New York Times: Trump's Corona Policy WORKED

[excalibur]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. ...

Fauci was talking against masks for months, Trump was following the expert's advice.

 

[excalibur]

Trump has recommended wearing masks for months, stupid.

Yep, once Fauci did a 180º on masks Trump went with the expert's advice. As Fauci has said, Trump always went with the science.

 

[bendog]

In March, the forecast was 2.2 million deaths.

Seems that the plan to fight COVID put forth by the President has been wildly successful.

Liar. That was the prediction if we did nothing, no npi's We've already topped the high range of 60-200 thousand dead so no, the President and his Banana Republicans policies have been near total failures.

Or trump saved us by telling govt to shut er down. LOL

 

[excalibur]

Don't you? Masks made a huge difference - and they are cheap. Why don't you like that?

Not what the CDC is saying.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

 

[BlindBoo]

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy

Yes, it's that silly piece of paper called the US Constitution.

Federal Court Rules Pennsylvania's Lockdown Order Unconstitutional

Population-wide lockdown orders are "such a dramatic inversion of the concept of liberty in a free society as to be nearly presumptively unconstitutional" wrote U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV

reason.com

The sacrifice millions of Americans made that the Times was referring too were not due to Pennsylvania's lock down order.

 

[MACAULAY]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

_____

This is nonresponsive to the OP.

Can't you bring yourself to address the NYT Article?

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

In March, the forecast was 2.2 million deaths.

Seems that the plan to fight COVID put forth by the President has been wildly successful.

Liar. That was the prediction if we did nothing, no npi's We've already topped the high range of 60-200 thousand dead so no, the President and his Banana Republicans policies have been near total failures.

So by your own admission, I didnt lie.

ACCORDING TO LIBS LIKE YOURSELF, TRUMP DID NOTHING,

Trumpybear, by actively discouraging npi's, has been a super spreader of COVID-19.

How many people should have died so far and what is YOUR COVID plan?

Everyone who is not alive should have died so far. Getting rid of the orange POS in the WH is the first step in many plans.

BlindBoo, down boy. President Trump is no longer able to pass cv due to his intensive cure at Walter Reed Hospital. He has also promised thst all people here in America will get the same protocol of medicine for free if they succumb. It is a miraculous answered prayer.

It's a miracle!

Buttress said: "He has also promised thst all people here in America will get the same""

He also said anybody who wants to get a test can get a test.

Trump wrongly says anybody can get tested for coronavirus

To show that his administration has been fast and effective in its response to the new coronavirus, President Donald Tru

www.politifact.com

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So is it deadlier than the average flu?

Churchill didn't lie to the British Citizens. Trump lied to the American Citizens. He downplayed it at first and has often times contradicted the experts. He has even let it into the WH staff. He is a super ..... spreader.

What difference does it make that it was? H1N1 wasn't nearly as deadly, and look at the tens of millions of Americans that got that!

Yes, Trump downplayed it when he had no idea how deadly this would get. The commies spent the first two weeks of March trying to pass a bill that would stop Trump from single handedly issuing travel bans because they were against them.

Trump tried to keep people calm and not go into a panic. It's similar to when Bush found out about 911. He didn't run out of the classroom screaming for everybody to run for their lives. He finished the story, smiled and said goodbye to the children.

Thinking that anything Trump did influenced one American is leftist propaganda. Our Governor, Mike DeRINO interrupts the Limbaugh show at least once a week to address the state on the virus. He always told people to wear masks, and even mandated it. You know what? People still walk around without masks.

 

[TheHardTruth]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

You flap your gums and say "From the original Times article...." yet unlike the OP you post NO link to "said article" as a means of verification and validation.. Are you trying to hide something or did it just slip your mind?

For your edification, here is the link: A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On - it was linked to within the op's article, which you didn't read before flapping your gums.

Oh....OK....My bad.
It wasn't that you were trying to hide something or it slipped your mind.....It was just that you were too lazy to post the link. Much like Democratic Party supporters are obviously too lazy to get off the couch to register to vote, get a photo ID and wait in line to vote in person once every 2 years.

No, it wasn't laziness. It was an erroneous assumption that you were up to the task of reading the article. Sorry about that dude, won't happen again.

Well, you know what they say about assuming.....and your assumption wasn't erroneous, I am more than up to reading the article the OP referenced, I just don't make a habit of clicking on each and every link within the title article. I PRESUME posters will link what they deem important.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The sacrifice millions of Americans made that the Times was referring too were not due to Pennsylvania's lock down order.

You said shutting down parts of the country. It's the same thing. PA shutdown, and it was ruled unconstitutional.

 

[hadit]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

Don't like good news?

Don't you? Masks made a huge difference - and they are cheap. Why don't you like that?

Who says I don't like that? I'm just glad the president's leadership is making a big difference. Aren't you?

 

[Papageorgio]

"Clearly, the pandemic has not ended. So far some 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to the coronavirus, and reliable estimates suggest that the number could reach 400,000. Health experts agree that, with stronger leadership, the death toll would have been far lower."

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

“It is highly likely that there would be significant spontaneous changes in population behavior even in the absence of government-mandated interventions.”

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy, keeping distance from one other and wearing masks.


Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved. The next step is pharmaceutical interventions.

Facemasks, shutting down businesses could only be done on a state level. Blame them for the slow response, blame them for the economy, blame governors for sending the elderly to nursing homes to die.

True and appropriate. However, it's the federal government's job to offer clear, consistent, science based guidelines - consistent being key. Governors of both parties, as well private industry were desperate for consistent guidelines. The administration fell far short in that arena.

Interesting opinion, I disagree. The left and right are so torn that it didn't matter what Trump said, the left would have cried and bitched and moaned and the right would have bowed to Trump. The left for four years has fought Trump and if Biden wins, we will see four years of the right attacking Biden, except like with Bush, Obama and Trump it will escalate. We need America rid it's self of the McConnell's the Schumer's and the Pelosi's. Until the voter smarten up, we will be the way we are today, except much worse.

 

[BlindBoo]

Wow, no plan yet you criticize others.

Yeah right. I started by posting quotes and the link to the NYT article these guys are jizzing all over themselves about.

But all I get is the typical firebrand insults. Durrr_whats yer plan?

So you don't have a plan, it's cool by me.

I have a plan, it starts about beer thirty.....

Good for you, like I said, you don't have a plan, it's cool by me.

My plan is workin

Yes, Trump downplayed it when he had no idea how deadly this would get.

He did know. We have a recording of him saying so. Do you still think Nixon didn't know about the million dollar slush fund too?

 

[BlindBoo]

The sacrifice millions of Americans made that the Times was referring too were not due to Pennsylvania's lock down order.

You said shutting down parts of the country. It's the same thing. PA shutdown, and it was ruled unconstitutional.

Again, that was a quote from the Times article that the OP's article was opining about. Government ordered shutdowns were not the only reason people were practicing social distancing and wearing masks.

 

[Papageorgio]

My plan is workin

If that is what you need to believe, I'm good with your ignorance.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Again, that was a quote from the Times article that the OP's article was opining about. Government ordered shutdowns were not the only reason people were practicing social distancing and wearing masks.

Fine, and you'll never get everybody to do it either, especially young people who are virtually no risk.

My cousins came for a visit yesterday with my father. We were discussing this issue since their father recently passed away from Colin cancer, and it was ruled Covid. He even showed me his death certificate on his cell phone.

So how did my 94 year old Uncle, who couldn't' walk, never went anywhere get Covid from? After the VA made the claim he tested positive, everybody in the house with him on his last day didn't have it. Nobody that came near him within the previous month had it. Nobody had it. But because he was dying from cancer, all of a sudden he got it out of the blue.

So I told my cousins, the only two ways to greatly reduce our rate of spread and mortality is for Trump to stop paying money to facilities who treat Covid patients, or for Biden to win. If ether of these two things would happen, our rates would drop like a rocket.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

He did know. We have a recording of him saying so. Do you still think Nixon didn't know about the million dollar slush fund too?

It doesn't matter he was trying to reassure the public. Fauci said in a Fox interview that everything they discussed was properly relayed to the public.

 

[westwall]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

Don't like good news?

Don't you? Masks made a huge difference - and they are cheap. Why don't you like that?

Actually, in every peer reviewed study they don't. In fact, if you are wearing a mask in direct Sunlight you are preserving the virus because Sunlight destroys the virus in minutes so wearing a mask outdoors, in the Sunlight is counter productive, which means anti scientific. If you are going to claim to follow the science, THEN FOLLOW THE SCIENCE!

The problem is there are very few peer reviewed studies on wearing masks, but the science is evolving and it does not conclude masks are ineffective.

According to:

Science says: Wear a mask

The science of masks is evolving, and all indications are that it’s evolving toward the theory that masks are an effective way to slow the pandemic.

www.uchealth.org

The science that supports wearing masks
One reason is that the science of masks is evolving, and all indications are that it’s evolving toward the theory that masks are an effective way to slow the pandemic’s spread. There are indeed few peer-reviewed studies on the effectiveness of masks on slowing the spread of the coronavirus. That’s because the human disease the SARS-CoV-2 virus causes is still just months old. COVID-19 studies take time; so does peer review. More research, rest assured, is coming.

Until then, we must largely rely on work that predates COVID-19 and mathematical models of the disease based on best estimates of how well masks and other coronavirus countermeasures work.

A 2015 study done in Vietnam compared cloth masks to surgical masks among 1,607 hospital health care workers and found that those wearing cloth masks ended up catching influenza more often (there was no mask-free control group). The same research group recently revisited the topic amid the COVID-19 epidemic. They concluded that, while health care workers need N95-class protection, “The general public can use cloth masks to protect against infection spread in the community,” particularly in light of the many mild and asymptomatic coronaviruses cases.

A 2013 British study concluded that “a homemade mask should only be considered as a last resort to prevent droplet transmission from infected individuals, but it would be better than no protection.” A 2008 Dutch study considered N95-style respirators, surgical masks, and cloth masks and found that they all would reduce exposure to airborne influenza virus in that order. An April 2020 review considering N95-class respirators, surgical masks, and homemade cloth masks came to much the same conclusion, as did a June 2020 review in The Lancet. That study reviewed 172 observational studies and concluded that wearing masks reduce the risk of coronavirus infection – albeit with “low certainty.”


So, I'll follow the science and wear a mask and social distance until we have a vaccine

No problem... This is a twelve second search. There are dozens more going back over 20 years. Masks, in general, provide NO defense against common viruses. They just don't. Cloth masks are useless. Beyond useless, they are actually counter productive outside. That is simple science.


Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial
Joshua L Jacobs 1, Sachiko Ohde 2, Osamu Takahashi 3, Yasuharu Tokuda 3, Fumio Omata 3, Tsuguya Fukui 3
Affiliations expand

• PMID: 19216002
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2008.11.002

Abstract
Background: Health care workers outside surgical suites in Asia use surgical-type face masks commonly. Prevention of upper respiratory infection is one reason given, although evidence of effectiveness is lacking.

Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial - PubMed

Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. A larger study is needed to definitively establish noninferiority of no mask use.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review

• B. J. COWLING (a1), Y. ZHOU (a1), D. K. M. IP (a1), G. M. LEUNG (a1) ...
  
  
• • DOI: Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review | Epidemiology & Infection | Cambridge Core
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 January 2010

Summary
Influenza viruses circulate around the world every year. From time to time new strains emerge and cause global pandemics. Many national and international health agencies recommended the use of face masks during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic. We reviewed the English-language literature on this subject to inform public health preparedness. There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission. There are fewer data to support the use of masks or respirators to prevent becoming infected. Further studies in controlled settings and studies of natural infections in healthcare and community settings are required to better define the effectiveness of face masks and respirators in preventing influenza virus transmission.

Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review | Epidemiology & Infection | Cambridge Core

Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review - Volume 138 Issue 4

www.cambridge.org

Results: We identified 6 clinical studies (3 RCTs, 1 cohort study and 2 case–control studies) and 23 surrogate exposure studies. In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection (RCTs: odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64–1.24; cohort study: OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.03–6.41; case–control studies: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.25–3.36); (b) influenza-like illness (RCTs: OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19–1.41); or (c) reported workplace absenteeism (RCT: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.57–1.50). In the surrogate exposure studies, N95 respirators were associated with less filter penetration, less face-seal leakage and less total inward leakage under laboratory experimental conditions, compared with surgical masks.

Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Conflicting recommendations exist related to which facial protection should be used by health care workers to prevent transmission of acute respiratory infections, including pandemic influenza. We performed a systematic review of both clinical and surrogate exposure data comparing...

www.cmaj.ca

Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis quantified the protective effect of facemasks and respirators against respiratory infections among healthcare workers. Relevant articles were retrieved from Pubmed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled estimates. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicated a protective effect of masks and respirators against clinical respiratory illness (CRI) (risk ratio [RR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.46–0.77) and influenza-like illness (ILI) (RR = 0.34; 95% CI:0.14–0.82). Compared to masks, N95 respirators conferred superior protection against CRI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.36–0.62) and laboratory-confirmed bacterial (RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.34–0.62), but not viral infections or ILI. Meta-analysis of observational studies provided evidence of a protective effect of masks (OR = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03–0.62) and respirators (OR = 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06–0.26) against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection. However, the existing evidence is sparse and findings are inconsistent within and across studies. Multicentre RCTs with standardized protocols conducted outside epidemic periods would help to clarify the circumstances under which the use of masks or respirators is most warranted.

Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found evidence for a protective effect of facemasks and respirators against clinical respiratory infection

academic.oup.com

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

 

[Seawytch]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.