front of them. They have no opportunity to see the bigger picture.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  AndyL
April 16, 2020 2:28 am

here is how we re opened in beijing on Feb 15th.

1. Every employed was required to submit temperatures for 14 days prior to starting work.
2. Starting in Shifts 50% of the employees could come to work, everyone else telecommuted.
3. All employees had to be masked at work. Checked by security folks walking around
4. security took temperatures twice a day.

Buy hey china data is all fake.

Another clue. 80% of all transmissions were family to family.


if you tested positive it was off to the field hospital with other sick folks.

Bam, you cut transmission by 80%.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 3:10 am

There are so many empty hotels due to no travel the government could simply convert them to basic field hospitals to send sick people to until they recover, so they don’t infect their family.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 3:14 am

Probably says something about living conditions in China from the Australian data that wouldn’t stop the spread. Our data says 16% of people infected show absolutely no symptoms, they have been detected by someone they subsequently infected or because they were part of a outbreak cluster testing.

All mute for Australia we are going for complete eradication now and so targeting clusters with full contact tracing.

Tropical Lutefisk
Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 7:18 am

Mosh, so you believe all the COVID-19 data coming from China is correct?

Totally unrelated… Are you interested in a mountainside cottage I have for sale in Miami, FL?

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 8:33 am

Mosh, have a look the graphs of Italy and US data. There is a strong weekly cycle, with low point on Mon/Tues each week. Italy and Spain show a 10d lag from confinement to a break in rise, establishing the lag in the system. That takes the cause back to Fri/Sat of the previous week.

comment image

comment image

Does that mean that big family meals at the weekend are undoing all the hard gains during the week? This really is a cycle, not just low testing numbers on Sat/Sun, which I know does happen in France. The rest I don’t know.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 9:01 am

The China plan elements seems to imply that “asymptomatic spread” occurs by individuals who have elevated temperatures (which often goes un noticed) during some point during the infection.

If there were many “asymptomatic without fevers” cases, the containment in China would have failed.

Therefore our exit plan should include daily temperatures readings for all working individuals to limit “asymptomatic spread”.

Reply to  DocSiders
April 16, 2020 10:44 am

More often that not, thermal scans are done at international airports in Asia. I seem to recall seeing these in use at a couple of train stations also and even at a private company. Seems like a good idea.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 1:47 pm

To me, the field hospital idea for positive tests is a brilliant idea. Probably so brilliant it was overlooked by the powers that be. 😉

This is more of a logistics question, but how to construct a field hospital? If you happen to live in a city with more than one hospital, I suppose you could simply designate one as a “Wuhan Flu Only” facility, but that would mean moving those hospital patients somewhere else. A hotel could be converted, but what about the necessary medical equipment, disinfection protocols, etc. Many questions, probably solvable, but rushing things would make for mistakes which, in turn, would make matters worse. Too bad we couldn’t have been better prepared.

Geoff Sherrington
April 15, 2020 11:34 pm

It is aducational to note how often a blog about a topical health matter brings out of the woodwork a string of favourite cures, home remedies, alt med favourites, homeopathic recommendations, etc. It is as if we lack competent professional medical scientists.
The muddled thinking that promotes these cures is hardly scientific. For example, how can so many people be screaming for various “chloroquine” treatments when these pushers have no experience with it other than what others similarly uninformed are promoting or rejecting?
Geoff S

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
April 16, 2020 12:02 am

Those who promote HCQ, azythromycin, etc. are precisely those who know the best what they are talking about : physicians who treat people.

Reply to  Petit_Barde
April 16, 2020 4:06 am

Spainish doctors reported 60% usage. Spain has by far the best recovered/cases ratio in Europe. Coincidence, possibly, but someone ought to be looking at that.

Notice all the proposed clinical tests manage to use a protocol the exact opposite of what Raoult says works: combined with azythromycin ; not useful on critically ill patients. Instead they will test without the antibiotic and ONLY on severely ill cases.

That can not be accidental. It is being set up to fail and clear the way for approval of patented drugs.

Any doctor giving a placebo to a patient knowing they are infected with a potentiall fatal disease if violating the Hypocratic oath.

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
April 16, 2020 4:17 am

You are so wise to trust your health to the medical profession. They protect us from heart disease (1st leading cause of death), cancer (2nd leading cause of death), iatrogenisis (3rd leading cause of death), and… wut!? derp!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  icisil
April 16, 2020 11:04 am

Non sequitur! YOU decide what and how much to eat, which largely controls heart disease and cancers. Doctors advise against Mickey D grease patties, but they are largely ignored.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
April 16, 2020 11:00 am

In my book, not unlike doing a rain dance or sacrificing a virgin during a drought. Desperate people seem to succumb to control by their amygdala.

April 15, 2020 11:50 pm

“The best way to measure the spread of COVID-19 is to perform random testing of the population. 500 random tests in a location with the population of 1-10 million would provide a sufficiently accurate picture, while only using a small fraction of available test kits. Such testing can be performed daily using a small fraction of available test kits.”
Well if not made public, it’s not much use- and this might being done and it’s fairly useless.
You need teams of people to do the tests, and they do it every day, probably 100 random tests and lots of teams
doing it. And they get paid to do the work- whatever minimum wage is. The are “volunteers” but you pay them.
So the “volunteers” test themselves and if they have COVID-19, then they can’t do the testing of others.
So, the volunteers also getting paid in the sense, that can find out whether they have COVID-19.
I would imagine there a lot people waiting around with not much to do and wanting to know if have it, or don’t. And knowing if they have immunity is probably something even more valuable to know. But if they have it, and later they don’t, then they have immunity.
So volunteers show up and test each other, those with COVID-19, go home for day, and return the next, and see if they still have it, if they do, they go home for two days, and return and get tested, if they have it, they go home for three days, and get tested again, and if fail again go home for 3 days, and etc.
BUT no volunteers should start with symptoms of Flu, and if develop symptoms of Flu, they need stay home until don’t have symptoms of Flu, then get tested, with space of 1 day, 2 day, 3 day, 3 days, etc.
And once got a volunteer, which are tested and not have COVID-19, they get paid to test others, and they continue to be tested every day.
So you the volunteer group, which is tested, and they randomly test 100 people per day. And obviously they keep records, and publish the results, every day.
And they don’t need haz gear, but can’t be in a risk group {being younger, etc} and should cover their face and wash their hands and social distance.
And such volunteer groups can part of some group: church members, knitting group- whatever group, the teachers of a school, etc. And everyone they randomly test, gets their test results. If doing it long enough anyone randomly tested, who has COVID-19, can tested again in 2 week time. and if negative, then they have immunity. Problem is this should be started more than 1 week ago. But we didn’t have enough tests, then.
So you could dozens of such volunteer groups in a State. But might start with a few and see how it goes.

Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 12:38 am

But it seems at moment, the serologic tests, need the serologic tests to be tested.

Once tested, then the volunteer group could possibly test with the kind of serologic test which intended for random sampling- when have large supply available.

It seems serologic tests which are very precise serologic tests, can have the most scientific value, as compared to informational value of daily results for broad public use.

April 16, 2020 12:05 am

Doctors Publish Open Letter – It’s Time To End The Lockdown (excellent)…

Eight Reasons to End the Lockdowns As Soon as Possible
Jonathan Geach, M.D.

This post does not deny the effectiveness of social distancing or quarantine for COVID-19. I am not encouraging people to suspend these practices before official determinations have been made public. This post is to help physicians, thought leaders and public officials understand and weigh the risks and benefits of extended lockdowns versus more measured and earlier return to work measures.

1. We have already flattened the curve
2. Economic collapse and unemployment are destroying families
3. We have not saturated the health care system
4. Suicide may kill almost as many people as COVID-19 this year.
5. The mortality was likely overestimated
6. Children are at almost no risk from this disease.
7. PPE was limited but is now becoming more available
8. Authorities should show clear evidence regarding the benefits of indefinite lockdown
Those who want to continue the lockdown indefinitely should show clear evidence regarding the benefits of indefinite lockdown. There needs to be a clear reliable model that shows how many additional lives will be saved considering we have already flattened the curve and there is essentially no further risk of overwhelming the health care system. The previous models were wrong. The consequences of indefinite lockdown are quite staggering, to the tune of one million jobs lost per day.

Reply to  TEWS_Pilot
April 16, 2020 12:50 am

We are fairly that certain this virus was developed in bio lab.
I think need more information regarding it.

Something like, give the information- or we start nuking China.

Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 6:08 am

Better to wipe out their military and encourage the population to rise up and overthrow the communists.

Reply to  icisil
April 16, 2020 8:53 am

Nuke from orbit CCP leadership, and with nuke hit their nukes.
Don’t have problem with their army.
Of course, rather not.
Purpose of lockdown was not to have virus kill healthcare workers, and give
time to figure out this virus is.
Just thinking we have to particularly careful because it possible it was intended a bio weapon attack. Unlikely. But even if accidental {more likely] still want info on what was intention of making this particular virus.
And Chinese could accidental released lab virus, and CCP could have added another bio attack virus which might be hard to detect or something.
Anyhow, I think US should get out of lockdown pretty soon but with a bit more caution in terms of how it’s done- and not threaten China with nuking them.
But if in a hurry to get out of our forced vacation, threatening China with a very quick consequences is an option- assuming you actually willing to pull the trigger. And assuming Russia will join us in the nuke attack- you don’t want to get into a superpower nuclear war.
I don’t buy the idea, that Russia wanted a bio war. And it’s unlikely, Chin wanted, one.
But if you accidentally release a bio weapon, that could panic Chinese leadership which could cause them to do all kinds of crazy.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  TEWS_Pilot
April 16, 2020 8:58 am

I agree.

– – – –
RE: #4 Suicide may kill almost as many people as COVID-19 this year.

In the USA: In 2018, there were 48,344 recorded suicides;
about 647,000 Americans die from heart disease each year
This virus is being reported as approaching 30,000 on the 15th.
The deaths from this new virus seem to be getting inflated a bit.
An interesting entanglement is the linkage between “regular” flu,
COVID-19 and other killing diseases.

April 16, 2020 12:08 am

“random testing of the population. ”
What is the false positive quote of the tests?

April 16, 2020 12:43 am

Doctor: the patient has a deadly disease likely to kill him.
Bureaucrat: don’t use HCQ. it might make him worse. It might make him a Republican.

April 16, 2020 12:43 am

The UK’s Covid-19 latest update:

Reply to  Vuk
April 16, 2020 2:37 am

Vuk: would it be possible to compare the deaths with the admissions delayed by say a week?
That might give a hint as to the survival rate in hospital

Reply to  Leo Smith
April 16, 2020 4:03 am

Sadly, no. Admissions and death data comes from hospitals all over the country and there are delays up to a week or even longer in collating all the numbers, particularly with the deceased.

Reply to  Vuk
April 16, 2020 1:55 pm

Germany has today the highest increase/day since March 10 (the first 2) with per 20:00 351 deaths to a total of 3,943

April 16, 2020 12:56 am

Canada: Federal health committee again calls on WHO advisor to testify amid concerns over false Chinese data. Bruce Aylward, the top Canadian at WHO abruptly cancelled his previiusly scheduled appointment to appear.

April 16, 2020 1:10 am

It’s still stunning to think that more people over the age of 100 have succumbed to COVID than peeled under 30.

If you’re over 100, take every precaution, if you’re under 30 and otherwise healthy, sitting in a bunker isn’t helping anyone or anything.

Reply to  Ktm
April 16, 2020 1:54 am

There are enough 20, 30, 40, and 50 year olds die that some people aren’t prepared to play Russian roulette. Are you prepared to run a vote in your country and if you lose accept it?

Personally I have no issue either way there are arguments both way and I would accept the results of a vote.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 8:48 am

There are? Where are these “otherwise healthy” 20, 30, 40, and 50 year olds who died from WuFlu? They don’t exist. You are making FakeNews

Rich Davis
Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 9:18 am

We can’t hold a binding national referendum under our Constitution. It doesn’t work that way. Some state constitutions have ballot initiatives, but not all. We are not a democracy, we are a republic.

However, our elected representatives pay very close attention to opinion polls which might as well be referenda.

Reply to  Ktm
April 16, 2020 3:06 am


– every time a person leaves house they run risk of being run over by car
– every time a person breathes even a little bit of pollution they risk getting cancer from it
– every time a person goes to hospital they risk catching antibiotic resistant infection that often leads to death

It is about risk management and what level of risk is acceptable. To say no risk is acceptable this is unrealistic.

April 16, 2020 1:11 am

Top Canadian on WHO comments on Taiwan.

Reply to  ferdberple
April 16, 2020 10:46 am

She should have asked the exact same question to put the f’in liar onto his heels.

Reply to  richard
April 16, 2020 1:44 am

Interesting observation. Reminds me of Legionnaires disease. Deadly when it was discovered but as doctors learned how best to treat the disease death rates went down and you never hear about it anymore.

The author may well be into something. One of the mysteries of C-19 is why the inflammation in the lungs doesn’t respond to medication. This new theory explains this.

Reply to  ferdberple
April 16, 2020 1:59 pm

Not only they learned treating, the on or the other treats the tubes with hot water to ki’l the Legionnaires. That’s what I do.

April 16, 2020 1:34 am

Came upon this on Jonova’s site:
One paragraph from the letter:
-“To be direct, our computer is showing that if the economy remains closed beyond May 1st, we are looking at a global economic decline that will not bottom for 13 years until we reach 2032. There are people, such asBill Gatesand Anthony Fauci, who have been advocating an economic shutdown on newspapers and television shows around the world. I believe Gatesis merely using this to further his theory on vaccines without any regard for the economic destruction these policies have causedand Fauci iscompromised by Gates’donations to the all health organizations.”-
Someone mentioned that Bill Gates, a major contributor to WHO funding, is calling for a 12 month lockdown until his vaccine is ready . And I believe that Dr Fauci, directing policy for Trump, is a member of Bill Gates’ organisation . Is this information correct ? it seems barely believable.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  mikewaite
April 16, 2020 5:11 am

My son, an engineer, keeps complaining that there are no repercussions for those whose models are later shown to be wrong. This allows for the most irresponsible and unfounded assertions. We cannot predict the climate in 2032 nor can we predict the world economic situation in that year.

Historically, all that we can say is that people and politicians mess up every day. They will still be messing up in 2032. The best we can do is to focus on today and seek to act responsibly – which may mean acknowledging and fixing up yesterday’s mess. It is simply ludicrous when politicians and scientists who do not even believe in a sovereign God nevertheless still want to play God.

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
April 16, 2020 8:04 am

A beneficial outcome of this covid-19 crisis may be a general appreciation of how wildly wrong computer model predictions, even those made by very bright, well-intended scientists, can be.

The whole global warming “crisis” is generated and sustained by computer models that keep failing as time marches on and real climate data becomes available.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
April 16, 2020 8:09 am

“My son, an engineer, keeps complaining that there are no repercussions for those whose models are later shown to be wrong.”

Are there any models that got it correct right from the start, or now, for that matter? I would like to see one.

What is the lowest death rate predicted by these models for the Wuhan virus, when it is allowed to spread without any mitigation, when it was first discovered?

The implication of all those questioning the initial estimates of the Wuhan virus is that there are models out there that accurately predicted the future. Let’s see them.

If somebody got it right from the very start, then you may have an argument to make, but I suspect that all the models missed the numbers. Anyway, let’s see them. Let’s see if anyone got it right.

If none of them get it right, then why are you criticizing only certain people about the models?

April 16, 2020 1:35 am

Is this enough to keep down the pandemi?
I miss the tracing part.
Those working in healthcare and teachers and some other groups have to be tested, perhaps as often as twice a week.
And it would be some complex logistics to keep groups of people apart. The society must be organized in time and space to diminish meeting points. People live and work in groups, so we have to accept in-group infections, and prevent infections between groups. We could need mathematicians for that.
And people have to understand that random contacts pose a danger to vulnerable groups.

Reply to  nobodysknowledge
April 16, 2020 1:53 am

None of this makes an iota of sense, given the information we have that it is a psyop, pure and simple. In the New Zealand context:
So far the lockdown has cost New Zealand $21 billion, the equivalent of:
– More than our entire health budget for the year
– 42 times what we spend on cancer every year
– Our entire education budget for 1.5 years.
– Roughly 10,500km worth of median barriers (Auckland to Wellington 16 times)
– 10 times the entire NZ Police’s budget (maintenance of law and order)
– 525 times what was allocated as a boost by the government to the Suicide Prevention (remembering suicide claimed 668 lives)
– Almost 15 brand new, modern hospitals

And for what? There is absolutely no evidence that this years seasonal flu is more dangerous than in any other year. To date NZ has recorded nine alleged coronavirus deaths:
Woman, aged 70’s with an underlying health condition.
Female, aged 90’s with an underlying health condition.
Male, aged 80’s with an underlying health condition(s).
Male, aged 70’s with an underlying health condition(s).
Male, aged 80’s with an underlying health condition(s).
Male, aged 90’s with an underlying health condition(s).
Male, aged 80’s with an underlying health condition(s).
Male, aged 90’s with an underlying health condition(s).
Male, aged 70’s with an underlying health condition(s).

Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 2:00 am

So take it up with Jacinda and your elected member or start a political movement in New Zealand. Everyone keeps repeating the same argument about there country but you all do nothing about it except seeming endless complaining on a Climate Change Blog.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 2:17 am

I offer the example of New Zealand here because the figures are telling – it helps that the deaths are few and well publicised. It is not intended to be a substitute for action in New Zealand – I don’t know why you assume it is.
Exactly, it’s a climate change blog – it’s questionable whether this series of articles is serving any practical purpose.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 2:18 am

I offer the example of New Zealand here because the figures are telling – it helps that the deaths are few and well publicised. It is not intended to be a substitute for action in New Zealand – I don’t know why you assume it is.
Exactly, it’s a climate change blog. It’s questionable whether this series of articles is serving any practical purpose – many commenters seem to have little knowledge of the issues.

Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 2:58 am

It’s not personal Barbara but there is a small core here who keep the same argument going on and on. New Zealand figures are the same as most countries if you divid the deaths by the money lost it comes to some rather large number. The question always comes back to how much is a life worth in the eye of the poster. I do agree with you the whole series of articles serves no purpose, people need to fight this in their own country.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 3:20 am

So far, fatality rates are less than 1% in Aus.

Classic example of knee jerk reactions, media hype, mass stupidity and an exercise in futility.

All of the “advice” about reducing viral spread like, (LOL) covering your mouth/nose when sneezing/coughing, using the bathroom and washing your hands after such event. Washing your hands! Did I say washing your hands after such events? To me this is all common sense, I do this all the time. Though there are many that don’t and, IMO, are dirty pigs (No, I will not refrain the language, I see it all the time), esp Chinese/Indian men!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 3:25 am

That’s less than 1% of known cases. And more and more people are being encouraged to go get tested with or without symptoms. Why? It’s mindless waste.

Reply to  Barbara McKenzie
April 16, 2020 2:46 am

It’s late summer in New Zealand. Wait till its winter…Southern Africa, too has not been badly affected.
And remember, governments get sacked not for wrecking economies, but for being perceived to be immoral.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Leo Smith
April 16, 2020 3:36 am

Late Summer in NZ? No, I don’t think so…

Reply to  nobodysknowledge
April 16, 2020 2:26 am

And New Zealand is in the lucky situation to have some control.
It would be easier to open up
It would be easier to trace infections
It would be easier to know who it is most important to test.
And with antibody testing it will even be easier to gain good overview.

April 16, 2020 1:44 am

First we must know what the goal is.

Nobody has outlined the specific goal of the lockdowns. Saying to slow the spread is not specific enough. How much do we want to slow the spread by ? As much as possible is not specific or realistic.

Is goal to keep USA yearly deaths below 100k from covid ? 50k ? 10k ? What is the economic cost of the goal ? Is economic cost acceptable ?

Don’t discuss anything until the goal is defined.

Without a specific, realistic goal policy cannot be designed.

Reply to  Stevek
April 16, 2020 3:01 am

In Australia the lockdown has a very specific goal to buy time to plot a path out, there has never been discussion it does anything else. We also know we have an absolute timespan of economic support of 6 months because it is too expensive to go beyond that and the legislation passed has a 6 month sunset clause.

Can’t speak for other countries but you statement is wrong in Australia.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 3:25 am

So Australia, after six months, is willing to accept higher death rate if Covid comes back and there is no effective medical treatment. Then I agree they are being specific. It is important that governments are clear about these goals and the economic impact of following the plan and acceptable death rate if covid comes back after the lockdown. Basically governments need to tell people the plan along with the upside and downside and that when plan is over it is possible deaths will start to rise.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Stevek
April 16, 2020 3:56 am

Yeah, 63, very old, very frail healthwise people out of 25 million!

Solution? Shut the whole country down!

Reply to  Stevek
April 16, 2020 4:33 am

Australia needed the 6 months to prepare and try to eradicate covid19 so we start the period at zero or as near as that we can be and can then do a South Korea.

1.) Public health system have leased a number of private hospitals to increase capacity.
2.) The army engineering corp is assisting local companies to manufacture masks, gowns and ventilators.
3.) There are a number of testing kits being developed for local manufacture
4.) There are numerous clinical trials on drugs and using the BCG vaccine happening.
5.) Get databases and system up to speed for rapid contact tracing.

When we do reopen and if it is still bad in the rest of world the enforced 14 day quarantine in government leased hotels for anyone coming into Australia will remain in force. At this stage New Zealand which is doing the same has approaches to join so we our nationals can transit freely between the two countries. That is the basic plan unless things improve or there is a vaccine … so yes at least we have a plan.

Views like Patrick are around 18% from polling which even with huge margins of error on a vote they would get easily defeated. Patrick probably views them as stupid but at the end of the day they vote and so poor Pat has to rage on.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 4:50 am

Interesting. I closely connected to the healthcare system in Aus…and none of what you say is true.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  LdB
April 17, 2020 2:21 am

“LdB April 16, 2020 at 6:46 am”

You link to “The Conversation”? Oh dear…

Scott W Bennett
Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 4:30 am


Who the f*ck are you? You could Putin or Xi Jinping for all I know.
You are a faceless coward, a social engineer with no balls.

Your comment is noted but your opinion is worthless to me, if you won’t live up to it.

You are just another ideologue otherwise, spewing familiar mantras I can read in a book. Demonstrate the courage of your convictions and stand behind your real name.

In other words, man-up or shut-up; that’s what I really think about gutless avatars pontificating on how the world should live and die!

Reply to  Scott W Bennett
April 16, 2020 6:12 am

@Scott W Bennett

YEAH!! You tell him Scott W Bennett! It’s about time somebody started calling out these Russo-ChiCom, social-engineering, polpette-undescended (h/t Willis), coleos foueto-free (h/t Pelagonius), hidey-ho hiderson types like LdB in the blogosphere!

Right, so man-up LdB!

IF that’s even your REAL gutless avatar . . .

Reply to  sycomputing
April 16, 2020 7:16 am

So your real name is Mr Sy Computing is it …. or is that a gutless avatar?

Rage on son .. rage hard … rage forever it makes all the difference 🙂

Reply to  sycomputing
April 16, 2020 7:51 am

So your real name is Mr Sy Computing is it . . .

Ha! Hoisted by your own petard!

In a manner of speaking, yes! Long ago I began to use this gutless avatar exclusively in my cowardly troddling about digitalia as a business decision. When that didn’t work so well, meh, it became a habit.

Regardless, I’m still more accessible than you are, mister! If you know what you’re doing (and I know you do), you can use TheGoogle on my polpette-undescended prosopopoeia and drive right up to my front door.

So what say you now? Are we, that is, the two of us, yet on footing that even equates with a modicum of similarity? I think not!

. . . rage forever it makes all the difference.

Speaking of forever professor, when you are EVER going to grade the test you gave me the other day??? Your young skull full of mush awaits thy bountiful wisdom:

Reply to  sycomputing
April 16, 2020 9:01 am

No apparently you rant under a fully accessible avatar .. how could I compete with that … I declare you are the winner 🙂

Reply to  sycomputing
April 16, 2020 9:17 am

I declare you are the winner.

Thanks buddy, but really it was all you. I couldn’t have done it without ya! 🙂

Reply to  Scott W Bennett
April 16, 2020 6:53 am

So my opinion is worth about the same as yours or anyone else 🙂
I think the value of the blog is has definitely covid19’ed.

April 16, 2020 1:45 am

The problem is they are never going to change the way emergency powers work in the middle of using them … you are wasting your time and energy.

I would also add Sweden has now failed as an example anyone would follow so that leaves only South Korea. The problem is to do a South Korea you have to have control on infections from the start. There currently there is no viable example to hold up as an example how it should be done, only one that was an example of how you could have done it.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 2:37 am

Why not mention Taiwan as an example . For the whole of April it has had only about 70 new cases and just 1 death. Anyome who has been to Taipei know that it is a crowded (yet ordered if that is not contradictory) city, a place where one might expect plagues to run amok . Yet that has not happened , why?
(I have to declare an interest here . Our middle boy has a Taiwanese wife and they have 2 young chikdren in England . They tend to go to Taiwan in the summer so that the children can keep up their chinese heritage, but we warned them not to go this year because of the chinese flu. Ironically , compared to the UK, they would be far safer there than here )

Reply to  mikewaite
April 16, 2020 2:51 am

Unless they have immunity to virus, they have to be quarantined {for 2 weeks or maybe more} when they get to Taiwan and might need to be quarantined when they left Taiwan.
Or a month total of quarantine doesn’t seem like much fun for kids, unless they like to on their phones all the time.

Reply to  mikewaite
April 16, 2020 2:51 am

Ok Taiwan is the same South Korea you could have only used that if you had initial control of the infections. For countries like USA, UK etc the horse has already well and truely bolted and there is nothing to learn other than do it better next time.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 4:40 am

Sweden has half the death rate per million of the UK. Why is that a failed example?

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 7:59 am

I would also add Sweden has now failed as an example anyone would follow

It has not failed to be an example, since it was not trying to be one. It was using what they determined to be right for their country not what someone else told them they should be doing.

That was a resounding success. There new daily cases has plateau’d at minimum social cost.

Biased media ( which LdB is presumably believing ) are citing other scandanavian countries have lower deaths per capita. That is to be expected since they clamped down hard and pushed to problem off so that it will continue for months on end. Come back next year and tell us who “won”.

Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 8:52 am

No I am not talking about death rate at all the discussion I am talking about economy. I am happy to go with everyone and ignore the dead and just evaluate keeping the country running and what happens to your economy.

Sweden current economic prediction is no better than having locked the country 4% contraction and 10% unemployed. South Korea is predicted 0.6% contraction and 5% unemployed so I give that a pass mark.

There are a number of ways we can evaluate what is better as per item 1 in the article … so just don’t assume the reference if it isn’t given. I will try to make sure I am more careful what I am referencing.

Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 11:22 am

Sweden is an export-dependent economy so yes, with the rest of Europe in lockdown it will suffer. Much of east Asia remains open.

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 12:04 pm

“That was a resounding success. There new daily cases has plateau’d at minimum social cost.”

Seems not.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  LdB
April 16, 2020 8:01 am

“. The problem is to do a South Korea you have to have control on infections from the start.”


it blew up. I was here. not cool

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 8:54 am

Yes Australia had the Ruby Princess fiasco as well, but they were not so bad as to get totally out of control.

April 16, 2020 2:09 am

Israeli Professor Shows Virus Follows Fixed Pattern
Marina MedvinMarina Medvin|Posted: Apr 15, 2020 12:01 AM
Linked from:
“Professor Yitzhak Ben Israel of Tel Aviv University, who also serves on the research and development advisory board for Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, plotted the rates of new coronavirus infections of the U.S., U.K., Sweden, Italy, Israel, Switzerland, France, Germany, and Spain. The numbers told a shocking story: irrespective of whether the country quarantined like Israel, or went about business as usual like Sweden, coronavirus peaked and subsided in the exact same way. In the exact, same, way. His graphs show that all countries experienced seemingly identical coronavirus infection patterns, with the number of infected peaking in the sixth week and rapidly subsiding by the eighth week.”
And says:
–“Is the coronavirus expansion exponential? The answer by the numbers is simple: no. Expansion begins exponentially but fades quickly after about eight weeks,” Professor Yitzhak Ben Israel concluded. The reason why coronavirus follows a fixed pattern is yet unknown.–

Known to me.
And believe “everyone” knows it.
Flatten the curve does not does kill less people from the virus {roughly speaking]
And if you do not anything to flatten it, it will be over pretty quickly if in the right conditions-
such high population densities. And you large crowds and/or people jammed in subways, buses
and elevators {or airplanes, particularly long flight airplanes}.
Or Sweden wants it to be over quickly, and is willing allow the virus to give herd immunity, quickly.
Of course we don’t know much about herd immunity regarding this particularly virus, but maybe it’s like
all other viruses, or maybe the immunity is not as “solid”- or Italy has already seemed to “prove” there is
some level of herd immunity with the Chinese Flu.

Reply to  gbaikie
April 16, 2020 7:59 am

Certainly, an unknown number of infected were spreading it bevor the more or less strong lockdowns started, than followed interfamily spreading.

April 16, 2020 2:32 am

“If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it” is applicable here. To control COVID-19, we need to measure the percentage of infected, immune, and naïve individuals in each location and age group. The most popular metrics – the number of tested positively and the number of deaths – are not very useful.

In reality the only things we care to manage are the two things we can measure extremely accurately. Acute cases with hospital admissions to ICU, and dead people.

Its hard to miss a dead person really.

This is a case where the academic approach whilst theoretically wonderful is bloody useless In Real Life ™.

The reality is that lockdowns will be eased when death rates and acute admissions start to fall and ramped up if they increase.

When easing lockdowns does not result in cases and deaths rising we can assume herd immunity.

Interestingly I have had a dry cough preceded by muscles aches and shortness of breath for a couple of days,but no fever whatsoever and, as an asthmatic with mild COPD, I have a full panoply of remedies. Symptoms are on the wane with the cough now productive and lessening.

Have I had it? Dunno, been in voluntary lockdown for 5 weeks now.

In reality whilst this post is interesting and informative, in the case of government policy it will be driven by a need to balance economic activity with excess deaths. Until we have a vaccine that is effective or the case rate decays to zero, government doesn’t need to concern itself with the maths in between. Lie driving a car, although there is a massive computer in between your foot and the wheels, you don’t really care. You will put your foot down on a pedal until te speed is satisfactory. Lockdown is that pedal and its the only peal on offer right now.

Reply to  Leo Smith
April 16, 2020 4:49 am

balance economic activity with excess deaths.

Excess deaths that are savable are only those caused by over run health care services. Beyond that flattening the curve saves no one medically and trashes the economy which DOES cost lives as well as ruining millions of other lives.

Once you’ve clamped down the curve to a new R0, cases will rise more slowly to a very, very distant new peak. You can run but you can’t hide.

Tim Bidie
April 16, 2020 3:00 am

Mortality in Britain is still lower than 2018 for the same period, distribution by age bang on normal.

That is reflected right across Europe

Am I alone in feeling shocked and ashamed at Britain’s, and in particular the national and other broadcasters, groupthink?

Apparently not:

Reply to  Tim Bidie
April 16, 2020 3:52 am

Claim: “Mortality in Britain is still lower than 2018 for the same period”
For the week 27th March to 3rd April the excess deaths were about 5500 higher, compared to 2018, and the official COVID-19 deaths were lower than 3500. I think it is an undercount of 2000 corona deaths in UK for that week.

Tim Bidie
Reply to  nobodysknowledge
April 16, 2020 4:37 am

My first two references show the facts. For 2020, during a ‘pandemic’, mortality is lower, as it is throughout Europe, to date compared to the same period in 2018!

The UK mortality figures for Covid 19 are all ‘with’ Covid 19′ since it became a notifiable disease on 05 March. You have picked a number for how many actually died ‘from’ Covid 19; and why not? Everyone else is!

Overflow hospitals, created for ‘The Surge’ are almost empty, new ones just set up are not even going to open, all thanks to a ‘batty’ model and groupthink broadcasters; ‘Carry on Matron!’

Comedy gold for the lucky ones, an unmitigated disaster for so many youngsters starting out in life, small businesses, self employed etc.

The public mood can shift very quickly. It may very well be that, once Britain wakes up, this previously unassailable government will be held to account, quite right that it should be, for this hopeless nincompoopery; an incompetent shambles.

April 16, 2020 3:43 am

BREAKING: Thousands Protesting Lockdown at Michigan State Capitol (Part 2)

Reply to  richard
April 16, 2020 4:11 am

Yeah, gridlock their shutdown !

Reply to  richard
April 16, 2020 5:48 am

Impressive drone footage of the event: “Drone 8 over ‘Operation Gridlock” protest in Lansing”
WOOD TV8 4-15-2020
Cars back as far as the eye could see:

Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 4:54 am

“In addition to boosting the number of tests, researchers at Stanford are also trying to improve reliability. While commercial tests are being developed around the world, Dr. Thomas Montine, chair of the pathology department at Stanford, described existing tests in the news release as “uncertain and variable.”

“We thought this was an urgent medical need, and the usual supply chains were unreliable, so we decided to build our own,” Montine said.”

At least for R&D sometimes 1 out of 3 kits is actually doing what it promised as good as it promised. Without any crises and pressure to get a product on the market.

Steven Mosher
April 16, 2020 4:07 am

complaining about an empty hospital

April 16, 2020 4:29 am

“More importantly, this would allow the government to closely observe the situation for the rest of the week. The median incubation period of COVID-19 is 5 days, so about half of the symptomatic cases, exposed in the Monday-Wednesday period will appear before the next Monday.”

That’s most likely not gonna work:

You can infect so many people in about 3 days that you have a R0 that is pulverizing all effort made before.

Reply to  Ron
April 16, 2020 5:03 am

It is certainly possible that virtually all people get virus and virus is with human species forever. Has happened with other coronaviruses that come from bats.

Reply to  Stevek
April 16, 2020 8:21 am

Of course it is possible. Just don’t care about killing 1% of the population in the process because everybody has to die someday. Easy.

Steve Cords
April 16, 2020 6:14 am

An interesting search on this topic will reveal what looks to be a very good way to test a population for pathogens including SARS-CoV-2. It’s may be able to monitor the spread before everyone tests individually. The noticemay be within a day of initial infection since in a large urban area, that’s how long it would take a flush to reach the sewage plant. About 4 or 5 hours ina large city. It could be pinpointed to smaller areas if testing can be done at lift stations or at an intermediate storage containment.

I don’t think it can spread from there but it looks like this testing would be a very early indicator. Some articles have indicated it is possible to calculate the number of infected people using that system.

Google searched using [viruses found in sewage]

Presence of SARS-Coronavirus-2 in sewage

The kids at CDC evidently haven’t updated their website (6 days ago) (under “Can the Covid-19 Spread through a Sewage System”)

Alexander Vissers
April 16, 2020 6:20 am

In the Netherlands the blood bank Sanquin has tested thousands of samples of donor blood for corona antibodies and came up with a percentage of 3% persons having been infected (and not ill- symptomless,cured or not yet symptomatic- because when ill they would not donate blood). This is not a test for the presence of the virus but of the anti-bodies. Incidence was highest among young people.

Reply to  Alexander Vissers
April 16, 2020 7:14 am

What is the false positive rate of the test by itself?

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 11:47 am

You know it now.

Tropical Lutefisk
April 16, 2020 6:21 am

My recommendations for preventing such a tragedy from happening in the future:
1. Set maximum density limits for cities. Strive for low density city centers and push for more suburban development. Urban sprawl is the answer to our fetid, filthy big cities.
2. Work towards limiting our dependence on mass transit. Its a giant infection risk that could be eliminated by more independent forms of travel. Let’s give huge tax breaks to those willing to purchase a personal vehicle after the shut down.
3. Round up homeless populations and intern them in hygienic camps. They will be forcibly bathed each day if they refuse to do so on their own.
4. Keep prisoners locked up indefinitely to contain any diseases they may harbor. They are not likely to ever be productive members of society so no reason to let them loose.
5. Force airlines to remove middle seats from planes
Sure these seem draconian and silly, but are they really any less so than what has imposed on areas not ravaged by the disease? Does everyone need to suffer because our big cities are a perfect means of transmitting disease?

Reply to  Tropical Lutefisk
April 16, 2020 7:13 am

Maybe you’d like to add euthanising Gypsies and Roms and trade unionists to your list. You’re almost there.

Tropical Lutefisk
Reply to  Greg
April 16, 2020 7:25 am

Please go on. I am open to suggestions. We need to be thorough if we are to avoid such a plague in the future. Obviously, everything is on the table. No measure is too drastic if we can save just one life. Even we have to sacrifice thousands of lives and livelihoods for that one.

Reply to  Tropical Lutefisk
April 16, 2020 11:05 am

What do they say about good satire?

Now that air travel is down so much, perhaps TSA can take care of #3.

Jeffery P
Reply to  Tropical Lutefisk
April 16, 2020 8:29 am

I lived in the Austin area for a couple of years. I hate central planning. To think we can do it better than the progressives who now run the show is the wrong way to go.

People are smart Normal people are smart enough to figure things out. I’ll bet much of the population of NYC would gladly wears masks every day and endure the occasional lockdown when the virus flares up.

On the flip side, normal people will think twice about staying in densely-populated areas, areas with high-air pollution or areas where mass transit/public transportation is the only affordable option for working.

In other words, many of these problems will take care of themselves. WFH and remote work are here to stay. People who can work remotely are learning the daily commute is not worth the hassle, that getting to and from work is unneeded stress and the time commuting back and forth can be better spent.

Reply to  Jeffery P
April 16, 2020 8:36 am

We still have empty buses and trains running to an empty airport. Our progressive leaders are so smart.

Reply to  Tropical Lutefisk
April 16, 2020 3:54 pm

I think you should add instituting decimation to any city over 10,000. We must do all we can to prevent anyone from dying of disease, even if it kills us.

April 16, 2020 6:34 am

” Beate Bahner has won three cases in the Federal Constitutional Court and written five books on German medical law’

Nick de Cusa
April 16, 2020 6:39 am

It kills people who have insulin resistance; even among the elderly. The others are fine. This is true also among the elderly :

April 16, 2020 6:46 am

a study in the J. Clin Microbiol which suggests that recent flu vaccination can give rise to coronavirus antibody testing as positive and suggests `routine vaccination as a potential cause of false-positive antibody test results’.

Reply to  richard
April 16, 2020 7:44 am

Same thing happened with the HIV test. Maybe still does happen, dunno.

Jeffery P
April 16, 2020 7:04 am

How about we stop treating the US like a small, homogeneous country and save the lock downs and other draconian measures for the Hotspot, like the NYC region or New Orleans.

Keep the high-risk population sequestered.

April 16, 2020 7:12 am

“The CDC should stop using the phrase ‘community spread’. COVID-19 transmission cannot be traced, which is the definition of community spread.” Can you say “non sequitur”? I knew you could.

COVID-19 is obviously getting transmitted among people in the US somehow, even if you can’t trace every individual case. To say that this is not community transmission is akin to saying that your house didn’t get robbed because the criminals weren’t captured.

April 16, 2020 7:33 am

Social Changes with COVID-19 are a prelude to life with less fossil fuels. With COVID-19 we’ve seen extensive self-imposed social adjustments to transportation that are very similar to what will be required to live with less fossil fuels in the future. As we weed ourselves from unrestrained use of oil, we’ll need to lower our demands from the transportation infrastructures and the leisure and entertainment industries to the best of their abilities to conserve oil for where its most needed for society, to make the thousands of products that support lifestyles as well as worldwide sustainable economic development.

Reply to  Ronald Stein
April 16, 2020 8:14 am

We are in the midst of another dump of snow and the downhill skiing would have been fantastic. A large part of my coming to Colorado was for the skiing. Do you think we should give up life’s pleasures, such as skiing, when there is no shortage of oil and there is no urgent need to reduce its consumption?

If climate scientists were honest, they would present the climate data truthfully which show that nothing that is happening today is beyond the bounds of natural variation. It was likely warmer a thousand years ago and it was certainly warmer two thousand years ago. In fact, a little man made warming is probably good.

April 16, 2020 8:03 am

“In Denmark, the lockdown is now regretted: „We should never have pressed the stop button. The Danish health care system had the situation under control. The total lockdown was a step too far,“ argues Professor Jens Otto Lunde Jørgensen of Aarhus University Hospital. Denmark is currently ramping up school operations again.”

April 16, 2020 8:06 am

“German virologist Hendrik Streeck explains that no „smear infections“ in supermarkets, restaurants or hairdressing salons have been detected so far’

April 16, 2020 8:16 am

Step 1: Grow up and become a rational thinking person.
Step 2: Look at the reality of the virus and realize that the hysteria of it is irrational. While fear is appropriate, over reacting to the fear causes more harm in the long run.
Step 3: Look at every country and align them on an apples to apples comparison. Build a timeline for each nation based on their actions to combat the virus. Look for the trend lines that show affects.
Step 4: Notice how little each action to combat the virus failed to deliver results that differ from other places.
Step 5: Wake up and just simply say no to the shut down and reopen the economy. Right now. Today. Before any more harm is done that cannot be undone.

The reality is that the disease spreads quickly. It has a Infection Fatality Ratio of about 0.03%. It primarily kills those near the average life expectancy for people in their health category. Which means it is not taking very many life years per death it supposedly causes.

Let us look at some fun facts about propaganda.
China shut down their economy for a short period. This set a precedent. They also reopened pretty quickly and continued on with life.
The study that claimed 2.2 million Americans could die came from the same man who claimed Mad Cow Disease would kill hundreds of thousands of people. That was the study governments chose to use to shut down the economies.
The new estimates are about 1/25th that number.
China has a large amount of sway with academic institutions, like the one that made the 2.2 million death claim.
China also has a large amount of sway with the media that was demanding we shut down like China did.
The original claim was that we needed to flatten the curve to save the health care system. The Health care system, even in New York did not collapse. And New York went from zero to 3 times the deaths per million as Spain did in about 2 weeks. The health care system is safe.
Now the claim is we need to stay shut down until we have some impossible things happening. We have to be able to test everyone once a month or twice a month before we can reopen. Why? The Health care system has proven it can handle New York City levels of the flu and survive.
My thought is that China is using its sway with academia and the media to keep us shut down to weaken us. Maybe if we keep following their desires we will be weak enough they can Invade Taiwan for instance. We did shut down an entire Aircraft Carrier Group over the disease, maybe more ships are out of commission where their captains were at least secretive about their situation.
Plenty of Useful idiots, like the above writer and Dread Lord Monckton and others everywhere. Dr Fauci.

Reply to  astonerii
April 16, 2020 8:32 am

I mostly agree, but we really don’t know how effective social distancing was in NY. How much worse would it have been and what’s likely to happen as lockdowns are ended?

Monckton is conservative and risk adverse in this case and doesn’t deserve to be called a useful idiot. Fauci perhaps is not useful at all.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 8:47 am

If he is doing the will of the communists, regardless of his intended meaning, he is a useful idiot. That is the official and real meaning of the term. If you have a problem with me calling him it, it means you too are one of their useful idiots. Willing to help them accomplish their goals.

How effective do you think social distancing in a city as packed as New York City could possibly be? Hint, they all still are either getting packages with the virus on them, shopping where the virus spreads, traveling on subway cars or buses where the virus is, living and working in high density high rise buildings where the virus is and transiting the long hallways and same elevators and stairwells as people with the virus are. Studies are hinting at greater than 85% of carriers are asymptomatic and of the other 15% mild symptoms at worst are the bulk.

Reply to  astonerii
April 16, 2020 10:16 am

Neither Monckton nor I are idiots and certainly neither of us are willing to help them (communists) meet their goals. I agree with you that China is however using the crisis to our disadvantage.

I disagreed to a great degree of MoB’s analysis on conoravirus. Your statement that I’m a useful idiot because I disagree with your name calling is illogical and is more about your feelings, which don’t prove anything. You ‘re likely wrong about his motives but I know you are certainly wrong about mine.

You are also incorrect about the lockdown in NYC. You make it sound as though it were business as usual. There was/is in fact a great deal less shopping, traveling, etc.

April 16, 2020 8:29 am

Virologist Hendrik Streeck –

“There is no significant risk of catching the disease when you go shopping. Severe outbreaks of the infection were always a result of people being closer together over a longer period of time, for example the après- ski parties in Ischgl, Austria.” He could also not find any evidence of ‘living’ viruses on surfaces. “When we took samples from door handles, phones or toilets it has not been possible to cultivate the virus in the laboratory on the basis of these swabs….”

Tom Abbott
April 16, 2020 8:30 am

What should our political leaders do the next time an unknown, infectious virus rears its ugly head? Other than what was done with the unknown Wuhan virus? There are only two choices; mitigate the hell out of it, or let it run wild. Which one should we do when we have no idea of the infectious rate or of the number of deaths it could cause?

Some people seem to think there was an alternative to what we just did (mitigate) with the Wuhan virus. They can say this because it is no longer an unknown virus. They could not say this three months ago with any credibility because they knew nothing about this virus.

Thank you, President Trump, for your quick action. Thank God the virus was less deadly than it could have been. That’s what people ought to be saying.

Doug Huffman
April 16, 2020 8:35 am

The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense. Gee Zeus Chrispy, shut-up y’all and read and think.

April 16, 2020 8:39 am

@Leo Goldstein:

Excellent! I have had similar thoughts starting from the time draconian unconstitutional edicts were being proclaimed by many State Governors. This is coming from a retired engineer who didn’t stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night nor am I a doctor and I’ve never played one on TV. I’m not a mathematician, either ;o)

You laid your case out well, far better than some similar, less coherent, and more weekly supported arguments I made a couple of weeks ago.

Americans were being shunted into two camps; shut ‘er down or let ‘er rip.

Naturally, the government, being government, always comes up with a one-size fits-all solution, because a considered, nuanced solution that relies on some common sense to treat people differently, but in a way that suits their needs and respects their constitutional rights is just not the way governments roll. If one person is going to be ordered to do something, everybody is going to do that something. The government was in the shut ‘er down camp so everyone gets shut down.

Oh and of course there are arbitrary and capricious exceptions determined the government, e.g. you can’t attend church in your car but you can go to the grocery store and you can’t buy garden seeds. Liquor stores are an essential service (OK. Didn’t mean to start a fight [grin]). Say what?!?

I always thought that there was a third more logical approach and you’ve laid out a good one. Most others have been too busy arguing the two extreme options to consider looking for a third way.

I have heard other 3rd way proposals, but yours is the best I’ve seen so far. I think it would be the sound basis to the start of the journey out of this government-created one-size-fits-all mess.

Never happen? I don’t know. It is the government and one-size does not fit-all. Governments don’t do that very well.

Thanks again for a good article.

James F. Evans
April 16, 2020 9:25 am

A good post.

This is what we need to see from governors and the federal government:

A plan to open business and get people to work.

Is it perfect? No.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Rich Davis
April 16, 2020 9:48 am

I don’t know if the author’s high-end estimate of 500 per million is accurate or not, but that would require about 165,000 random tests across the US. Abbott Labs plans to deliver 1 million tests within the next week, starting today. That would leave 835,000 tests for all other purposes this week. If the low-end estimate of 500 per 10 million is correct, then only 16,500 random tests would be required. Logistically it might take a while to select the participants, but the test would be a small fraction of the number of diagnostic tests currently being completed daily in the US.

Get on with it please.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Rich Davis
April 16, 2020 10:47 am

A recent opinion poll of likely voters in North Carolina had 500 participants with a 4.38% margin of error at 95% CL. About 4.5 million people voted in NC in 2016. That’s about 247 per 10 million.

So it seems like 500 per 10 million would be conservative and likely give a margin of error below 4%. We are wondering is it 5% immunity or 50%.

Get on with it please.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Rich Davis
April 16, 2020 10:50 am

Oops, sorry. Math error. 1,111 per 10 million.

Nevertheless get on with it please.

Nick Schroeder
April 16, 2020 10:13 am

New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Michigan, California and Pennsylvania are the top six leaders for the number of US CoVid-19 cases and deaths.
Not only that, together they have more cases and deaths than the entire other 46 states COMBINED!!!!
Not only that, together they lead the ENTIRE REST OF THE FREAKING WORLD!!!!
The US and global economies are in free fall because of these six idiots!
The masked, stay-at-home, social distancing clown show is because of these six losers.
Besides the obvious, e.g. poor hygiene, too old, too sick, too crammed together, too diabetic, too fat, too smokey just what might be their special talents?
How ‘bout some of y’all useless freshly minted twit and twat journalism majors free lancing for the fake news MSM investigate and inform.
Like ya’ know, actually that’s like actually your like actual job description, ya’ know, like.

Reply to  Nick Schroeder
April 16, 2020 11:38 am

This is not a statement of causation, but every governor of those states is a democrat. I will also note that Colorado which has similar demographics but smaller population than Arizona, has twice the cases and deaths compared to Arizona. Colorado also has a democratic governor. There is something to this.

Colorado, however, is often thought of as having the most fit citizens in terms of obesity, diabetes, etc. Compared to Arizona though our climate is much cooler. In fact, this winter is the longest on record. Today there is another foot of global warming on the ground and it’s still falling.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 11:56 am

Winter was the same length as every leap year

Reply to  dwestall
April 16, 2020 12:07 pm

Sorry, I meant winter weather.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 12:57 pm

You must have moved here since last winter. We haven’t had any winter weather since February. 1 or 2 April snowstorms doesn’t make up for above avg temps and below average March snowfall. Last year was much longer winter weather (whatever that means) and this year isn’t even in the realm of 10/11.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 1:39 pm

Sure, there were some warm days this past winter like there always are. However, for the mountains, this would have been an epic ski season if it hadn’t been artificially ended by the governor in early March.

Last year, I skied on July 4 and had A Basin maintained the slopes this year it could likely have happened again in 2020. I suppose it still could. Most resorts opened two weeks early in October and with the snow we’re getting they could have stayed opened well into May.

With the snow we’re getting now, Boulder will get close to or will exceed its seasonal snow record.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2020 4:52 pm

The new most snowfall for a season in Boulder was set today, which dated to back to 1908-1909.

April 16, 2020 12:12 pm

Willis needs to publish his data that shows that all countries are showing the same metrics with or without lockdowns (re Sweden) except that lockdonws are going to cause possibly billions of death of young middle aged active people worldwide who dont have jobs ect. I am an old person and expect to die but I am not willing to have my children subjected to the stupidity of Fauci and Cuomo New York who know nothing about this virus . This is a normal virus that kills millions of old people every year ITS NORMAL! The USA needs to wake up quickly to this scam. You have two weeks before before you complete destroy your country with millions dying of starvation ect disaster looking to 1930 depression Again ~60,000,000 mainly old people die every year or 170000 EVERY DAY

Clyde Spencer
April 16, 2020 12:20 pm

Because there are so many commenters agitating in support of HCQ, I’m concerned that other work is being ignored. Those with open minds might find this to be of interest:

Tom in Florida
April 16, 2020 5:59 pm

The metrics we need to see on a weekly basis is the number of people who test positive and:
1. have no symptoms
2. have slight symptoms
3. have normal flu like symptoms
4. have more severe symptoms
5. require hospitalization
6. require hospitalization and life saving efforts
6. have died with underlying conditions
7. have died without underlying conditions.

I believe when a sufficient number of people are tested and categorized as above, most of the fear of the unknown will vanish and sensible precautions can be recommended.
Percentages should not be used but rather actual hard numbers to have the most effect.

Aaron Watters
April 16, 2020 6:40 pm

According to worldometer the percent of the population in New York State that has died from the virus is around 0.8% and the percent in Belgium is 0.4% — and they aren’t done yet — not even clearly past the peak. It seems likely that it will be several times that before a vaccine is available. If that happens everywhere it will be horrific. We need to bring the rate of spread way down and keep it there and lock downs work.

April 17, 2020 1:20 pm

We should not allow this in a free society – if it is mandatory. There are several cures available that can arrest new cases until there is a vaccine