Trump lost a month and may have killed more people because he may still believe in 'herd immunity'

The Trumpian disinformation machine lost a month and now recalibrates death toll expectations in the last two pressers. 

President Tiger King’s reelection can only happen with a recovering economy and a receding coronavirus contagion. In his desperation, his media frame for electoral success now moves from zero to 100,000 deaths. Today he lied about testing rates and fled before being held to account about a lie regarding testing data. Only General Bone Spurs could make war on an “invisible enemy”.

x

x

— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) March 29, 2020

The members of the coronavirus task force typically devoted only five or 10 minutes, often at the end of contentious meetings, to talk about testing, several participants recalled. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, its leaders assured the others, had developed a diagnostic model that would be rolled out quickly as a first step.

But as the deadly virus spread from China with ferocity across the United States between late January and early March, large-scale testing of people who might have been infected did not happen — because of technical flaws, regulatory hurdles, business-as-usual bureaucracies and lack of leadership at multiple levels, according to interviews with more than 50 current and former public health officials, administration officials, senior scientists and company executives.

The result was a lost month, when the world’s richest country — armed with some of the most highly trained scientists and infectious disease specialists — squandered its best chance of containing the virus’s spread. Instead, Americans were left largely blind to the scale of a looming public health catastrophe.

The absence of robust screening until it was “far too late” revealed failures across the government, said Dr. Thomas Frieden, the former C.D.C. director. Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins, said the Trump administration had “incredibly limited” views of the pathogen’s potential impact. Dr. Margaret Hamburg, the former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, said the lapse enabled “exponential growth of cases.”
And Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, a top government scientist involved in the fight against the virus, told members of Congress that the early inability to test was “a failing” of the administration’s response to a deadly, global pandemic. “Why,” he asked later in a magazine interview, “were we not able to mobilize on a broader scale?”

[…]

By early March, after federal officials finally announced changes to expand testing, it was too late. With the early lapses, containment was no longer an option. The tool kit of epidemiology would shift — lockdowns, social disruption, intensive medical treatment — in hopes of mitigating the harm.

Now, the United States has more than 100,000 coronavirus cases, the most of any country in the world. Deaths are rising, cities are shuttered, the economy is sputtering and everyday life is upended. And still, many Americans sickened by the virus cannot get tested.

www.nytimes.com/…

x

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 30, 2020

For a lesson in conservative punditry tested by journalism, read this NewYorker piece

x

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) March 30, 2020

x

— Colin Camerer (@CFCamerer) March 30, 2020

So RWNJ The Federalist wants folks to have COVID-19 parties with folk theory, because if anything Trumpism is an uncontrolled infection.

x

— Seth Cotlar (@SethCotlar) March 26, 2020

Twitter temporarily locked the account of The Federalist Wednesday after the conservative opinion site published a piece, written by a dermatologist based in Oregon, that proposed the deliberate spread of the coronavirus in order to boost immunity to the disease.

The op-ed, penned by Dr. Douglas Perednia, proposed an “outside the box” solution to the current pandemic that flies in the face of advice from experts, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, who are urging social distancing.

Perednia wrote that a “controlled infection” — modeled after the “chickenpox parties” of the last century — is the measure that should be considered.

A Controlled Voluntary Infection (CVI) “involves allowing people at low risk for severe complications to deliberately contract COVID-19 in a socially and medically responsible way so they become immune to the disease,” the doctor wrote.

“It is time to think outside the box and seriously consider a somewhat unconventional approach to COVID-19: controlled voluntary infection,” The Federalist wrote in a now-removed tweet linking to the op-ed.

www.mediaite.com/…


Herd immunity is vulnerable to the free rider problem.[46] Individuals who lack immunity, particularly those who choose not to vaccinate, free ride off the herd immunity created by those who are immune.[46] As the number of free riders in a population increases, outbreaks of preventable diseases become more common and more severe due to loss of herd immunity.[10][11][12][43][45] Individuals may choose to free ride for a variety of reasons, including the perceived ineffectiveness of a vaccine,[47] believing that the risks associated with vaccines are greater than those associated with infection,[1][11][12][47] mistrust of vaccines or public health officials,[48] bandwagoning or groupthinking,[43][49] social norms or peer pressure,[47] and religious beliefs.[11] Certain individuals are more likely to choose not to receive vaccines if vaccination rates are high enough so as to convince a person that he or she may not need to be vaccinated, since a sufficient percentage of others are already immune.[1][45]

en.wikipedia.org/…

This fucking nightmare needs to end.