"Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts"

[Calypso Jones]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

None of this computes to Drumpfsters. When the orange man says that he isnt wearing a mask his drones follow along nervously.

But he is wearing a mask now. Didn't you know...and he rocked it. Next thing I know Jake Tapper has some woman claiming some medical authority and she says the masks aren't necessary.
I say we all start wearing OrangeMan2020 masks and the dems will suddenly says masks are unnecessary and ban them.

 

[Calypso Jones]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

Unfortunately CDC/WHO Fauci and the Scarf Queen DON"T know what they're talking about. Let me remind you that Fauci downplayed it at the beginning...Pelousi invited everyone to ChinaTown for lunch with no masks and the Dems said it was nothing...I got the video dude. Left is always blaming Donald J Trumpius for their own incompentence and get caught in their lie every time. oh well. LOLOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

None of this computes to Drumpfsters. When the orange man says that he isnt wearing a mask his drones follow along nervously.

But he is wearing a mask now. Didn't you know...and he rocked it. Next thing I know Jake Tapper has some woman claiming some medical authority and she says the masks aren't necessary.
I say we all start wearing OrangeMan2020 masks and the dems will suddenly says masks are unnecessary and ban them.

For the last several weeks, the left have been complaining how Trump doesn't wear a mask. Now that he wore one, they are complaining even more.

 

[Flopper]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

 

[Flopper]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

None of this computes to Drumpfsters. When the orange man says that he isnt wearing a mask his drones follow along nervously.

But he is wearing a mask now. Didn't you know...and he rocked it. Next thing I know Jake Tapper has some woman claiming some medical authority and she says the masks aren't necessary.
I say we all start wearing OrangeMan2020 masks and the dems will suddenly says masks are unnecessary and ban them.

Trump is wearing a mask because his polling is telling him the public doesn't like what he's doing. Trump does what he always, does whatever is best for Donald Trump. However, I don't care why he's wearing a mask, just so he wears one. A president sets an example for his supporters and refusing to wear a mask is bad example.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

 

[Calypso Jones]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

None of this computes to Drumpfsters. When the orange man says that he isnt wearing a mask his drones follow along nervously.

But he is wearing a mask now. Didn't you know...and he rocked it. Next thing I know Jake Tapper has some woman claiming some medical authority and she says the masks aren't necessary.
I say we all start wearing OrangeMan2020 masks and the dems will suddenly says masks are unnecessary and ban them.

Trump is wearing a mask because his polling is telling him the public doesn't like what he's doing. Trump does what he always, does whatever is best for Donald Trump. However, I don't care why he's wearing a mask, just so he wears one. A president sets an example for his supporters and refusing to wear a mask is bad example.

you silly.

The Lead CNN

@TheLeadCNN
“There’s really no need to be wearing the mask,” says Dr. Erica Shenoy, associate chief of Mass General Hospital's Infection Control Unit, about healthy people wearing surgical masks amid coronavirus fears. “It eventually will impact the supply and … we need those masks.

 

[Flopper]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

I said his inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason. Of course I have more and you've probably read a number of them but being a republican is not the only reason to vote against him.

Unlike most presidential candidates who fought for the presidency to make changes, Donald Trump fought for the presidency to just win. The republican issues he select were just a means to an end, winning. The same is true as president. The issue is of little importance but winning is everything. If Trump wins this election, you better hope the democrats don't get control of congress. If that happens, you will see a new Donald Trump that will make you wonder whether he was ever a republican. Trump will do anything to win. If he decides to back a bill and that means given a democrat congress a liberal supreme court judge, he would do it in heartbeat. The issues mean nothing to him. They never have because as you said, he's not a politician.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

I said his inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason. Of course I have more and you've probably read a number of them but being a republican is not the only reason to vote against him.

Unlike most presidential candidates who fought for the presidency to make changes, Donald Trump fought for the presidency to just win. The republican issues he select were just a means to an end, winning. The same is true as president. The issue is of little importance but winning is everything. If Trump wins this election, you better hope the democrats don't get control of congress. If that happens, you will see a new Donald Trump that will make you wonder whether he was ever a republican. Trump will do anything to win. If he decides to back a bill and that means given a democrat congress a liberal supreme court judge, he would do it in heartbeat. The issues mean nothing to him. They never have because as you said, he's not a politician.

Well........we could take that risk that Trump might do these things. On the other hand, if Biden wins, we know these are things he will do. So our better odds are voting for the reelection of President Trump.

President Trump has made changes, many of which he ran on. He did a fantastic job on the border in spite of Democrats who want an open one. He went around them by using military funds for the wall he promised us. He attacked immigration on every level possible: From pressuring Mexico to stop migrants from crossing their country to get to ours, to redoing asylum applications which now must be done at their embassy, to creating policy that all asylum applications will be rejected IF they were offered asylum in Mexico or elsewhere, to addressing the Birther Tourism problem, to the Visa problem, which he currently decided if they are going to have virtual college classes, they can return home and take them from their own country; just every possible level.

Yes, Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted. How could he make any changes by losing? Every presidential or congressional candidate concentrates on winning first.

What makes me confident that Trump will not be a lame duck? President Trump has lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for this position. He has donated every presidential paycheck. IMO, he's not in this for himself, he's in this for us. No President in our history has given up so much to do this job than President Trump.

That's why I think your theory is flawed.

 

[Thinker101]

Yep, before seat belts Americans went to war with Japan. Before Japan, Americans went to war with each other. Before each other, Americans went to war with Britain. Before Britain, Americans went to war with Indians. So what does all this tell ya....not a damn thing.

 

[dudmuck]

Yep, before seat belts Americans went to war with Japan. Before Japan, Americans went to war with each other. Before each other, Americans went to war with Britain. Before Britain, Americans went to war with Indians. So what does all this tell ya....not a damn thing.

Its not referring to war with other country. Its about war against public health or safety requirement. It tells you that people bitched about some new safety law intended to protect people from dying. The same thing happend with indoor smoking (2nd hand smoke).

 

[The Original Tree]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

The media is refusing to cover protests against Mandated Marxist Masks.

 

[Flopper]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

I said his inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason. Of course I have more and you've probably read a number of them but being a republican is not the only reason to vote against him.

Unlike most presidential candidates who fought for the presidency to make changes, Donald Trump fought for the presidency to just win. The republican issues he select were just a means to an end, winning. The same is true as president. The issue is of little importance but winning is everything. If Trump wins this election, you better hope the democrats don't get control of congress. If that happens, you will see a new Donald Trump that will make you wonder whether he was ever a republican. Trump will do anything to win. If he decides to back a bill and that means given a democrat congress a liberal supreme court judge, he would do it in heartbeat. The issues mean nothing to him. They never have because as you said, he's not a politician.

Well........we could take that risk that Trump might do these things. On the other hand, if Biden wins, we know these are things he will do. So our better odds are voting for the reelection of President Trump.

President Trump has made changes, many of which he ran on. He did a fantastic job on the border in spite of Democrats who want an open one. He went around them by using military funds for the wall he promised us. He attacked immigration on every level possible: From pressuring Mexico to stop migrants from crossing their country to get to ours, to redoing asylum applications which now must be done at their embassy, to creating policy that all asylum applications will be rejected IF they were offered asylum in Mexico or elsewhere, to addressing the Birther Tourism problem, to the Visa problem, which he currently decided if they are going to have virtual college classes, they can return home and take them from their own country; just every possible level.

Yes, Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted. How could he make any changes by losing? Every presidential or congressional candidate concentrates on winning first.

What makes me confident that Trump will not be a lame duck? President Trump has lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for this position. He has donated every presidential paycheck. IMO, he's not in this for himself, he's in this for us. No President in our history has given up so much to do this job than President Trump.

That's why I think your theory is flawed.

I completely disagree with your statement, "Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted." In the campaign, Trump concentrated on the changes you wanted because it was the only way he could win the election. The same is true now.

I'll agree that his motives are irrelevant as long he accomplished what you want. However looking ahead, suppose I'm right and his motive is strictly to win and the particularly issues are irrelevant to him. If he wins the election and democrats win the congress, do you really think he would go down fighting for an immigration bill you want and the repeal of Obamacare that would fail in congress. Or would he work with democrats and pass a landmark immigration reform bill and a healthcare bill that surpasses Obamacare in coverage and benefits. A true republican politician would never turn his back on the party and would go down swinging rather support such liberal issues, but Trump is not a politician and he would not chose to end his 2nd term as a loser.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

I said his inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason. Of course I have more and you've probably read a number of them but being a republican is not the only reason to vote against him.

Unlike most presidential candidates who fought for the presidency to make changes, Donald Trump fought for the presidency to just win. The republican issues he select were just a means to an end, winning. The same is true as president. The issue is of little importance but winning is everything. If Trump wins this election, you better hope the democrats don't get control of congress. If that happens, you will see a new Donald Trump that will make you wonder whether he was ever a republican. Trump will do anything to win. If he decides to back a bill and that means given a democrat congress a liberal supreme court judge, he would do it in heartbeat. The issues mean nothing to him. They never have because as you said, he's not a politician.

Well........we could take that risk that Trump might do these things. On the other hand, if Biden wins, we know these are things he will do. So our better odds are voting for the reelection of President Trump.

President Trump has made changes, many of which he ran on. He did a fantastic job on the border in spite of Democrats who want an open one. He went around them by using military funds for the wall he promised us. He attacked immigration on every level possible: From pressuring Mexico to stop migrants from crossing their country to get to ours, to redoing asylum applications which now must be done at their embassy, to creating policy that all asylum applications will be rejected IF they were offered asylum in Mexico or elsewhere, to addressing the Birther Tourism problem, to the Visa problem, which he currently decided if they are going to have virtual college classes, they can return home and take them from their own country; just every possible level.

Yes, Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted. How could he make any changes by losing? Every presidential or congressional candidate concentrates on winning first.

What makes me confident that Trump will not be a lame duck? President Trump has lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for this position. He has donated every presidential paycheck. IMO, he's not in this for himself, he's in this for us. No President in our history has given up so much to do this job than President Trump.

That's why I think your theory is flawed.

I completely disagree with your statement, "Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted." In the campaign, Trump concentrated on the changes you wanted because it was the only way he could win the election. The same is true now.

I'll agree that his motives are irrelevant as long he accomplished what you want. However looking ahead, suppose I'm right and his motive is strictly to win and the particularly issues are irrelevant to him. If he wins the election and democrats win the congress, do you really think he would go down fighting for an immigration bill you want and the repeal of Obamacare that would fail in congress. Or would he work with democrats and pass a landmark immigration reform bill and a healthcare bill that surpasses Obamacare in coverage and benefits. A true republican politician would never turn his back on the party and would go down swinging rather support such liberal issues, but Trump is not a politician and he would not chose to end his 2nd term as a loser.

What he has been doing for three and a half years is winning. So correct, why would he change that?

If he wins the election and Democrats keep the House, and even get a majority in the Senate, not much changes except for the possibility of not getting his judges nominated should that come about, which I think it will; Ginsburg isn't going to make it another four and a half years.

There may be slight changes in the House if Republicans take it, but that would hinge on how many more Republicans we have. We need to out vote the RINO's and TDS people, and the same goes in the Senate if we keep that. So I think no matter what happens, Commie Care will continue to be with us unless some issue or another surfaces and they take that up to the Supreme Court.

 

[Flopper]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

I said his inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason. Of course I have more and you've probably read a number of them but being a republican is not the only reason to vote against him.

Unlike most presidential candidates who fought for the presidency to make changes, Donald Trump fought for the presidency to just win. The republican issues he select were just a means to an end, winning. The same is true as president. The issue is of little importance but winning is everything. If Trump wins this election, you better hope the democrats don't get control of congress. If that happens, you will see a new Donald Trump that will make you wonder whether he was ever a republican. Trump will do anything to win. If he decides to back a bill and that means given a democrat congress a liberal supreme court judge, he would do it in heartbeat. The issues mean nothing to him. They never have because as you said, he's not a politician.

Well........we could take that risk that Trump might do these things. On the other hand, if Biden wins, we know these are things he will do. So our better odds are voting for the reelection of President Trump.

President Trump has made changes, many of which he ran on. He did a fantastic job on the border in spite of Democrats who want an open one. He went around them by using military funds for the wall he promised us. He attacked immigration on every level possible: From pressuring Mexico to stop migrants from crossing their country to get to ours, to redoing asylum applications which now must be done at their embassy, to creating policy that all asylum applications will be rejected IF they were offered asylum in Mexico or elsewhere, to addressing the Birther Tourism problem, to the Visa problem, which he currently decided if they are going to have virtual college classes, they can return home and take them from their own country; just every possible level.

Yes, Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted. How could he make any changes by losing? Every presidential or congressional candidate concentrates on winning first.

What makes me confident that Trump will not be a lame duck? President Trump has lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for this position. He has donated every presidential paycheck. IMO, he's not in this for himself, he's in this for us. No President in our history has given up so much to do this job than President Trump.

That's why I think your theory is flawed.

I completely disagree with your statement, "Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted." In the campaign, Trump concentrated on the changes you wanted because it was the only way he could win the election. The same is true now.

I'll agree that his motives are irrelevant as long he accomplished what you want. However looking ahead, suppose I'm right and his motive is strictly to win and the particularly issues are irrelevant to him. If he wins the election and democrats win the congress, do you really think he would go down fighting for an immigration bill you want and the repeal of Obamacare that would fail in congress. Or would he work with democrats and pass a landmark immigration reform bill and a healthcare bill that surpasses Obamacare in coverage and benefits. A true republican politician would never turn his back on the party and would go down swinging rather support such liberal issues, but Trump is not a politician and he would not chose to end his 2nd term as a loser.

What he has been doing for three and a half years is winning. So correct, why would he change that?

If he wins the election and Democrats keep the House, and even get a majority in the Senate, not much changes except for the possibility of not getting his judges nominated should that come about, which I think it will; Ginsburg isn't going to make it another four and a half years.

There may be slight changes in the House if Republicans take it, but that would hinge on how many more Republicans we have. We need to out vote the RINO's and TDS people, and the same goes in the Senate if we keep that. So I think no matter what happens, Commie Care will continue to be with us unless some issue or another surfaces and they take that up to the Supreme Court.

What do you mean nothing changes? If democrats controls the House and Senate, they can block every piece of legislation Trump proposes, de-fund any project including the wall, strip his budget, block any appoints, nix his nomination of judges, change the laws under which he operates, and kick him and any of his people out of office. Do you really think the master deal maker would put up with that for 4 years. He would be cutting deals right and left with congress to put his signature on historic liberal legislation.

Well we can agree on Obamacare, it's going be with us a long time simple Republicans don't want to tackle healthcare. Republicans controlled the congress and presidency in Trump's first 2 years and the best they could do was remove the mandate which just pushed rates up leaving most of Obamacare in place because republicans had no replacement.

 

[dudmuck]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

The media is refusing to cover protests against Mandated Marxist Masks.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can't breath with a mask on. I couldn't stand oxygen masks when i WENT in for an operation, I tolerate the mask less than those. I have problems breathing. I'll stay home until whenever. I don't want to live in a world where everyone wears a mask.

Since that Uterus holds a life and removing it would cause it's death.
Not wearing a mask will not cause me to die and even so, I'm an adult able to make my own choices but the child isn't.

A growing body of evidence supports the idea that wearing face masks in public, even when you feel well, can help curb the spread of the coronavirus — since people can spread the virus even without showing symptoms. That's the main reason to wear a mask: to protect other people from you.

However that's not written in stone, it's what the left wishes to believe. While you can find studies and such to show they work, I can find studies that say they don't. It's subjective, just like man made global warming, or the effects of hydroxychloroquine.

Because there is no consensus, then it should be the individuals choice whether to wear a mask or not.

I think there is a huge consensus among just everybody in the healthcare field in regard to mask wearing. Of course it probably does not include your local bartender who is out of work, Sam the Surfer, and my granddaughter that thinks wearing a mask makes her look ugly. And there is a lot evidence coming contact tracing that shows that people that are asymptomatic are spreading the virus.

I read the opposite from the CDC just a few weeks ago. This tells you how everything changes. First a mask was no good, now it's mandated in cities and states across the country. Before asymptomatic people were low risk for spreading, now the risk of spreading is the same.

I think there is a difference between going to a restaurant and going to a doctors office. Doctors are exposed to ill people day in day out. For most of us, we will probably never be around a person with Covid unless you are a socialite, or your business relies on personal contact with people all day long. Although our antibody testing is far from perfected, some are suggesting that we are already in the herd process and there's no stopping it.

The problem with this thing is we've never experienced anything like it; at least with the technology we have today. Who knows......next year at this time, they may be telling us what a waste of time and money it was for us to wear a mask. We simply don't know.

Early on CDC said that masks would not protect you which was true then and is basically true today. Actually, there is a very small amount of protection for the wearer but not much. Herd immunity as defined by the scientist is a calculated estimate based on transmission rate and reproductive numbers for the virus. For this virus herd immunity is 70% of the population having been exposed, that is they have antibodies. That can be off by 10 or 15%. If the scientists definition of herd immunity is used, there should not be much difference in the calculation.

We may not have all the details of a virus but we know a lot about epidemics and how to control them. For example any airborne virus or a virus whose most common transmission is through the air, the key to stopping transmission is preventing the virus from reaching a host. Masks, plastic shields, staying away from the source of virus, staying at home, etc prevents the spread, a really easy to understand concept but pretty hard to implement in a large population.

We also know a lot about a virus based on the characteristics of the family. There are 6 types of coronavirus that can infect humans which includes Mers and SARS. They have many of the same characteristic but there are some differences. It's really fortunate that there was work done developing the SARS vaccine because this gave researchers a starting point in developing the vaccine for this member of the family. Making changes to the vaccine can be very simple. However, every time you change the vaccine you start over in testing. This is why it takes so long to develop a vaccine. The fact that we are willing to accept a vaccine which has is not very effective, 40% makes it more likely we will get one sooner rather later.

It's wishful thinking, but there certainly is no guarantee a vaccine can be developed. We still don't have vaccines for HIV, flu, even the common cold.

If a new vaccine came out and was approved by September, many Americans would be hesitant to take it including myself. It reminds me of when I bought my first computer and read up on it. It was a Dummy's book. The author warned his readers to never buy software 2.0. 2.0 software is the original version. When thousands of people use it problem free in trials, it's different than when you start passing it out to millions of people. That's when they discover the hidden flaws and imperfections. It's why you always wait until version 2.2. or 2.3 to come out. Those are the versions where the flaws have been corrected.

It's the same with new medications. Yes, it undergoes intense testing, but we won't know the results or drawbacks until it's been used on tens of millions of people. Even then, it could take years to find out if it has any long-term negative effects.

Before I take it, I would need 100% guarantee from my doctor that it won't have any harmful effects on me, corroborated by my cousin, who is a retired research doctor that supervised the laboratory where she worked. Until I get that, I may wait for a while if and when a vaccine comes out.

I agree with your assessment of a vaccine with a few exceptions.
We do have a vaccine for the flu. I get one every year. A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds. Also, if there were such a vaccine, you would have to get a new one every year like the flu vaccine, plus it would probably be not very effective due to the rate these viruses mutate.

The HIV is nothing like the coronations family of viruses. The problem developing a vaccine for HIV lies in genetic makeup of the virus. Unlike coronavirus, HIV has an incredibly fast replication cycle, less than 24 hour. However, the real show stopper is that HIV is prone to frequent replication errors, churning out mutated copies of itself which recombine into new strains as the virus is passed from person to person.

This coronavirus is very similar to SARS which we have developed a vaccine. Also most of the organizations developing vaccines have already proved in the lab that their vaccine kills the virus and is so far harmless to humans. The big question market is how effective the vaccine will be. Typically vaccines like these are 40% to 70% effective. The CDC has implied that a 40% effective vaccine would be acceptable. Think about what this really means. If we are able to produce enough of the vaccine to make it available like the flu vaccine at every primary care doctors office, every pharmacy, hospital, and public health clinic, we might be able to get the same inoculation numbers as the flu vaccine which is 45% of the population by the end of next year. So we might just have have 148 million vaccinated with 40% less chance of getting the virus and the remainder no protection since they were not vaccinated. After a year or so we get more effective vaccines and thus more protection. My guess is we will reach herd immunity about the time of 2024 election.

I don't think we're going see an unemployment rate of less than 5% for at least a year or so and people will dying from coronavirus for many years, hopefully at a greatly reduced rate.

BTW You will never get a 100% guarantee that a vaccine will not harm you. Deaths caused by vaccines are less than 2 per million and in almost all of those cases the person had a compromised immune system or had other conditions. You're probably more likely to get killed by a lightening strike than a vaccine.

I happen to be one of those people. I am 60 years old, and one of my two major medical conditions is the number one condition associated with death. It's one of the reasons I'd be so hesitant to take it.

If we (or others) do develop a vaccine for this thing, it should be able to wipe it out. Unlike the flu, it won't mutate so rapidly or differently, if it does at all. Experts have said if it would, then a weaker much less deadly strain would take it's place, unlike the flu. And if it does again, the next strain will be weaker yet.

Plus I think careless people have become more conscious of cleanliness now. You still can't find hand sanitizer or liquid soap in some stores. Fortunately for me, one of my tenants works at a store where they had and abundance of it because of customer limitations. She brought home some sanitizer for me and I was grateful she did. I should have plenty for while, at least until the shelves get fully stocked again. In addition, GoJo, the people who make Purell, are opening up a factory in my suburb. With some luck, they will let the citizens buy direct from them. And thanks to President Trump, there is this:

US bets on small, untested company to deliver COVID vaccine

When precious vats of COVID-19 vaccine are finally ready, jabbing the lifesaving solution into the arms of Americans will require hundreds of millions of injections.

fox8.com

Every vaccine is different. For the influenza vaccine given to day, you should avoid it if you:

• Have had an allergic reaction after a previous dose of influenza vaccine, or have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
• Have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called GBS).

In order to wipe out the coronavirus, we would need a participation much more than the 45% we get with the influenza vaccine. The CDC did a big study of why people don't get the flu vaccine. As it turns only about 2% of the population has medical condition to disqualify them. If everyone that was eligible to take the flu shot did, we would nearly wipe it out. That means last year we would have saved the lives of nearly 57,000 people, prevented an illness that sickens nearly 40 million people plus an economic impact in the hundreds of millions.

With over 50 vaccines in test trials, I don't think we will need to worry about a vaccine being available next year.

I only take the flu shot once in a while. I've known many people who came down with illness after they took the shot. Some years, you get vaccinated for one strain, but a new strain comes out that makes the original vaccine worthless.

I have little doubt a vaccine for Covid will be made, it's just a matter of how effective it is, how many people get it, how many are restricted from getting it, and any serious side-effects many of us will be waiting for before we have confidence it's beneficial to us.

The reason you have a flu shot every year is to pickup protection for new strains of the viruses.

Viruses making you ill go back years when live viruses were used in most vaccines. That is no longer necessary. Today, if one person get's a flu shot and get's sick, they are almost certain to spread the news. However, for the tens of thousands of people that get flu shots and have no reaction at all, they remain silent. Ray, how often do people stop you on the street or call you and say, "Ray, guess what I got a flu yesterday and I feel just fine. My wife and I and most of my brothers and sisters have been getting flu shots every year for over 40 years and I can't remember anyone telling me they got sick. Thy myth that flu shots will make you sick has certainly contributed to the number of people that don't get vaccinated which cost us tens of thousands of lives every year.

I'm sure a majority don't get sick, but if you feel well, and then are faced with the possibility of getting sick because of the shot, you just don't take it. The times I've taken it, I've never experienced such a thing, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way in the future. My sister, who spent much of her life working in the hospital, took the shot and got the flu a week later.

If an when a vaccine comes out, I'm sure a lot of people will have reservations about getting one for some time. We can't deal out the media in this game. They will search high and low for stories of people getting ill or dying, because that's what sells newspapers and brings people to their internet
site, even if it is all bullshit. President Trump is absolutely correct when he says how dishonest most of our media is. They don't care about informing people, they care about making money, even if it's a disadvantage to society as a whole.

The vaccine tracker has 40 vaccines in progress.
There will certainly be a choice.

And Trump is last person you want to hear from about the media.
Because his favorite is OAN, a questionable source, at best.

OAN is not really mainstream media, just media with a very small audience.

I (like most people I'm sure) are anxious for a safe and reliable vaccine to come out. Yes, people are working 24/7 around the globe to get it done. Of course, the winner of the race will get very wealthy provided no serious side-effects happen when they start vaccinating tens or hundreds of millions of people.

I've seen great economies and terrible economies. I've seen people predicting the end of the world for one reason or another. I've seen situations that look hopeless for not only myself, but more importantly, the country. But this is a new animal we've never experienced before. This is like a nightmare that won't stop, and you're just praying to wake up and realize it was nothing but a terrible dream.

Yes it is a nightmare. We are now retired with all the money we need to see the world, visit or favorite restaurants go to baseball and football games, attend jazz festivals, plays, concerts, spend much needed time at my local gym, and visit all my grandchildren, yet I sit at this damn computer, watch old movies, and clean out the the storage room for the third time. With probably only a few years left on this earth, I sure as hell hate to spend my time like this but having experience with a ventilator I certainly don't want to spend any time there either. I know a lot of people that have it worse, but it still really sucks.

However, looking at the situation from a more global point of view, this country made it through the depression which lasted about 10 years and it was far worse than this.

Ray, I would really be surprised to see much change for at least a year. I figure by then we will either have a vaccine that is reducing the spread of the virus or we will have better treatments that will take the fear out of the disease.

And both are being worked on every living minute. People who had the virus and survived, developed antibodies that fight Covid off. Blood transfusions have a very encouraging future even if no vaccine is produced. As more people get it and recover, more subjects can donate this valuable plasma, particularly to front line healthcare workers, first responders, and eventually to people like me who are at high risk.

Medications have been politicizes such as hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors and experts say it is helping their patients with proper dosage. The problem is, Trump endorsed it's use, and now we have people on the right supporting the treatment, and people on the left, plus the MSM, who are against it for no reason other than Trump saying doctors who believe in the results should be allowed to prescribe it.

Everything in our country today is about politics unfortunately.

hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore, meaning it helps zinc to be absorbed into cells. But it doesnt do any good unless you have zinc available. Zinc is one of the components of a functioning immune system. The other components are avoiding sugar in diet, adequate vitamin D levels, and vitamin C in diet. But perhaps just as effective zinc ionophore is quercetin, which can be supplemented over the counter, or just by eating quercetin containing foods.

So, the reason hydroxychloroquine is "politicized" is because nobody explains such things. And that these components are relevant to any virus, flu or covid or whatever. Trump is too brain dead to be able to tell people about such things.

Laura has experts on her show all the time about how it works, what real studies show, and how they are treating patients successfully with the combo of drugs. After all, she's the one who brought HCQ to light. Trump just happens to watch her show.

WaPo did an opinion piece a while back, ‘The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine,’ and it has some insight.

Basically, he’s looking for that silver bullet that ‘cures’ the virus, makes everyone think he’s brilliant, and he wins the election. It’s desperation.

Put in the frame of disinfectant injection, and it makes sense. Trump cures pandemic using only a turkey baster, some pliers and a bottle of dish soap. He wants to be the guy that discovered bleach. He wants to be smart again.

A study came out saying ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ works—and he’s like, ‘See, I told you so!’ He’s vindicated.

Well.....it actually has worked. Trump promoted it because he believes it has worked here and abroad. Trump will do anything to get this behind us, and I support anybody that has the same goal.

It's the left that politicized it, not Trump. If Trump originally came out and said he's against the use of HCQ, the left would have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is not for saving Americans. How Trump is hoping we turn to a solution from a company he has investments in. Every news outlet on cable television would be promoting the use of HCQ, and demanding that it be made as an over the counter drug for anybody to get their hands on.

Unfortunately Trump is new at politics, and didn't think this out clearly before supporting the use of HCQ.

I'm ok with a president giving advice on basketball or the stock market. The worst that can happen is some money is lost or the team loses. In the field of medicine bad advice can result in people dying. Trump is not a doctor and as far as I can tell, he has absolutely no background in science. Recommendations on medical treatment should come from people who know what they talking about.

When the President ever addressed this product, he has always stated for people to discuss the use of it with their doctor first. They really have no choice though, because it needs to be prescribed.

My question is why did the president say anything about this to the public? If the article he read made him think that there might be something to it, he should have handed it to FDA for investigation.

It appears to me that Trump can not resist being a commentator whether he has any knowledge of the subject or not. As Donald Trump the businessman that's fine but not Donald Trump the president. Words have power and a huge amount of power when they come from the president. It might be pleasing to hear a president speaking to you like your next door neighbor but that is a big mistake. What the president says needs to be sanitized because we all say things at times we don't mean or that's incorrect. It doesn't mean much if we do it but not the president. Once the president says something it will be written in stone. If his words are subject to interpretation, as most of what Trump says when he's off script, his opposition will interpret his words negatively and his supporters will interpret them positive. And the rest will just scratch their head wondering what the fuck the president really mean by saying this.

Trump's inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason I would never vote for him.

Come now Flopper, I'm sure you have a list of reasons, including that he's with the Republican party.

Trump never said don't use X, and use HCQ instead. There was nothing better at the time, and still isn't, although there are new breakthroughs with remdesivir. It's much more costly of course, and research is still ongoing.

My point here is that by Trump talking about HCQ, nobody got hurt by it. If anything, he may have saved many lives because of it. If you didn't see that video I posted, I suggest you watch it. I know, I hate watching videos here too, but it's reasonably short.

If you don't have the time, it's a state rep that gave Trump credit for saving her life. The clinicians gave up hope for her while suffering with Covid, and then she demanded that they give her HCQ, because she seen the President support it's use. And BTW, she's a Democrat.

Her doctors were hesitant, but thought to themselves, why not? We have little to lose at this point.

After all her suffering, she claims to have seen improvements in her condition within a few hours of taking the combo. It only got better from there, and eventually she made a full recovery.

She probably still won't vote for Trump, but wanted to show her support for this drug to help others that may be in her position right now.

I said his inability to control his mouth and speak coherently is the major reason. Of course I have more and you've probably read a number of them but being a republican is not the only reason to vote against him.

Unlike most presidential candidates who fought for the presidency to make changes, Donald Trump fought for the presidency to just win. The republican issues he select were just a means to an end, winning. The same is true as president. The issue is of little importance but winning is everything. If Trump wins this election, you better hope the democrats don't get control of congress. If that happens, you will see a new Donald Trump that will make you wonder whether he was ever a republican. Trump will do anything to win. If he decides to back a bill and that means given a democrat congress a liberal supreme court judge, he would do it in heartbeat. The issues mean nothing to him. They never have because as you said, he's not a politician.

Well........we could take that risk that Trump might do these things. On the other hand, if Biden wins, we know these are things he will do. So our better odds are voting for the reelection of President Trump.

President Trump has made changes, many of which he ran on. He did a fantastic job on the border in spite of Democrats who want an open one. He went around them by using military funds for the wall he promised us. He attacked immigration on every level possible: From pressuring Mexico to stop migrants from crossing their country to get to ours, to redoing asylum applications which now must be done at their embassy, to creating policy that all asylum applications will be rejected IF they were offered asylum in Mexico or elsewhere, to addressing the Birther Tourism problem, to the Visa problem, which he currently decided if they are going to have virtual college classes, they can return home and take them from their own country; just every possible level.

Yes, Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted. How could he make any changes by losing? Every presidential or congressional candidate concentrates on winning first.

What makes me confident that Trump will not be a lame duck? President Trump has lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for this position. He has donated every presidential paycheck. IMO, he's not in this for himself, he's in this for us. No President in our history has given up so much to do this job than President Trump.

That's why I think your theory is flawed.

I completely disagree with your statement, "Trump concentrated on winning, because winning is the only way he could make the changes he wanted." In the campaign, Trump concentrated on the changes you wanted because it was the only way he could win the election. The same is true now.

I'll agree that his motives are irrelevant as long he accomplished what you want. However looking ahead, suppose I'm right and his motive is strictly to win and the particularly issues are irrelevant to him. If he wins the election and democrats win the congress, do you really think he would go down fighting for an immigration bill you want and the repeal of Obamacare that would fail in congress. Or would he work with democrats and pass a landmark immigration reform bill and a healthcare bill that surpasses Obamacare in coverage and benefits. A true republican politician would never turn his back on the party and would go down swinging rather support such liberal issues, but Trump is not a politician and he would not chose to end his 2nd term as a loser.

What he has been doing for three and a half years is winning. So correct, why would he change that?

If he wins the election and Democrats keep the House, and even get a majority in the Senate, not much changes except for the possibility of not getting his judges nominated should that come about, which I think it will; Ginsburg isn't going to make it another four and a half years.

There may be slight changes in the House if Republicans take it, but that would hinge on how many more Republicans we have. We need to out vote the RINO's and TDS people, and the same goes in the Senate if we keep that. So I think no matter what happens, Commie Care will continue to be with us unless some issue or another surfaces and they take that up to the Supreme Court.

What do you mean nothing changes? If democrats controls the House and Senate, they can block every piece of legislation Trump proposes, de-fund any project including the wall, strip his budget, block any appoints, nix his nomination of judges, change the laws under which he operates, and kick him and any of his people out of office. Do you really think the master deal maker would put up with that for 4 years. He would be cutting deals right and left with congress to put his signature on historic liberal legislation.

Well we can agree on Obamacare, it's going be with us a long time simple Republicans don't want to tackle healthcare. Republicans controlled the congress and presidency in Trump's first 2 years and the best they could do was remove the mandate which just pushed rates up leaving most of Obamacare in place because republicans had no replacement.

Like I said, nothing changes except when it comes to SC nominees, because he won't have a Republican led Senate to confirm. Democrats in the House are already stopping everything Trump has proposed. They can't defund anything because doing so would still require the Presidents signature. Please explain how they would kick him out of office. You do know that even if they pulled another fake impeachment, you still need 2/3 of the Senate for removal, and they have no power to remove anybody from his administration either.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Ultimately the mask Nazis just like the powerful feeling they get when they can force someone to do something they would otherwise not do. It's just power. It's the deranged mother beating the child who didn't clean his room. It's the man who pounds his girlfriend's face into hamburger because dinner was late. This is the mentality of the deranged maskers who believe they are saving all of humanity

The masks are now a joke. They will become walking billboards vying for how insulting they can be. Making fun of the masked degenerates might be worth it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ultimately the mask Nazis just like the powerful feeling they get when they can force someone to do something they would otherwise not do. It's just power. It's the deranged mother beating the child who didn't clean his room. It's the man who pounds his girlfriend's face into hamburger because dinner was late. This is the mentality of the deranged maskers who believe they are saving all of humanity

The masks are now a joke. They will become walking billboards vying for how insulting they can be. Making fun of the masked degenerates might be worth it.

Our city sponsored the Republican National Convention for Trump. BLM, Antifa, and others from around the country promised us a blood bath. It never happened.

Cleveland accepted help from police in all surrounding suburbs, the state, and even forces outside of the state. Bikers for Trump rolled in, and that was about the last nail in the coffin. The police had a makeshift outdoor jail until the paddy wagons could come in to haul criminals off batch by batch. It was reported that this makeshift temporary jail only held two people.

These radicals will not act out if they are extremely outnumbered. That's why they act out in liberal places that have a hard stance on concealed carry, weak stance on protection of businesses and citizens, and assume the liberal position of police standing down and allowing the rioters to do as they will.

While our convention was safe and successful, they failed to use that same template after the Floyd killing. What they should have done here was summon the national guard long before the protests started. It should have been three times the manpower needed for the expected protestors and rioters.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I bet ANYTHING Trump was one of them who was against them, too, just like he is masks.

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

Before face masks, Americans went to war against seat belts

"There was a libertarian streak among resistors," Ralph Nader told Business Insider.

www.businessinsider.com

• A small but vocal minority of people in the US are protesting face-mask mandates.
• In the early 1980s, the public-safety battle was over seat belts. Most Americans didn't use them, and 65% opposed them being enforced by law.
• "There was a libertarian streak among resistors," car-safety pioneer Ralph Nader told Business Insider. "They took the stance that 'you're not going to tie the American people up in seat belts.'"
• More than 50 years after "Unsafe at Any Speed," Nader said, "We are a very hard society to change cognitively.""""

So let's take the politics out of this mask thing and get healthy again!
Protect yourself, protect your friends and take your tip from the scientists and docs!

Driving a car is not a Constitutional right, you blithering idiot.

Nor is going to work or the store without a mask on you fucking retard.

No law has been passed in the house and signed into law requiring you to wear a mask. It's an edict that overrides personal freedom.

Not yet. You are not personally free to infect someone else with a potentially dangerous disease you fucking retard.

Im personally free to walk around without a mask. There is no law requiring that I wear a mask. I give people their space but I will not wear a mask.

I've said it before. I wear them when I go into businesses with signs up saying they require them. I do it out of respect for the business. I wear them when I'm going to be around people who have expressed health concerns, also out of courtesy. But the absolute instant I step outside of the business or away from that acquaintance, that stupid mask is GONE. It's hard enough to breathe in a Phoenix summer without suffocating myself just to please a bunch of hypochondriac leftist sheep.

I respect that. If the business that I frequent asks, I'll abide and, like you, it comes off when Im out the door.

Yes, it's the same way with CCW licenses. If you are a carrier, and the business forbids it, you simply take your business elsewhere. It's the chance a business owner takes. If your butcher shop demands masks, you either wear the mask, or go to a butcher that doesn't require it.

The businesses in Phoenix don't have a choice, as the Powers-That-Be have mandated it. That's why I say that arguing with them is a waste of everyone's time, and just being an ass who's making their already-difficult day harder. They have no choice in the matter if they want to stay in business.