A physician in Sacramento, California, said this week the cancellation of regular medical care during the coronavirus pandemic could yield a “massive wave” of cancer patients in the future.
In an interview with California Public Radio (CapRadio) Tuesday, Dignity Health thoracic surgeon Dr. Costanzo DiPerna said even though Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) announced in late April that hospitals and healthcare providers could resume some nonemergency medical care, many patients are still not scheduling appointments.
“Many patients are concerned about coming to visit us, to be screened for cancer, to be surveilled for their previous cancers we’ve taken out,” DiPerna explained.
What I’m concerned about right now, not just for lung cancer but for all cancers, is are there patients out there that don’t want to come in because they’re afraid of getting COVID-19? And, so, they avoid mammograms, they avoid cat scans, they avoid colonoscopies … Then in two years we’re hit with this massive wave of patients that are all at a later stage of essentially incurable cancers.
In California and many other states, medical visits governors decided are of a “nonemergency” variety have included routine mammograms, breast ultrasounds, and colonoscopies – which often detect cancers at their earliest stages, when they are most treatable.
Similarly, heart valve replacements, angioplasty, and tumor removals have all been delayed because of the orders of many governors as they focused solely on the infections caused by the Chinese coronavirus and associated massive testing and contact tracing expansions.
Hundreds of physicians, led by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), signed a letter to Vice President Mike Pence and the White House Coronavirus Task Force Friday urging the reopening of the nation’s business and schools and warning that delay will show a negative impact on the health of millions of Americans.
Heath-wise, this is 99% on Democrats. It was primarily Democrats who shut down hospitals from being able to see anything but coronavirus cases. Regarding the lengthing of this pandemic by making the tools needed scarce, it was the Affordable Care Act (voted through by only Democrats) that put a tax on hospital equipment (like ventilators).
It has been only Democrat governors who have placed COVID-19 patients in nursing homes, thus expanding the number of people who have really died of the virus.
Dr. Anthony Fauci said Friday that there could be “irreparable damage” if lockdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic went on too long.
Fauci explained during a segment of CNBC’s “Fast Money Halftime Report” that there could be numerous unintended consequences to keeping the country shut down longer than necessary.
Fauci began by saying that his position had always been that states and regions should open as they passed certain benchmarks and could do so safely while still protecting the more vulnerable populations.
“We can’t stay locked down for such a considerable period of time that you might do irreparable damage and have unintended consequences, including consequences for health,” Fauci explained, adding, “We are enthusiastic about reopening. I think we can do it in pace that would be reasonable and would get us back as a society from a morale standpoint as well as the economy.”
“I don’t want people to think that any of us feel that staying locked down for prolonged period of time is the way to go,” Fauci continued. “We had to do that when we had the explosion of cases, but now is the time depending upon where you are and what your situation is, to look at reopening the economy, reopening the country to try to get back to some degree of normal. I’m totally in favor of that if it’s done in the proper way in the appropriate setting.”
Thousands gathered in Spain Saturday as part of a nationwide demonstration, where they spoke out against the country’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
Cars and motorcycles could be seen driving in procession through Madrid, honking horns and waving Spanish flags. Protesters demanded officials ease lockdown restrictions, which have been some of the toughest in Europe.
Members from the far-right Vox political party have called for current left-leaning Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez to resign over the damaged economy.
“The situation we have at the moment (in) Spain is intolerable. We have an intolerable president, we live in a sociocommunist country. I have had enough. We have to shout it out loud, ‘Out Sanchez and long live Spain!” – Unnamed protester
The coronavirus issue in Spain and Italy seems to center on an influx of workers, tourists, and investors from China
As has been reported within the blogosphere (e.g., A Sign of Hope, Truth2Freedom, and The Last Refuge), coronavirus made its way into Spain and Italy through a number of routes. First, Italy and Spain had agreements with China regarding trade that commemorated the Silk Road. Therefore, Chinese workers, investors, and tourists came to Italy and Spain en masse from Wuhan (even though China stopped travel from Wuhan to other parts of China).
The U.S. Census Bureau announced this week that each Wednesday it will post online a survey of American households to measure how people are doing during the coronavirus outbreak on a number of issues, including employment, “food security,” and access to health care.
“The survey is intended to provide crucial weekly data to help understand the experiences of American households during the COVID-19 pandemic,” the announcement of the survey said.
The announcement said:
In this initial release, the Household Pulse Survey Interactive Tool provides data for select indicators at national and state levels. National data also are available in table format. We plan subsequent weekly releases through late July, and will include additional estimates for states and the 15 largest metropolitan statistical areas.
For the April 23-May 5 period, invitations to take part in the survey were sent to 1,867,126 households and a total 74,413 responded (63,003 complete interviews and 11,410 partial interviews).
White House trade advisor Peter Navarro on Monday sounded off on the stay-at-home orders many states are still under as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.
While many are pushing to begin slowly reopening the economy and getting Americans back to work, there are still some pushing back against doing so too early.
Navarro told Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom” that the lockdown has been dangerous because it is “indirectly” killing Americans through suicide, depression, alcoholism and drug addiction as many people are losing their jobs.
“The original death estimate was about 2 million Americans dying in the absence of any kind of mitigation or containment, and the president took the very tough choice of entering into a mitigation phase and a containment phase,” Navarro outlined. “It was a manufactured recession that we face. And the estimates would basically take that down to 100,000 to 200,000 deaths. And that is a number that’s still out there. We know what the numbers are today. We’re — we’re just moving through time. We’re trying to simultaneously protect the American people from the effects of the China virus, killing them directly, but it’s also true that the lockdown indirectly kills Americans through the economic effects with a higher suicide rates, depression, alcoholism, drug addiction and all that.”
There is a clear and present danger that lockdown measures aimed at stemming the spread of the novel coronavirus may fuel mental health issues like suicides, Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), warned this week.
During an interview published by the medical news outlet STAT on Tuesday, Dr. Collins acknowledged that quarantine measures like social distancings, currently impacting more than 95 percent of U.S. residents, may increase mental health illnesses, particularly suicides, in some areas, telling STAT:
It is interesting that if you look back over history, when we have had other times of major national stress, it looks as if, for the most part, actually, illnesses, and even mortality, seems to actually not be as bad during those situations.
But that’s not true of specific areas, and particularly with suicide, one worries about the people who already are struggling with depression, and then are put in a circumstance of being isolated from others. That’s exactly the wrong thing.
So that’s one more reason why we need to figure out [the health consequences of the lockdowns] in a safe way, and an evidence-based way how we can get ourselves back out there again, because people are suffering with this.
Dr. Collins’ comments came in response to STAT asking about his views on Trump’s prediction that there is a real health cost to keeping people cooped up in their homes for long periods.
“I think we do have to take that seriously,” the director of the NIH, a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), said about Trump’s warnings.
The director also noted that the NIH is working to determine the expected health consequences from the ongoing coronavirus lockdowns, saying:
We set up a series of 10 significant trans-NIH research initiatives, bringing together all of the best and brightest leaders that we have around us — virtually, of course — to try to address things that we would all want to know about the consequences of this as well as ways that we can help end it.
Obviously, that includes things like vaccines and therapeutics, but one of those initiatives is very much about the mental health consequences of what this has done, socially, by asking people to stay at home for long periods of time, losing those face-to-face personal connections.
Citing U.S. government and independent assessments, Breitbart News has acknowledged early this month that the financial crisis triggered by the coronavirus lockdowns will likely increase deadly drug abuse and suicides, particularly among the unemployed.
The leftist mainstream media, however, had a meltdown over Trump’s warnings of surging suicides if nationwide social-distancing guidelines that have closed many non-essential businesses and have triggered a spike in unemployment stay in place.
Remember Obamacare (where the Congress got exemptions)
Democrats have proven time and time again that they do not care about your health in any way. They have sided with the Chinese over this coronavirus just because it worked as a political football against the President and the Republicans.
Additionally, despite all the “we are all in this together” advertisements, they don’t give a flying rip about your mental health.
One thing that I find odd within all of the politically-related articles in this string is the observation that Democrats either denied or stood against claims that further shutdowns would result in higher suicide rates. What do they think will happen when people lose their jobs, max out their credit cards, become more isolated than usual in this already isolated society, and then get a continual mantra of “isolate, isolate, isolate?”
Study: Coronavirus Shutdowns Could Lead To 75,000 ‘Deaths Of Despair’
Government-mandated shutdowns over the coronavirus pandemic could lead to as many as 75,000 deaths, a new study shows.
The study published Friday by Well Being Trust (WBT) found that the pandemic could cause an additional 75,000 “deaths of despair,” including deaths from suicide and drug overdoses. The study identified the cause of these deaths as “unprecedented economic failure paired with massive unemployment, mandated social isolation for months and possible residual isolation for years, and uncertainty caused by the sudden emergence of a novel, previously unknown microbe.”
Benjamin Miller, WBT’s chief strategy officer warned that the country cannot continue to ignore the collateral damage being caused by the coronavirus.
“Undeniably policymakers must place a large focus on mitigating the effects of COVID. However, if the country continues to ignore the collateral damage—specifically our nation’s mental health—we will not come out of this stronger,” Miller wrote. “If we work to put in place healthy community conditions, good healthcare coverage, and inclusive policies, we can improve mental health and well-being. With all the other COVID-related investments, it’s time for the federal government to fully support a framework for excellence in mental health and well-being and invest in mental health now.”
The study found that 27,644 people will die from deaths of despair under the best case scenario, while over 150,000 could die under the worst case scenario. The study identified the country’s skyrocketing unemployment rate as a leading factor contributing to these deaths, writing that “Unemployment is an undeniable risk factor for suicide and drug misuse as well as decrease in overall health status.” The U.S. unemployment rate currently sits at nearly 15%, its highest rate since the Great Depression. Most of the U.S. economy has been closed since March, although some states have recently reopened in an attempt to stave off economic catastrophe.
Rather than figuring out how to keep the shutdown, get us back to work
The deaths that essentially result from isolation, loss of income, and lowering of activity can be minimized by just getting more people back to work. Not necessarily just handing out money, but getting people to do something that produces a product that they can point to and smile.
However, what does Nancy Pelosi do? She holds up programs that would benefit small businesses in ways that would allow those small businesses to retain their employees. What did she hold the program up for? One item on her list of give-a-ways was the a gift of $25 million to the Kennedy Center, a place where only the richest in the Washington D.C. area can afford to attend. Once the gift went through, the Center fired the musicians for the Center. That’s a Democrat’s compassion for the little guy.
Suicide rates have been rising in the US over the last 2 decades. The latest data available (2018) show the highest age-adjusted suicide rate in the US since 1941.1 It is within this context that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) struck the US. Concerning disease models have led to historic and unprecedented public health actions to curb the spread of the virus. Remarkable social distancing interventions have been implemented to fundamentally reduce human contact. While these steps are expected to reduce the rate of new infections, the potential for adverse outcomes on suicide risk is high. Actions could be taken to mitigate potential unintended consequences on suicide prevention efforts, which also represent a national public health priority.
COVID-19 Public Health Interventions and Suicide Risk
Secondary consequences of social distancing may increase the risk of suicide. It is important to consider changes in a variety of economic, psychosocial, and health-associated risk factors.
There are fears that the combination of canceled public events, closed businesses, and shelter-in-place strategies will lead to a recession. Economic downturns are usually associated with higher suicide rates compared with periods of relative prosperity.2 Since the COVID-19 crisis, businesses have faced adversity and laying off employees. Schools have been closed for indeterminable periods, forcing some parents and guardians to take time off work. The stock market has experienced historic drops, resulting in significant changes in retirement funds. Existing research suggests that sustained economic stress could be associated with higher US suicide rates in the future.
Leading theories of suicide emphasize the key role that social connections play in suicide prevention. Individuals experiencing suicidal ideation may lack connections to other people and often disconnect from others as suicide risk rises.3 Suicidal thoughts and behaviors are associated with social isolation and loneliness.3 Therefore, from a suicide prevention perspective, it is concerning that the most critical public health strategy for the COVID-19 crisis is social distancing. Furthermore, family and friends remain isolated from individuals who are hospitalized, even when their deaths are imminent. To the extent that these strategies increase social isolation and loneliness, they may increase suicide risk.
Decreased Access to Community and Religious Support
Many Americans attend various community or religious activities. Weekly attendance at religious services has been associated with a 5-fold lower suicide rate compared with those who do not attend.4 The effects of closing churches and community centers may further contribute to social isolation and hence suicide.
Barriers to Mental Health Treatment
Health care facilities are adding COVID-19 screening questions at entry points. At some facilities, children and other family members (without an appointment) are not permitted entry. Such actions may create barriers to mental health treatment (e.g, canceled appointments associated with child restrictions while school is canceled). Information in the media may also imply that mental health services are not prioritized at this time (e.g, portrayals of overwhelmed health care settings, canceled elective surgeries). Moreover, overcrowded emergency departments may negatively affect services for survivors of suicide attempts. Reduced access to mental health care could negatively affect patients with suicidal ideation.
Illness and Medical Problems
Exacerbated physical health problems could increase risk for some patients, especially among older adults, in whom health problems are associated with suicide. One patient illustrated the psychological toll of COVID-19 symptoms when he told his clinician, “’I feel like (you) sent me home to die.”5
Outcomes of National Anxiety
It is possible that the 24/7 news coverage of these unprecedented events could serve as an additional stressor, especially for individuals with preexisting mental health problems. The outcomes of national anxiety on an individual’s depression, anxiety, and substance use deserve additional study.
Many studies document elevated suicide rates among medical professionals.6 This at-risk group is now serving in the front lines of the battle against COVID-19. A national discussion is emerging about health care workers’ concerns about infection, exposure of family members, sick colleagues, shortages of necessary personal protective equipment, overwhelmed facilities, and work stress. This special population deserves support and prevention services.
Many news outlets have reported a surge in US gun sales as COVID-19 advances. Firearms are the most common method of suicide in the US, and firearm ownership or access and unsafe storage are associated with elevated suicide risk.7 In this context, issues of firearm safety for suicide prevention are increasingly relevant.
Seasonal Variation in Rates
In the northern hemisphere, suicide rates tend to peak in the late spring and early summer. The fact that this will probably coincide with peak COVID-19 prevention efforts is concerning and deserves additional study.
Suicide Prevention Opportunities
Despite challenges, there are opportunities to improve suicide prevention efforts in this unique time. Maintenance of some existing efforts is also possible.
Physical Distance, Not Social Distance
Despite its name, social distancing requires physical space between people, not social distance. Efforts can be made to stay connected and maintain meaningful relationships by telephone or video, especially among individuals with substantial risk factors for suicide. Social media solutions can be explored to facilitate these goals.
Most new Covid-19 hospitalizations in New York state are from people who were staying home and not venturing much outside, a “shocking” finding, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Wednesday.
The preliminary data was from 100 New York hospitals involving about 1,000 patients, Cuomo said at his daily briefing.
It shows that 66% of new admissions were from people who had largely been sheltering at home. The next highest source of admissions was from nursing homes, 18%.
“If you notice, 18% of the people came from nursing homes, less than 1% came from jail or prison, 2% came from the homeless population, 2% from other congregate facilities, but 66% of the people were at home, which is shocking to us,” Cuomo said.
“This is a surprise: Overwhelmingly, the people were at home,” he added. “We thought maybe they were taking public transportation, and we’ve taken special precautions on public transportation, but actually no, because these people were literally at home.”
A new report released this month in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) expresses concern about the potential for increased suicide rates due to economic stress, social isolation, medical problems and other factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Concerning disease models have led to historic and unprecedented public health actions to curb the spread of the virus. Remarkable social distancing interventions have been implemented to fundamentally reduce human contact. While these steps are expected to reduce the rate of new infections, the potential for adverse outcomes on suicide risk is high,” states the JAMA report, which also stresses the emphasized need for enhanced suicide prevention efforts.
Although data on numbers of calls specifically related to COVID-19 distress are not yet available for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, a national network of locally operated crisis centers, Lifeline counselors confirm receiving numerous calls from people expressing concern over their health, economic and financial stability, and substance use.
Senior Director of Communications Frances Gonzalez tells Changing America, “In addition, counselors are connecting with healthcare providers and workers expressing their own distress and anxiety related to their work and health, as well as people facing grief related to COVID-19.”
Gonzalez adds that, “Disaster Distress Helpline, a sub-network of the Lifeline that is focused on providing emotional support to people affected by natural and human-caused disasters, has experienced significant volume increases.”
Citing numbers, she says, “During March 2020, the Disaster Distress Helpline saw a 338 percent increase in call volume compared with February 2020.”
Now that The Hill has reported on it, they can now ignore the subject and accuse others of ignorance
The pattern of the main stream media seems to be report on a subject online or on the last pages of a small section — then they claim that people who hold to the theories that depend on that idea are to be discounted. For example, suicide has now been breached; however, the only people suggesting that suicide might be elevated by a continued lockdown are people in the President’s camp.
How can this become a political football? How can people ignore the tensions created by unemployment?
The rise in the suicide rate caused by lockdowns in Australia is predicted to exceed deaths from the Wuhan coronavirus by a factor of ten, the Australian reported Thursday.
Researchers from Sydney University’s Brain and Mind Centre forecast a 50 percent rise in the national suicide rate because of the economic and social impact of government responses to the virus, which would drive deaths to as much as ten times higher than those causes by the coronavirus itself.
Already this year global deaths by suicide are significantly higher than those attributed to the coronavirus. According to the respected Worldometers running tallies, there have already been 374,225 suicides since the start of 2020, whereas the Wuhan coronavirus has claimed 251,898 lives, Johns Hopkins University reveals.
If the Australian research holds up for other nations as well, the global suicide rate could end up far outpacing the death toll from COVID-19.
The uptick in Australian suicides will be felt over a number of years, the Australian scholars suggest, and the coronavirus response could produce “a generational mental health crisis” resulting in an extra 1500 deaths each year over the next five years.
Cases of the new coronavirus that originated in the Chinese city of Wuhan have expanded into the thousands, with more than 170 deaths. The virus’ spread elsewhere — including the U.S., which has at least six confirmed cases, the last one marking the first time the illness was spread from one person to another here — contributed to the World Health Organization’s decision to declare the outbreak a public health emergency. The Gazette spoke to Professor of Epidemiology Marc Lipsitch, director of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health’sCenter for Communicable Disease Dynamics and an expert on the spread of infectious diseases, including his work during the SARS coronavirus outbreak in 2003.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has identified a handful of coronavirus cases in the nation and is investigating others. How worried should residents be?
At this point, worry won’t accomplish anything and doesn’t help. It is reasonably likely that there will be more cases in the United States, but whether that means double digits or many more still remains to be seen. I do think it may be more challenging to control than SARS, because it seems that a lot of cases are relatively mild, which makes them harder to identify.
It’s a coronavirus, which includes not only SARS but things like the common cold. Does this mean, when the symptoms are mild, that it’s easy to get it mixed up with something like a cold or the flu?
It seems that way. Some of the symptoms are more severe than colds or than typical flu, but not everybody has a severe infection. So the milder infections can certainly be missed.
One thing that struck me watching this unfold is the rapid expansion in China. Is that because it’s more infectious than we had thought, or is it because now that we’re looking for it all these mild cases are turning up?
I think it’s a mix of things. I think responsible people weren’t saying how infectious it was until recently. The most optimistic scenario — that it’s acquired from animals and then transmitted among humans only very modestly — is no longer credible. Each day it seems clearer that transmission is relatively common — estimates are converging around something similar to SARS. Reporting has been very irregular, so the big jumps in case numbers don’t necessarily mean new cases, just newly reported cases. We should remember that it’s only been about a month since the problem was recognized. The fact that we’re able to test and confirm cases of a completely unknown virus is amazing and a testament to very, very good biological work being done very quickly.
So it’s quite extraordinary that we know as much as we do, but we still don’t know that much. By comparison, however, SARS broke out in November of 2002, and it didn’t come to global attention until February . So this epidemic may have started that same time in 2019 and came to light within a month or two of its start date.
How big a difference does that time make, as far as the number of cases you have to deal with?
It’s much better. People are still trying to figure out the doubling time of the epidemic. Because right now, what we’re seeing is doublings of cases, sometimes even in one day, but that’s because people are getting tested, not because new cases are appearing. But whatever the doubling time is, a month is probably at least enough time for it to grow four- to 10-fold, if not more. A month is a lot of time in an epidemic.
How does this virus compare to SARS as far as its death rate?
We don’t know. Of the diagnosed cases of SARS, about 10 percent of them died. By comparison, seasonal flu is about a tenth of a percent or lower. This one, we don’t know either the numerator or the denominator for that calculation. Not enough cases have been diagnosed to know how many people have been infected even to an order of magnitude. There were probably some deaths that weren’t attributed to this virus. Maybe not that many, but some, especially in places that weren’t looking for them at the time. So I think we just don’t know. It doesn’t look like it’s as bad as SARS, which is very good from one perspective, but it also means that it may be more challenging to control if the overall spectrum of illness is milder, because it’s harder to recognize and isolate cases.
If you read this with a discerning eye, it shows how little we knew
As you read through the above interview, note how much dodges the question. A few questions honestly answer with “we don’t know” or “why worry?” From this lack of information, those in the political and media drove a panic in the nation.
China lied on the coronavirus. It put everyone at risk.
Compared with the response in some previous outbreaks, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 and swine flu in 2009, biomedical detective work got underway quickly in China in December, when people began to suffer a pneumonia-like illness. Chinese researchers isolated the new coronavirus, sequenced its genetic code and prepared reagents for diagnostics. But during all the weeks of this activity in December, Beijing largely kept the lid on information. It did not alert the public until well into January. The thought police were still on the beat, even as the virus spread.
The common reactions of Chinese leaders to crisis — strict secrecy, media censorship, desperate attempts to protect “stability” and slavish adherence to central authority — were evident throughout the early period of the crisis, according to a detailed insider account published by the China Media Project. On Dec. 30, this account says, the Wuhan Health Commission “issued an order to hospitals, clinics and other healthcare units strictly prohibiting the release of any information about treatment of this new disease.”
The account says that while Chinese officials informed the World Health Organization of a new coronavirus outbreak, “they did not inform their own people, but instead maintained strict secrecy.” A free press might have made a difference — it might have at least raised questions about people’s illnesses. But such a press does not exist in China.
The World Health Organization on Thursday decided not to declare the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak a global emergency, despite the spread of the dangerous respiratory infection from China to at least five other countries.
Although the disease has reached beyond China, the number of cases in other countries is still relatively small, and the disease does not seem to be spreading within those countries, agency officials said. Of more than 800 cases now reported, the wide majority — and all the 25 deaths — have been in China, according to Chinese officials.
“At this time, there is no evidence of human-to-human transmission outside China,” Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the W.H.O.’s director general, said at a news conference in Geneva. “That doesn’t mean it won’t happen.”
“Make no mistake,” he added. “This is an emergency in China, but it has not yet become a global health emergency. It may yet become one.”
The committee weighing the decision was divided, its chairman, Dr. Didier Houssin, said during the briefing. Some members felt the course of the outbreak warranted an emergency declaration now, but others said it that was too soon to decide, citing the limited number of cases in countries outside China as well as the country’s efforts to contain the virus.
So, for a virus that isn’t as lethal as say Ebola, why did we have to lock it down? Why didn’t we do so for the SARS or MERS outbreaks? FiveThirtyEight broke it down:
If the name didn’t give it away, SARS was caused by a virus similar to the one that causes COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, but it didn’t have nearly the same impact. This is in spite of having a relatively high case fatality rate of 9.6 percent, compared to the current estimate for COVID-19: 1.4 percent.
Another respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS, has an even higher case fatality rate of 34 percent. But it’s also led to fewer deaths than what we’ve already seen from COVID-19: As of January 2020, there have been 2,519 cases of MERS and 866 associated deaths from the infection.
SARS and MERS didn’t cause the same level of devastation that COVID-19 has largely because they aren’t as easily transmitted. Rather than moving by casual, person-to-person transmission, SARS and MERS spread from much closer contact, between family members or health care workers and patients (or, in the case of MERS, from camels to people directly). These viruses also aren’t spread through presymptomatic transmission, meaning infected people don’t spread it before they have symptoms. Once people got sick, they typically stayed home or were hospitalized, making it harder for them to spread the virus around.
As for Swine Flu, FiveThirtyEight noted that Swine Flu spread easily, though it was not as contagious as COVID-19 and not nearly as deadly, preventing our health care system from being overwhelmed:
“The 2009 pandemic, the H1N1 swine flu, that [disease] spread very, very well, but the fatality rate was quite low, and that’s the reason why it wasn’t dubbed as a particularly serious pandemic,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a member of the White House’s coronavirus task force, in a February livestream.
Even with such a low case fatality rate, the swine flu had a high overall death toll due in part to how easily it spread. With an even higher case fatality rate and perhaps even a higher rate of transmission, COVID-19 has required drastic measures to prevent its spread.
What about Ebola, a disease with a mortality rate that can reach as high as 90 percent? Again, a highly lethal virus, perhaps the deadliest on this list, but blessedly hard to contract. It doesn’t spread like the flu:
Similar to MERS and SARS, Ebola is not easily transmittable. Infected people don’t spread the virus until they start showing symptoms, and even then the virus is hard to catch because it is spread through direct contact with the bodily fluid of an infected person, like blood, sweat, and urine, rather than through the kind of particles produced when someone sneezes or speaks. Unless you’re nursing patients (either at home or in a hospital setting) or tending to their body after they’ve died, it’s unlikely you’d acquire the infection.
Ebola also tends to cause pretty severe and identifiable symptoms, such as fever and fatigue followed by vomiting and diarrhea. Not only can infected people not spread the virus until they’re sick, but once they become sick, they’ll know it.
“If you want to see illnesses which are controllable, they all have transmission very much tied to symptoms, and this includes SARS and Ebola,” said William Hanage, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “If you’re in an Ebola zone, you can be pretty sure whether or not the person you’re talking to is a potentially risky contact.”
This makes it easier to isolate infected individuals and protect health care workers to limit the spread, which is what occurred in the 2014-2016 outbreak. It’s a striking difference from COVID-19, which we know can be spread without any symptoms at all, and even when people get sick, some people might have symptoms so mild that they’re not sure they have COVID-19 in the first place.
I will respectfully disagree with Townhall. We shut down due to misinformation and a lack of information
From poor information, people took guesses to be facts. For example, Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo took the projections by Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins who said 583,000 would die in Texas (since he took the then-current projections of COVID ACT NOW as gospel). Now the projections are that there will be 1,000 deaths in Texas (refer below). We are not near that, but people still give some of this too much consideration.
The mortality rate has fallen far below the projections
The model showed 6,000 would die in Texas. Now it’s 1K. What’s changed?
A revised model suggests Texas could have 5,000 fewer COVID-19 deaths than previously estimated.
The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, a global health research organization at the University of Washington School of Medicine, is forecasting that Texas will have 957 deaths by Aug. 4, 2020. IHME models have been used by the White House.
That model had previously forecast around 6,000 deaths. Then 4,000, and now just under 1,000, said Dr. Peter Hotez, professor and dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine.
Preliminary data shows about 13.9 percent of the population of New York state — about 2.7 million people — have at some point been infected with the coronavirus.
About 3,000 people were randomly tested at grocery stores and other public locations to allow officials to get a broader sense of how widely the virus has spread in New York and how many people might now have immunity.
In New York City, 21 percent of residents had antibodies for coronavirus, compared with 3.6 percent in upstate New York, 16.7 percent in Long Island and 11.7 percent in the Westchester and Rockland area.
“They were infected three weeks ago, four weeks ago, five weeks ago, six weeks ago. But they had the virus, they developed the antibodies and they are now recovered,” Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) said Thursday.
The data indicates the COVID-19 death rate in New York is about 0.5 percent. The tests were conducted over a two-day period in 19 counties and 40 localities.
Nearly everything we’ve been told about models, rates of infection, deaths, and recoveries was inaccurate.
I’m not here to argue that it was malfeasance or ignorance — both are unacceptable. But the one thing that Governor Andrew Cuomo’s stunning announcement made clear on Thursday is that there are some pretty shocking — and what should be — reassuring truths.
The implication of this is a shockwave to the system.
With a population of 19,540,500 the findings point out that over 2,500,000 New Yorkers had the virus and have recovered. Keep in mind that as of this writing that only 263,000 New Yorkers have currently confirmed cases. Also as of this writing New York has reported 19,543 fatalities.
We’ve been told that the true death rate is 7.4% in New York. We were told there would be hundreds of thousands dead. We were told that this was worse than the flu, which has still recorded more deaths to date in this past flu season—even though the CDC instructed medical personnel to start counting influenza, heart disease, pulmonary, respiratory, drug overdose, and possibly even car crash deaths as COVID-19 deaths.
We were told that we had to upend an economy, go into solitary confinement, and divorce ourselves from normal life because this would rage beyond any previous pandemic. We were told that this virus with 846,000 current confirmed cases was worse than the H1N1 that broke out on Obama’s watch that infected 60,000,000 people. (We were conveniently not told that Obama had authorized $3.7 million U.S. tax dollars to be used at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to utilize corona viruses in bats in 2015 — but that’s yet another deception of omission.)
But none of these “truths” turned out to be so.
The death rate in New York State isn’t 7.4%, it is actually .75%. The recently ended influenza season numbers from the CDC indicate possibly 56,000,000 cases of flu, 740,000 hospitalizations, and 62,000 deaths. Under the current count from the Johns Hopkins Dashboard in this five month stretch CoVid19 has racked up 845,959 confirmed cases, 122,000 hospitalizations and 46,972 deaths.
A couple of other observations are extremely relevant. To begin with the flu — which has no vaccine but rather a randomized version of a shot designed to help develop antibodies to fight the version of the flu that “smart people” *think* will be the primary version that particular year — has remedies that physicians prescribe in primary care on an as needed basis. So we’re not accustomed to thinking that the flu is this deadly killer that all of life must be shut down to prevent. CoVid19 had no known treatments at the beginning of the breakout, and for political reasons—and possibly financially incentivized ones to boot—the most effective treatment for CoVid19 became a political football. Even the supposed “negative” trials that were reported on this past weekend, had cherry picked subjects that were mostly late stage victims of the virus. As Dr. Vladimir Zelenko pointed out on my show this week, doing so created the negative outcomes “purposefully & by design.” When used under a physician’s care, in the primary care basis, and early on after testing or onset of symptoms, the hydroxycholoroquine, azithromycin, & zinc cocktail reduced the rates of deaths and long term infectious stages. Zelenko’s numbers to date: 1,450 patients treated, two deaths, four ventilator cases (all fully recovered,) and all others recovered. Zelenko and other physicians using the treatment are releasing the world’s largest Meta-study to date within the next few days that will examine more than 2,000 confirmed cases.
… In case you’ve missed it, Sweden has taken a radically different approach in dealing with the coronavirus. It has essentially opted for a strategy of “herd immunity” through exposure.
This strategy posits that most people under age 65 who get the coronavirus — if they do not have major pre-existing medical conditions — will either experience it as a typical or tough flu, or completely asymptomatically, and the number who will get so sick that they require hospitalization or emergency care will reliably be less than the number of beds needed to care for them.
So, if you do your best to shelter and sequester all of those over 65 and those with serious pre-existing conditions — notably heart and lung disease and diabetes — and let much of the rest of the population circulate and get exposed and become naturally immune, once about 60 percent of your population has gone through this you’ll have herd immunity and the viral transmission will be blocked. (This assumes that immunity for some period of time results from exposure, as most experts think it will.)
After all, herd immunity is our goal — either from vaccination or from enough people building natural immunity. Those are the only ways to achieve it.
The upside of Sweden’s strategy — if it works — is that your economy does not take such a deep hit from lockdowns. It is unlike the strategy of suppression pursued in cities across America right now — as well as around the globe — where, when the lockdown is over, your population largely has not developed immunity and so most everyone remains vulnerable to the virus, and to a second wave in the fall.
Think of the challenge of New York City. Its hospitals would have been overwhelmed by the sudden crush of patients, so the months of lockdown of millions will surely, and vitally, have saved lives. But it has come at huge cost to jobs and businesses and with little progress to herd immunity — and with the prospect that the virus can come roaring back as soon as the lockdown is lifted, unless there is Chinese-level testing, tracking, tracing and quarantining those carrying the infection. And even that might not work.
Now think of Stockholm. Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist at Sweden’s Public Health Agency — the nation’s top infectious disease official and architect of Sweden’s coronavirus response, said in an interview published in USA Today on Tuesday: “We think that up to 25 percent people in Stockholm have been exposed to coronavirus and are possibly immune. A recent survey from one of our hospitals in Stockholm found that 27 percent of staff there are immune. We think that most of those are immune from transmission in society, not the workplace. We could reach herd immunity in Stockholm within a matter of weeks.”
Tegnell explains that Sweden is not just blithely letting all Swedes get the disease to achieve herd immunity, but rather is pursuing a designed strategy for the most sustainable way to navigate through this pandemic. So colleges and high schools are closed, but kindergarten through grade nine are open, as are many restaurants, stores and businesses.
But the government has also issued social-distancing guidelines, which many people are abiding by, encouraged working from home and discouraged nonessential travel. Most important, it has encouraged everyone over 70 to stay at home and banned gatherings of more than 50 people and visits to nursing homes.
The result, so far, Tegnell noted, has been a gradual building of herd immunity among those least vulnerable while the country has avoided mass unemployment and an overwhelming of the hospital system.
Texas Workforce Commission information shows that the oil and natural gas industry shed another 2,500 jobs over the past 10 days, according to a report from the Houston Chronicle.
The report shows 13 companies laid off 2,525 people. The service sector, which includes drilling rig operators, hydraulic fracturing crews and manufacturing, took the hardest hit, according to the Chronicle. The report blames record low oil prices and the coronavirus pandemic hurting demand for products and services.
The layoffs, according to the Chronicle article, included:
Houston-based NexTier Oilfield Services — 1,041 employees working at its headquarters, another Houston office and field offices in the Permian Basin and Eagle Ford Shale.
Midland oil-field service company ProPetro Service — 584 layoffs in the Permian Basin where losses now total 584 layoffs.
Houston oil-field service company Baker Hughes — 184 jobs cut after merging operations at two locations in Houston.
The report also states U.S. Silica laying off 105 people in Midland; Fort Worth-based Black Mountain Sand laying off 87; and Ohio-based Covia laying off 82 people.
Among the fuel distributors, the Midland office of tanker truck hauler Sun Coast Resources reported laying off 70 people from its Midland truck yard while the fuel distribution arm of Sunoco cut 55 jobs from its Odessa truck yard, according to the Chronicle article.
Hog farmers are struggling in the face of absent workers, shuttered pork packaging plants, and a loss of buyers in restaurants and international markets due to the coronavirus pandemic.
The result is a glut of excess hogs, making it more expensive to sell pigs to be made into pork than to simply kill the animals.
The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) said on Tuesday that farmers will lose almost $37 per hog and almost $5 billion collectively for every hog marketed for the rest of 2020, citing economists Dr. Dermot Hayes and Dr. Steve Meyer. Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the NPPC said analysts predicted farmers would earn roughly $10 per hog.
On a call with reporters, NPPC President Howard Roth said that euthanizing is going to start coming up in farmers’ discussions “absent immediate and significant government intervention,” Star Tribune’s Adam Belz tweeted. According to Roth, the number of baby pigs being euthanized will “soar dramatically” without intervention.
“Hogs are backing up on farms with nowhere to go, leaving farmers with tragic choices to make,” Roth said in a statement. “Dairy producers can dump milk. Fruit and vegetable growers can dump produce. But, hog farmers have nowhere to move their hogs.”
The NPPC is asking that the federal government purchase more than $1 billion in backed-up meat supply, which the USDA can use to supply food banks. The organization is also seeking equitable direct payments to pork producers and to allow family farms to take out emergency loans offered by the Small Business Administration.
Considering the pork that was stuffed into the PPP, why didn’t Pelosi help the pork farmers?
It would just seem natural that Pelosi, such a lover of pork, would help the pork industry. However, her parts of the Paycheck Protection Plan put greater restrictions on the USDA and swine raising industry.
Farmers fear USDA’s $19B in coronavirus aid won’t ‘scratch the surface’
As the federal government prepares to distribute an unprecedented $19 billion in aid to farmers struggling through the coronavirus pandemic, farm industry experts say it won’t be enough.
“That $19 billion helps,” said Pat Westhoff, director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Minnesota. “But if things deteriorate further, that may not even scratch the surface for what people are going to need to get through this.”
The issue is especially severe among livestock producers, Westhoff said.
That sector is facing an immediate crisis because the widespread closure of meat packing plants because of outbreaks of the virus makes it impossible for many farmers to sell all their animals.
“It’s a mess,” said Jim Petrik, a South Dakota rancher who raises cattle and hogs. “Almost all our local plants are out. It’s going to be a bloodbath for producers.”
Hog producers are losing money every day. The National Pork Producers Council on April 17 released a “conservative” estimate that hog farmers would lose a collective $5 billion in 2020.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has allocated $1.6 billion in aid for the hog industry.
For the Democrat’s supposed empathy for those in “food deserts,” there was no planning in Pelosi’s stimulus (Kennedy Center, etc) for food
If Democrats really cared about the poor inner city people within “food deserts,” why didn’t they arrange to get the soon-to-be-wasted beef, pork, and vegetables from the farms with some compensation to the farmers?
In Wisconsin and Ohio, farmers are dumping thousands of gallons of fresh milk into lagoons and manure pits. An Idaho farmer has dug huge ditches to bury 1 million pounds of onions. And in South Florida, a region that supplies much of the Eastern half of the United States with produce, tractors are crisscrossing bean and cabbage fields, plowing perfectly ripe vegetables back into the soil.
After weeks of concern about shortages in grocery stores and mad scrambles to find the last box of pasta or toilet paper roll, many of the nation’s largest farms are struggling with another ghastly effect of the pandemic. They are being forced to destroy tens of millions of pounds of fresh food that they can no longer sell.
The closing of restaurants, hotels and schools has left some farmers with no buyers for more than half their crops. And even as retailers see spikes in food sales to Americans who are now eating nearly every meal at home, the increases are not enough to absorb all of the perishable food that was planted weeks ago and intended for schools and businesses.
The amount of waste is staggering. The nation’s largest dairy cooperative, Dairy Farmers of America, estimates that farmers are dumping as many as 3.7 million gallons of milk each day. A single chicken processor is smashing 750,000 unhatched eggs every week.
Many farmers say they have donated part of the surplus to food banks and Meals on Wheels programs, which have been overwhelmed with demand. But there is only so much perishable food that charities with limited numbers of refrigerators and volunteers can absorb.
And the costs of harvesting, processing and then transporting produce and milk to food banks or other areas of need would put further financial strain on farms that have seen half their paying customers disappear. Exporting much of the excess food is not feasible either, farmers say, because many international customers are also struggling through the pandemic and recent currency fluctuations make exports unprofitable.
“It’s heartbreaking,” said Paul Allen, co-owner of R.C. Hatton, who has had to destroy millions of pounds of beans and cabbage at his farms in South Florida and Georgia.
The widespread destruction of fresh food — at a time when many Americans are hurting financially and millions are suddenly out of work — is an especially dystopian turn of events, even by the standards of a global pandemic. It reflects the profound economic uncertainty wrought by the virus and how difficult it has been for huge sectors of the economy, like agriculture, to adjust to such a sudden change in how they must operate.
Even as Mr. Allen and other farmers have been plowing fresh vegetables into the soil, they have had to plant the same crop again, hoping the economy will have restarted by the time the next batch of vegetables is ready to harvest. But if the food service industry remains closed, then those crops, too, may have to be destroyed.
Beaumont Mayor Becky Ames left Tuesday’s City Council meeting to find her phone flooded with text messages and angry social media criticism after a picture surfaced of her getting service at a local nail salon.
A cropped version of the photo first appeared on a local blog, saying Ames went to have her nails done on Monday.
Nail and hair salons are among the businesses ordered to close across Beaumont during the coronavirus pandemic.
Ames, who signed the stay-at-home orders on March 27, acknowledged that the photo could make people think she was getting a manicure.
Noting that there is no nail technician in the photograph, however, the mayor insisted that she did not violate any of the stay-at-home orders.
Violating the restriction is punishable by a fine of up to $2,000.
“I did not do anything wrong,” she told The Enterprise. “I would not be upset with anyone who I found out did this.”
Ames said she’d stopped in to pick up acetone to soak off artificial “dip” nails after they’d grown out and become painful. She said she felt she could not take them off herself.
“Six weeks ago or more, I went to get a manicure and ended up getting the powder nails for the first time. I loved it and it looked great, but as they grew out I started looking like a witch,” she said. “I tried to take them off and texted the lady that did them, who is the owner of the salon, to ask what to do.”
Ames said the salon owner told her the shop wasn’t open, but that she would mix up some solution for pickup. The photograph was taken, she said, while Ames was soaking her nails to learn how to take them off.
The photo shows Ames, wearing a face mask, with her fingertips in a bowl.
The mayor said she stopped by the salon Tuesday, not Monday, and was there for about 10 minutes before going straight to the Beaumont City Council meeting. She said she was able to remove half of the dip nails during that time.
Texas’ biggest counties and cities, including Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin, are shouldering that burden on their own, officials said during a launch event at the Children’s Museum Monday.
“We are doing everything we can to make sure that folks participate, said Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo. She called Census 2020 a crucial moment “to live up to that right that we have…to be counted.”
Amid heightened tensions for immigrants under the Trump administration, Hidalgo made an impassioned plea, in the Spanish version of her remarks, to prospective participants to set aside any fears about filling out the form.
“The Census is very safe, I want to make that very clear, that under penalty of prison or fine, nobody can share your personal information from the Census — not ICE, the FBI, no organization or federal agency can access your personal information about the Census,” she said in Spanish.
A 37-year-old California man who died of a drug overdose has been added to the novel coronavirus death toll.
Though the death of the unidentified man was caused by a drug overdose, he also tested positive for the novel coronavirus, which was coded as a “significant continuing condition,” according to Ventura County spokeswoman Ashley Bautista, VA Star reported Thursday.
“Ventura County’s coronavirus death toll increased to 16 on Thursday as county officials reported two additional deaths, including a 37-year-old man,” the report said.
“The man died as a result of a drug overdose while infected with COVID-19, a significant contributing condition, according to county spokeswoman Ashley Bautista. He is the youngest victim to die from the virus yet in the county,” VA Star added.
Last month, a 61-year-old Pennsylvania man who died from a head injury and tested positive for COVID-19 was added to the coronavirus death toll, too.
“Lehigh County Coroner Eric Minnich confirmed the patient died Friday night at St. Luke’s University Hospital in Fountain Hill,” Lehigh Valley Live reported. “He said the primary cause of the man’s death was a head injury from a fall at home, but that the virus was listed as a contributing factor to his death.”
Earlier this month, leading voice on the White House Coronavirus Task Force Dr. Deborah Birx explained that COVID-19 deaths in the United States have “very liberal” recording guidance, noting that anyone who tests positive for the virus and dies would be included in their numbers of coronavirus deaths.
“I think in this country, we are taking a very liberal approach to mortality. And I think the reporting here has been pretty straightforward over the last five to six weeks,” she said, adding, “If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that.”
“There are other countries, that if you have a pre-existing condition, and let’s say the virus called you to go to the ICU (intensive care unit) and then have a heart or kidney problem,” she added. “Some countries are recording that as a kidney issue, or a heart issue, and not a COVID-19 death.” In the U.S., Dr. Birx suggested, “we’re still recording it” as a COVID-19 death.
Pennsylvania has had to remove hundreds of coronavirus deaths from its official death count, following questions of accuracy and highlighted discrepancies by area coroners.
New York City, already a world epicenter of the coronavis outbreak, sharply increased its death toll by more than 3,700 victims on Tuesday, after officials said they were now including people who had never tested positive for the virus but were presumed to have died of it.
At Tuesday’s White House coronavirus press conference, task force member Dr. Deborah Birx said that while some countries are reporting coronavirus fatality numbers differently, in the U.S. you are counted as a victim of the pandemic if you die while testing positive for the virus, even if something else causes your death.
: DR. DEBORAH BIRX: So, I think in this country we’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality. And I think the reporting here has been pretty straightforward over the last five to six weeks. Prior to that when there wasn’t testing in January and February that’s a very different situation and unknown.
There are other countries that if you had a preexisting condition and let’s say the virus caused you to go to the ICU and then have a heart or kidney problem some countries are recording as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. Right now we are still recording it and we will I mean the great thing about having forms that come in and a form that has the ability to market as COVID-19 infection the intent is right now that those if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.
New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell (D) signed a coronavirus emergency order last week allowing her to ban the sale and transportation of firearms.
She signed a follow-up proclamation on March 16, 2020, further emphasizing her emergency powers to “suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation, of alcoholic beverages.”
The declaration declaring the mayor’s power to restrict gun sales and transportation says she is “empowered, if necessary, to suspend or limit the sale of alcoholic beverages, firearms, explosives, and combustibles.”
On March 16, 2020, the Second Amendment Foundation responded to Cantrell’s claims of emergency powers over firearms by reminding her that they sued over Second Amendment infringement following Hurricane Katrina and will do so during the era of coronavirus if needed.
What could the reason for this ban be, other than symbolic?
This does not stop any law-abiding gun owner from protecting his or her property. However, it might keep a cash-strapped gun owner from paying his or her mortgage or rent in the event that there have been coronavirus-related layoffs. Additionally, it would prevent a law-abiding person from buying a firearm in a time of need.
However, there will be criminals in New Orleans with new guns. There may be coyotes selling an array of firearms not available legally and LaToya will not have a thing to say about it.
Still, now that she has pulled this little stunt, she will later produce a Mike-Bloomberg-esque commercial claiming that she stood up to the National Rifle Association.
Nancy Pelosi added these items to the first coronavirus relief bill
Jails across the country are seeing more and more inmates and workers infected. In Dallas County, there is an effort to control the spread by releasing some inmates.
The Dallas County Sheriff’s Office has confirmed 42 positive cases of COVID-19 in inmates. That’s 30 more than were reported this past week. Another 16 detention officers and deputies have contracted the virus, although two of those officers have returned to work.
About a thousand inmates have been released from the Dallas County jail to help reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19 inside the facility. Inmate advocacy groups applaud the move, but still have concerns.
Tiara Cooper, formerly incarcerated at Lew Sterrett, now advocates for inmates with live free faith in Texas. She says they would still like to see more inmates released to allow for more distancing inside the jail.
She also said there’s concern for newly released inmates and the communities they return to. She worries some inmates may have been exposed to the virus and of those released, she says many will end up homeless or return to communities with an already high number of COVID-19 cases.
“My hope for the people that are being released is that they be tested as soon as possible and that they have those direct services that are needed and necessary in this hour,” Cooper said.
A spokesman for the sheriff’s office says inmates are screened before being released and if there’s a possibility that person has been exposed to COVID-19, he or she is provided instructions by Parkland Hospital medical staff about what they need to do when they get out.
A writer with the leftwing New York Magazine asked President Donald Trump at a coronavirus briefing at the White House on Monday if he deserves to be re-elected given the fact that more Americans have died from the virus than did in the Vietnam war.
According to the National Archives, 58,220 Americans died fighting in the Vietnam War. The number of deaths from coronavirus as of April 25 was 52,459, according to the Statista website.
Olivia Nuzzi asked Trump, “If an American president loses more Americans over the course of six weeks than died in the entirety of the Vietnam War, does he deserve to be re-elected?”
As we have observed from the beginning of the Trump administration, there is no reporting
From the beginning of the Trump administration, there has been in the range of 98% negative propaganda from the Democrats that remain employed in the main stream media. For that reason, I do not read their papers and magazines unless their articles come up through an online search.
Governor Whitmer appoints committee to research the racism of coronavirus
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said Thursday she is appointing a coronavirus task force to recommend ways to address the racial disparities in the occurrence of the disease COVID-19 among Michiganians.
She noted that over 40% of deaths due to COVID-19 in Michigan have been among African Americans, although African Americans make up 14% of the state’s population. About 31% of deaths have been among whites, 24% of unknown race and 3% among individuals of multiple races.
The trend has also played out nationally, with one in three patients requiring hospitalization in the first month of the COVID-19 epidemic were African American, according to hospital data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“This virus is holding up a mirror to our society and reminding us of the deep inequities in our country — from basic lack of access to care, to access to transportation, to lack of protections in the work place,” Whitmer said during a press briefing.
“These inequities have that hit people of color and vulnerable communities the hardest.”
While there may be racial issues with how people approach medical issues or are treated at hospitals, germs don’t discern race
While I hope there are no cases of racism at hosptials and I hope that people of all races will seek medical help when it is needed, we don’t need to find out whether germs are racist. There is no racism among germs.
However, as with the following article, there may be payoffs between Democrats.
Michigan Governor Whitmer cancels contract with two Democrat-linked firms that she tapped to track coronavirus
Flashback: 2010 and doctors start dropping out of the system due to the strains of Obamacare
The New York Times: As Medicaid Payments shrink, patients are abandoned
Shortly after Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010 (adding paperwork requirements for doctors and reducing payment made by Medicaid), doctors began dropping out, as chronicled by a 16 March 2010 article in the New York Times.
Carol Y. Vliet’s cancer returned with a fury last summer, the tumors metastasizing to her brain, liver, kidneys and throat.
As she began a punishing regimen of chemotherapy and radiation, Mrs. Vliet found a measure of comfort in her monthly appointments with her primary care physician, Dr. Saed J. Sahouri, who had been monitoring her health for nearly two years.
She was devastated, therefore, when Dr. Sahouri informed her a few months later that he could no longer see her because, like a growing number of doctors, he had stopped taking patients with Medicaid.
Dr. Sahouri said that his reimbursements from Medicaid were so low — often no more than $25 per office visit — that he was losing money every time a patient walked in his exam room.
The final insult, he said, came when Michigan cut those payments by 8 percent last year to help close a gaping budget shortfall.
“My office manager was telling me to do this for a long time, and I resisted,” Dr. Sahouri said. “But after a while you realize that we’re really losing money on seeing those patients, not even breaking even. We were starting to lose more and more money, month after month.”
Bloomberg’s gun ban rejected in Virginia with Democratic help
The Washington Examiner reported in a 17 February 2020 article that the gun grab in Virginia funded by Michael Bloomberg went down in flames.
Despite spending millions to turn Virginia’s legislature blue and a last-minute visit to Richmond, Democrats in the Senate turned back presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg’s top goal in the state of banning “assault weapons.”
In a lopsided 10-5 vote, the state Senate Judiciary Committee killed any advancement this year, pushing the legislation off for a year.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s controversial plan to keep large sugary drinks out of restaurants and other eateries was rejected by a state appeals court on Tuesday, which said he had overstepped his authority in trying to impose the ban.
The law, which would have prohibited those businesses from selling sodas and other sugary beverages larger than 16 ounces (473 ml), “violated the state principle of separation of powers,” the First Department of the state Supreme Court’s Appellate Division said.
The decision, upholding a lower court ruling in March that struck down the law, dealt a blow to Bloomberg’s attempt to advance the pioneering regulation as a way to combat obesity. Beverage makers and business groups, however, challenged it in court, arguing that the mayoral-appointed health board had gone too far when it approved the law.
A unanimous four-judge panel at the appeals court agreed, finding that the board had stepped beyond its power to regulate public health and usurped the policy-making role of the legislature.
In particular, the court focused on the law’s loopholes, which exempted businesses not under the auspices of the city’s health department and left certain drinks, such as milk-based beverages, unaffected.
As a result, grocery and convenience stores – such as 7 Eleven and its 64-ounce Big Gulp – were protected from the ban’s reach, even as restaurants, sandwich shops and movie theaters were not. Meanwhile, milkshakes and high-calorie coffee drinks like Starbucks’ Frappucinos would have remained unfettered.
A conservative activist says New York’s former mayor will have to overcome several obstacles if he hopes to “buy” the U.S. presidency.
Much has been made about Michael Bloomberg’s obscenely deep pockets and the fact that he could spend a billion dollars of his own money to blanket the country with campaign ads, posing a serious challenge to President Trump’s re-election. But Bloomberg could also face a serious blowback from black voters following the release of a 2015 speech in which he said 95 percent of all crime is committed in minority neighborhoods.
“The tapes that came out recently showing certainly what appeared to be his disdain for the people that live in minority communities is the kind of thing that will hurt him deeply with perhaps the most important voting bloc in Democrat Party primaries,” comments Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families.
And Bauer says Bloomberg has something else to deal with.
“He is the ultimate capitalist success story — a self-made billionaire running in a political party that is increasingly socialist in its orientation,” the conservative activist notes.
And as Bauer points out, some polling data shows nearly 60 percent of Democrats could never vote for a billionaire to be their party’s nominee.
If Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg was 95 years old and had prostate cancer, he could afford advanced and extreme medical care to improve and extend his life.
But what about a 95-year-old non-billionaire with prostate cancer who requires medical treatment using taxpayer dollars? In 2011, Bloomberg made the following statement: “If you show up with prostate cancer and you’re 95, we should say ‘go and enjoy, have a nice day, live a long life.’ There’s no cure and we can’t do anything. If you’re a young person, we should do something about it,” said Bloomberg, a former New York City mayor.
Bloomberg warned that society was not yet willing to make hard choices with respect to treating older Americans and this is “going to bankrupt us.”
The video reportedly was released by Daily Caller, a hyper partisan conservative website.
Bloomberg’s 2011 statement surfaced as he released a proposed health care plan to improve retirees’ lives, from giving low-income workers access to government-provided retirement savings plans to bolstering Social Security. Bloomberg said he would limit out-of-pocket drug costs and provide federal coverage for long-term care costs. Do Bloomberg’s statements constitute age discrimination? Yes. Without a doubt.
Dr. Robert N. Butler, M.D., (1927-2010), who coined the term “ageism” in 1968, said generations throughout history have justified the futility of granting the aged access to health care due to unfounded ageist beliefs. Butler defined ageism is ‘a process of systematic stereotyping, prejudicial attitudes and direct or indirect discrimination against people because they are old.”
In his book, Age-ism: Another Form of Bigotry, Butler writes: “Age-ism reflects a deep seated uneasiness on the part of the young and middle-aged – a personal revulsion to and distaste for growing old, disease, disability; and fear of powerlessness, ‘uselessness,’ and death.” Scapegoating Older Americans
Moreover, Bloomberg’s 2011 ramblings while sitting Shiva with a Jewish family also seem profoundly misguided. There are many other criteria that seem just as likely to bankrupt the United States.
The U.S. health care system is notoriously inefficient and outrageously expensive. It costs four times more to run the U.S. health care system than Canada’s single-payer system. Why is America saddled with a failed system? The U.S. Congress has failed to act in the face of intense lobbying by insurers and pharmaceutical companies.
And why is aging singled out as opposed to other conditions, such as obesity? Some 40 percent of American adults aged 20 and over are obese, a condition that can lead to coronary heart disease and stroke.
The Centers for Disease Control states that coronary heart disease and stroke cost the U.S. health care system $199 billion per year and cause $131 billion in lost productivity on the job.
Why doesn’t Congress address America’s “new national epidemic” and enact sound policy changes, such as limiting unhealthy foods at schools and restoring “gym ” for all students. Congress could tax products that contribute to obesity or require informative labeling of food products Many blame lobbying by the mammoth food production and retail industries for Congressional inaction.
Consider this: when Bernie had a heart attack, he did not go to Canada, Great Britain, or Venezuela for treatment. Although he has been hypocritically hopping in his personal jet while lecturing us on “climate change,” he did not hop down to his much-praised comrades in Cuba for treatment. Instead, he went to an American hospital.
So, if the Democrats want to fix anything, they need to open up markets and reward those of us who come together in medical collectives.
Friday was Michael Bloomberg’s 78th birthday and the Washington Post gave a belated gift Saturday morning, a blast from the former New York City mayor’s past. “Aw, you shouldn’t have,” he must have said, seeing the news.
The paper has reprinted, in full, The Portable Bloomberg: The Wit and Wisdom of Michael Bloomberg, a gag birthday gift published by former Bloomberg L.P. chief marketing officer Elisabeth DeMarse 30 years ago. “Yes, these are all actual quotes,” it says in the introduction, adding “no, nothing has been embellished or exaggerated. And yes, some things were too outrageous to include.”
The Wit and Wisdom, an ersatz monograph on corporate culture, may plunge the 2020 political discourse into a new period. One can easily foresee people arguing if describing the Bloomberg Terminal device as something that “[can] do everything, include give you a blowjob. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business,” is as bad as “grab ‘em by the pussy.”
The pocket-sized collection has long been the stuff of lore. ABC News had a piece on it in December and Bloomberg himself distanced himself from the collection in 2001 during his first mayoral campaign. But today’s reproduction, as Bloomberg readies himself, at long last, to compete in Democratic primaries, is the first time citizens considering him for national office can scroll through his alleged recorded office musings.
Bloomberg’s campaign spokesman Stu Loeser, upon learning of the book’s imminent reproduction, said that the candidate “simply did not say the things somebody wrote in this gag gift, which has been circulating for 30 years and has been quoted in every previous election Mike has been in.” He did add that “Mike openly admits that his words have not always aligned with his values and the way he has led his life and some of what he has said is disrespectful and wrong.”
Not all of the 121 quotes, divided into sections like “On Computers” or “On Customer Service” will raise eyebrows. Some quotes are simply business-speak, the type of thing you half-hear while zoning out during a meeting. For example:
Everyone I know who is successful loves what they do. The question is: are they successful because they love what they do, or do they love what they do because they are successful? I don’t know. I suspect it’s a combination of both.
Other quotes, while admittedly coarse, are simply benign jokes, like this listed in the “On Profanity” section:
When the Wall Street Journal article came out saying I was profane, my dear old mother called me to ask me if it was true. ‘Ma,’ I said, ‘Fuck ‘em!’
Then there’s typical Manhattanite braggadocio, which might get a laugh at work, but probably isn’t something you want spreading around if you are, you know, running for President of the United States of America. Such as:
You know, there’s a Federal Law that prohibits the serving of good food west of 12th Avenue — look it up.
I make it a rule never to go to Queens — and since that eliminates both airports I don’t travel a great deal.
And then there’s the sexism and casual bigotry:
If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they’d go to the library instead of Bloomingdale’s.
The Royal Family — what a bunch of misfits — a gay, an architect, that horsey faced lesbian, and a kid who gave up Koo Stark for some fat broad.
The three biggest lies are: the check’s in the mail, I’ll respect you in the morning, and I’m glad I’m Jewish.
If Jesus was a Jew, why does he have a Puerto Rican first name?
Whenever my wife catches me eyeing some broad, she’s very careful to turn to me and say “That’s the most expensive piece of ass in the world!”
In the middle of all this, however, one can find seeds of progressivism if you look really, really hard. One quote shows a surprising lack of fiery hatred concerning the topic of taxes, at least coming from a business tycoon whose fortune stemmed from letting Wall Street killers know about deals a fraction of a second ahead of the poor schmucks who couldn’t afford his proprietary information system.
I encourage you to download the PDF and view it for yourself
Inform yourself by downloading and reading the PDF linked above. This guy said many more offensive things than Trump has been accused of saying. So, when the Democrats support any of these clowns, you know that it is not on principle.
A former Clinton staffer questions Bloomberg’s racist comments (including “stop and frisk”)
Townhall reports that one Clinton staffer suggests that Bloomberg’s “stop and frisk” comments will need to be explained.
Rumors are swirling that former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is contemplating adding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to his ticket. According to one of Clinton’s ex-staffers, Zerlina Maxwell, the move is highly unlikely. But, regardless of whether or not Clinton is on Bloomberg’s ticket, the MSNBC analyst believes people need to dig deep into the billionaire’s past.
“One of the things that’s been annoying me about this particular election cycle is when the men who are running for president speculate about women or women of color they’re going to put on the bottom of their ticket as their number two in order to help their chances. Why can’t we just talk about the women themselves?” Maxwell asked.
She reminded people that the former secretary of state has repeatedly said she would not run for president again.
“I’m highly skeptical of this particular report and I think, in some ways, it’s to send a signal to the folks who still love Hillary Clinton, that they should look at Michael Bloomberg,” the former staffer explained. “But they should look at Bloomberg on his own record. He has plenty of issues that he needs to address. He has not been in a debate. He has not done a national interview on television, so, right now, he’s blanketing the airwaves with glossy advertisements. And if millions of dollars in advertisements didn’t work to sell products, even defective ones, they wouldn’t spend so much on advertising.”
Bloomberg has taken hits over redlining and stop and frisk, MSNBC’s Alex Witt said. Despite that, three members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) have endorsed the former New York City major.
Maxwell said voters shouldn’t overlook Bloomberg’s past policy positions simply because they want to beat President Donald Trump come November.
“I don’t think that by accepting a deeply-flawed candidate, particularly one who hasn’t debated any of the other candidates. I think black and brown people are jumping ahead before we’ve even had an opportunity to weigh in at the ballot box,” she said. “It’s very important to get endorsements from the [CBC members].”
As the former Clinton staffer said, a candidate can receive CBC endorsements but that doesn’t necessarily translate to black voters. In 2016, Clinton received substantial CBC endorsements but black voter turnout was low.
“His record is one that should be examined by black and brown communities because it’s nice to put money behind good causes and philanthropy, but if you’re doing that at the same time that you’re throwing black children up against the wall and defending it up until weeks before announcing your run, then people have a right to be skeptical of whether or not you really care about these communities,” Maxwell explained.
The presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg has insisted he is a “champion for women in the workplace”, after the republication of a 30-year-old booklet purporting to contain his “Wit and Wisdom” cast an uncomfortable spotlight on the billionaire former New York mayor.
The Washington Post made the 1990 booklet available online as it published an investigation of how Bloomberg has “for years battled women’s allegations of profane, sexist comments”. The booklet was presented as a gift to Bloomberg on his 48th birthday party and contains a catalogue of sexist remarks attributed to the billionaire during his time at the company he founded.
The renewed attention on Bloomberg – who has for years been the subject of allegations that his company fostered a hostile and sexist environment towards women – comes as he has surged in the race for the Democratic nomination to face Donald Trump in November.
With the leftwinger Bernie Sanders climbing in national polls and former vice-president Joe Biden falling away, Bloomberg’s self-financed candidacy has begun to attract support from moderates seeking what they believe will be an electable alternative to Donald Trump.
On Saturday the rightwing Drudge Report website caused a stir when it said “sources close to the Bloomberg campaign” said he was considering Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate beaten by Trump in 2016, as his running mate this year.
But with such increasing prominence, fuelled in part by a massive TV and Facebook advertising effort, has come increasing scrutiny of the former Republican’s record in office and his comments and views.
In one comment printed in the 1990 booklet, the businessman turned politician is said to have said of Britain’s royal family: “What a bunch of misfits – a gay, an architect, that horsey faced lesbian, and a kid who gave up Koo Stark for some fat broad.”
Of the Bloomberg Terminal, the computer system on which a fortune estimated at $60bn was built, Bloomberg is quoted as saying: “It will do everything, including give you a blowjob. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business.”
He is also quoted as comparing “a good salesperson” to “the guy who goes into a bar, and walks up to every gorgeous girl there, and says, ‘Do you want to fuck?’ He gets turned down a lot – but he gets fucked a lot, too!”
Presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg appeared to belittle both farmers and factory workers in 2016 comments made at a university forum, continuing a trend of old remarks resurfacing to plague the billionaire’s bid for the Democratic nomination.
Joining the Distinguished Speakers Series at the University of Oxford Saïd Business School, Bloomberg was responding to a question about whether it is possible to unite people in middle America and the coasts. One of the issues standing in the way of that, Bloomberg said, was the inability of blue-collar workers to adapt to the information economy even if they have their education subsidized.
“The agrarian society lasted 3,000 years and we could teach processes. I could teach anybody, even people in this room, no offense intended, to be a farmer,” Bloomberg said. “It’s a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn. You could learn that. Then we had 300 years of the industrial society. You put the piece of metal on the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow and you can have a job. And we created a lot of jobs. At one point, 98 percent of the world worked in agriculture, now it’s 2 percent in the United States.”
Bloomberg continued: “Now comes the information economy and the information economy is fundamentally different because it’s built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze, and that is a whole degree level different. You have to have a different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter. It’s not clear the teachers can teach or the students can learn, and so the challenge of society of finding jobs for these people, who we can take care of giving them a roof over their head and a meal in their stomach and a cell phone and a car and that sort of thing. But the thing that is the most important, that will stop them from setting up a guillotine someday, is the dignity of a job”
During my stint while earning a Bachelor of Arts at Texas A&M, I was introduced to many agricultural scientists
I concentrated on technical subjects during that time and took a number of classes in programming. However, that did not dim my respect for the work that students in the agricultural sciences went through. Obviously, Mr. Bloomberg has a bit of a vaunted view of himself regarding a field he seems to have invested little time in learning.
Bloomberg’s attempts at trying to redeem himself
Bloomberg delivers his best attack line against Bernie Sanders … and it was pretty brutal
Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg jumped into the 2020 ring. Or was it a shark tank? He secured a spot on the debate stage for the Nevada debate—and everyone was gunning for him. Mike clogs the spot. He threatens Amy Klobuchar and former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg. He has to be destroyed. He pulls from bases of support that makes everyone’s path to the nomination no matter how small, even smaller. They had to deliver a thousand blows to him. And he was beaten pretty badly by everyone. From stop-and-frisk to allegations of sexually suggestive remarks, Bloomberg came off as cold, calculating, and just unlikeable. He was horrific on the non-disclosure agreement issues that were brought up. It was not good. CNN’s Van Jones called his performance a disaster, but he did have one good attack line against Sanders—and it was a brutal one.
The Vermont democratic socialist went on his usual line about how socialism is awesome. He railed against what he sees as socialism for the rich, calling out Donald Trump for getting hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for his business ventures. Sanders also railed against the welfare state expenditures for Walmart’s workers because the Walton family pays what the Left sees as “starvation wages.”
“I believe in a democratic socialism for working people, not billionaires. Health care for all, educational opportunity for all,” said Sanders as he finally ended his stump speech by declaring he will create a government that works for everyone.
And then Bloomberg torpedoed it in a couple of sentences.
“What a wonderful country we have. The best-known socialist in the country happens to be a millionaire with three houses. What did I miss here?” he replied.
Michael Bloomberg’s campaign said Thursday it has invested in sponsored Instagram meme content in a new illustration of his record spending aimed at securing the Democratic presidential nomination.
As he vies to be the candidate to take on President Donald Trump, the former New York mayor is also challenging the president on one of his preferred battlefields — the world of social media, where the comic images known as memes flourish.
“Mike Bloomberg 2020 has teamed up with social creators to collaborate with the campaign, including the meme world,” campaign spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said in an email to AFP.
“While a meme strategy may be new to presidential politics, we’re betting it will be an effective component to reach people where they are and compete with President Trump’s powerful digital operation,” Singh added.
Trump’s surprise election win in 2016 was attributed in part to his use of social media, which was much more aggressive than his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.
Among the Instagram content creators recruited by Bloomberg are fuckjerry, grapejuiceboys and tank.sinatra, each of which has millions of followers.
On Wednesday they published screen shots of humorous (but fake) private messages with Bloomberg on Instagram — and which they said were sponsored by him.
In one of them, the 77-year-old candidate says that his granddaughter showed him the account.
In one post, Bloomberg appears to ask the account to post a meme to let everyone know he is “the cool candidate” — along with a picture of him in oversized shorts, a Polo-style shirt and a rust-colored vest.
In the meme, the candidate agrees to pay “a billion dollars” for the post.
Bloomberg Hits Sanders: ‘Outrageous’ to Call Soleimani’s Death an ‘Assassination’
If I am going to blog on all the things I disapprove of among Bloomberg’s acts, I should also refer to Breitbart‘s 6 January 2020 article where Bloomberg pointed out the outrageousness of Bernie’s statement on the killing of Soleimani.
Presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg (D) said it is “outrageous” to describe the death of Iran’s top terror chief as an “assassination” — a description used by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
Bloomberg last week took issue with Sanders describing the elimination of Iran’s top general, Qasem Soleimani, an “assassination,” telling reporters that it is an “outrageous thing to say.”
“Nobody that I know of would think that we did something wrong in getting the general,” the billionaire said:
His remarks followed the Sanders campaign’s statement, describing the terrorist’s death as an “assassination”:
Sanders said in a video statement that he would “do everything that [he] can to prevent a war with Iran” and added that he apologizes to “no one” for his position:
Bloomberg, however, took a more measured approach, stating that Soleimani had the “blood of Americans on his hands.” While he took shots at Trump in his statement and questioned his judgment, he did not outright condemn the action:
After a blog post on Social Security phishing at the Arlin Report, I determined that I should blog about those pesky scammers who try to sneak your social security number and name from you. Problem is that, after trying and failing to get the Houston Police Department to investigate either of the last two scammers who had left messages for me, I threw the recordings away.
However, having felt a challenge from the Arlin Report post, I determined that I would start on a post as soon as I got another message from a scammer. True to form, I got one that very day (2 October 2019).
The text of this most recent scam follows:
As we have received against your social security number by the federal crime and investigation department. We need to talk to you as soon as possible. Again, this call is from Social Security Administration. Number to reach department is 516-530-7087. I repeat, it’s 516-530-7087. Thank you.
Things noted and maybe erroneously extrapolated from this and other scam calls
There are several things that I noted in the above message (or at least assume that I noted):
One change that I observed happening after my first scam call (which obviously cannot be demonstrated here, due to my having deleted files) was the transition from a real voice to an artificial voice. I guess someone got caught via their voice print.
Still,one of the hallmarks of criminality flourishes in this message: errors. Errors abound in the message. Try looking up a “federal crime and investigation department.” (It doesn’t exist.) Ask anyone if the Social Security Administration (SSA) will communicate via any method other than mail. (The SSA will not call you or send you emails. The SSA will only communicate by letter.)
To reiterate the central error: the SSA does not have to contact you to get your Social Security number (SSN). They have it. However, even if they did need to contact you, they would do it by mail.
Sometimes, the scammers are not just after your SSN, name, and address. At these times, they bank on your curiosity and other emotions to just gather other information.
Because we are emotional creatures, there is the “call-back” scam
As suggested above, some criminals either use a one-ring tactic or some sort of emotional ploy to get the mark (you and me) to call them back. Sometimes, they pretend to be stranded relatives. Sometimes they pretend that our credit cards are going to be charged for some reason.
Hence, we get scam calls like the following:
That we have renewed your antivirus security for the upcoming one year and we have charged you $399 and within 24 hours, you will see a charge from VTech solution. If you want to cancel the subscription and want a refund then please call on this. Number one, 239-932-2091 cancellation should be done within the 48 Hours upon receiving this confirmation call. Thank you. This is David Williams customer relationship manager.
If you like the scams made available thanks to Social Security and emotional manipulation, just wait for greater federal involvement in healthcare
If you think that it is bad enough with the current crop of social security and the emotion-related scams, just wait until the U.S. government starts expanding Obamacare. That will provide another fertile field for the scammers to plow (since the ACA was sold to us with the promise that it would save each family $2500, but ended quadrupling most of our rates), many of us will be fearful of possible glitches in the system.
Thanks, Obama. Future thanks to Warren, Sanders, and Pelosi.
Illinois Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed an abortion bill into law on Wednesday that expands The Prairie State’s abortion rights in profound ways.
The new law strips all rights from unborn children, changes the definition of the viability of a fetus, and legalizes abortions through all nine months of pregnancy, right up to birth.
Supporters of the new law say it’s needed just in case the US Supreme Court overturns its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.
But pro-life groups around the country quickly responded with shock, calling the new legislation extreme.
The Thomas More Society called the new abortion law the same as “legalizing the death penalty, with no possibility of appeal, for viable unborn preemies.”
“This law is the most radical sweeping pro-abortion measure in America and makes Illinois an abortion destination for the country,” Thomas More Society Vice President and Senior Counsel Peter Breen said in a press release. “The deceptively titled ‘Reproductive Health Act’ gives our state some of the most extremely permissive abortion laws of any state in the nation.”
The group says there are 5 shocking facts about the new law:
All licensing requirements for abortion clinics are abolished, and health and safety inspections ended, despite those inspections shutting down numerous dirty abortion clinics in recent years
Dismemberment abortions of “preemie” babies, who feel pain, without anesthesia, are legalized
Every private health insurance policy, including those for small churches and religious nonprofits, must pay for elective chemical and surgical abortions
Every unborn child, up to and even during birth, will now have NO legal rights in Illinois
Abortion is labeled a “fundamental right,” protected to a greater degree than Free Speech and other First Amendment rights