The Coronavirus - a virus from eating bats, an accident or something sinister gone wrong?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Howe said:

Correct. I'm confident a Wal Mart "Health Ambassador" will inform an incoming customer of the mask requirement and the result will be similar to the video.

Should be some classics out there in the coming days...

[swordfish]

 

[Muda69]

7 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

Kroger did the same.

I am intrigued if their employees will start wearing masks....definitely been hit and miss in the CG area.  And don't get me started about the ability to wipe down your cart handles consistently.

It would be nice locally if they would first practice what they preach and step their game up first before setting expectations to their customers......

I've been able to avoid entering a WalMart since before the pandemic started.  All our business with them is now done via their pickup option.

 

[Muda69]

3 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

Muda...I think you need to come clean my friend..........

lol, that is gross.

 

[Muda69]

Just now, TrojanDad said:

yes it is...I was going to attach some photos of me and my bride....but I was worried some my take offense to her reference to farts on her tshirt.....

Heh heh.  That People of WalMart site has been around for a long time.  It's one those "what has been seen cannot be unseen" kind of things........

 

[Muda69]

Democrat Governor Of Michigan Uses Emergency Alert System To Dictate Mask Wearing

https://summit.news/2020/07/16/democrat-governor-of-michigan-uses-emergency-alert-system-to-dictate-mask-wearing/

Quote

Democratic Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer has come under fire for using the State’s emergency alert system to order residents to wear face masks.

The IPAWSCAP, or Integrated Public Alert Warning System, sent out thousands of messages to cell phones Monday afternoon ‘alerting’ people that it is compulsory that they were face masks in public.

 

The message read:

From the Governor’s Office: Fight COVID by wearing a mask. Michiganders are REQUIRED by executive order to wear face coverings in public indoor and crowded outdoor spaces. Business must refuse entry or service to those who do not wear a face covering (with limited exceptions). More info: Michigan.gov/MaskUp.

Whitmer previously issued an executive order requiring residents to wear face coverings while in public.

The use of the system to mandate has wearing has been criticised, and GOP lawmakers are set to introduce legislation to limit what the alert system can be used for, according to reports.

“This is an overt abuse of a service designed to alert people of legitimate emergencies — the governor has gone beyond the scope and intent of the law and is now somewhere over the rainbow and approaching Oz,” said Sen. Peter Lucido in a statement.

Whitmer previously used the alert system in March, taking over television stations to issue a “Michigan coronavirus emergency alert broadcast” lockdown order:

Whitmer was also criticised recently for joining Black Lives Matter protesters in the streets after lecturing small businesses for weeks to stay shut down.

 

 

 

Whitmer also called small business owners “racist” and “neo Nazis” for protesting her lockdown orders.

In response to criticizing Whitmer’s hypocritical excessive lockdown orders, conservative firebrand Candace Owens was recently suspended from Twitter.

 

[Howe]

Fatal motorcycle crash is listed as death from coronavirus

 

[Howe]

[dazed and confused]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/07/19/coronavirus-update-us/?outputType=amp

this part and says alot....can't make it up... 

In Sunday’s interview, Wallace confronted Trump about his incorrect predictions that the virus would “disappear.”

“I will be right eventually,” Trump told the host. “You know I said, ‘It’s going to disappear.’ I’ll say it again.”

“Does that discredit you?” Wallace asked.

Trump said he didn’t think so. “It’s going to disappear, and I’ll be right,” he said.

[Muda69]

One month after statewide mask mandate, California's daily COVID case average has increased by 162%: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/one-month-after-statewide-mask-mandate-california-daily-case-average

Quote

One month after California Gov. Gavin Newsom unilaterally ordered state residents to wear masks in most public settings, the average daily number of coronavirus cases in the state has increased by over 160%. 

Newsom's June 18 order "mandate[d] that face coverings be worn state-wide" while in "any indoor public space," while on public transit, during virtually every form of work in which the public might be involved in some way, while walking through "hallways, stairways, elevators, and parking facilities," while in "any room or enclosed area where other people (except for members of the person’s own household or residence) are present when unable to physically distance," and in outdoor settings where six feet of distance between individuals is not possible.

Every state resident older than two years old is bound by the mandate; a small number of exceptions exempt individuals due to medical conditions and other limited circumstances. 

In spite of those strict directives, cases have continued to rise in the state, continuing an upward trend that was already in full swing when the mask mandate went into effect. 

The website of Johns Hopkins University, which offers pandemic tracking tools for every U.S. state, says average daily cases in California have increased from 3,385 on the day of Newsom's order to 8,889 as of July 16, an increase of 162%.

Though Newsom's mask mandate appears to have had little effect on the trajectory of the virus in California, the governor nevertheless this week imposed additional mask requirements on the state, ordering that most students who return to school in the fall will be subject to "strong mask requirements," namely that "all staff and students in 3rd grade and above will be required to wear a mask or face covering" during the school day.

Newsom, like many other public officials, has claimed masks are necessary to stop the spread of COVID-19, but his own directive from last month stops short at actually calling them effective, instead merely stating that they "could" help. 

"There is scientific evidence to suggest that use of cloth face coverings by the public during a pandemic could help reduce disease transmission," the order said. 

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Muda69 said:

One month after statewide mask mandate, California's daily COVID case average has increased by 162%: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/one-month-after-statewide-mask-mandate-california-daily-case-average

 

Waiting on the “without masks it would have increased by 300 percent” response...

[Bobref]

Just now, Temptation said:

Waiting on the “without masks it would have increased by 300 percent” response...

Consider the response made.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Bobref said:

Consider the response made.

Where’s “stat boy” when we need him?  He’s the supposed “expert” when it comes to numbers.

[Muda69]

Kentucky Couple Reportedly Placed Under House Arrest After Failing To Sign COVID-19 Quarantine Notice

https://reason.com/2020/07/21/kentucky-couple-reportedly-placed-under-house-arrest-after-failing-to-sign-covid-19-quarantine-notice/#comments

Quote

A Kentucky couple says they were placed under house arrest for refusing to sign self-quarantine documents after testing positive for COVID-19.

Elizabeth Linscott of Hardin County told WAVE that she got a COVID-19 test in preparation for a trip to visit her parents in Michigan. Linscott's test came back positive. Shortly afterward, the Lincoln Trail District Health Department informed Linscott that she would need to sign a Self-isolation and Controlled Movement Agreed Order.

Linscott had no objection to quarantining herself. But she declined to sign, the Associated Press reports, because the order included this sentence: "I will not travel by any public, commercial or health care conveyance such as ambulance, bus, taxi, airplane, train or boat without the prior approval of the Department of Public Health." If Linscott needed to go to the hospital, she did not want to wait for the health department's permission. She would, however, take precautions, such as informing hospital workers that she had tested positive.

Last Thursday, the Hardin County Sheriff's Office and a health department employee appeared at her home. There, Linscott's husband was served three papers: one for his wife, one for himself, and one for their daughter. The Linscotts claim that they were told to wear ankle monitors to ensure that they remained within 200 feet of their home.

While the Hardin County Sheriff's Office was unable to provide Reason with its protocols for enforcing quarantine, it did release a statement via Facebook about the case:

According to the sheriff's office, any petition filed against the Linscotts was initiated by the Lincoln Trail District Health Department and any quarantine orders would be issued by a judge. The sheriff's office also denied installing monitoring devices.

Linscott told WAVE that the health department director had claimed to the judge that the couple was refusing to self-quarantine. Linscott maintains that her decision was mischaracterized and that she merely disliked how the document was worded.

Under Kentucky law, the Louisville Courier Journal reports, county health departments have the power to isolate contagious people who don't stay at home. The law does not state a penalty for objecting to or breaking quarantine orders.

If the Linscotts' account is accurate, and the authorities not only ignored reasonable objections from citizens and placed them under house arrest, but also lied about it, this is a deeply troubling turn for civil liberties in Hardin County.

Doesn't the government have FEMA trailers for isolating questioning scofflaws like the Linscotts?

 

[Muda69]

This Health Care Law Bars Competition And Drives Up Prices, Even as a Pandemic Rages

https://reason.com/2020/07/20/this-health-care-law-bars-competition-and-drives-up-prices-even-as-a-pandemic-rages/

Quote

COVID-19 has forced doctors to postpone many types of surgeries, but some things can't wait. Ophthalmologist Jay Singleton saw one man at risk of permanent blindness on a recent Friday evening in New Bern, North Carolina.

"He had a rare type of glaucoma caused by a large cataract, and the only thing to do was to remove it so the pressure would go down inside the eye," Singleton says. "We knew it was a very real situation because he already had lost one of his eyes to the same thing."

Singleton had all the skills and equipment necessary for the job at his state-of-the-art vision center. Unfortunately, the government won't let him use his space for the vast majority of the surgeries he performs.

North Carolina and many other states impose a regulatory tool called a "certificate of need" (CON), which forces health care providers to prove an unmet need in the market before operating a facility, scaling up, or purchasing major medical equipment. In practice, CON laws block new competition, funneling traffic to big hospital systems—the last thing that should happen during a global pandemic.

"Most of my patients don't have a choice," Singleton says. "They are being herded into these facilities."

The top-down approach to health care creates other problems, which multiply during a crisis like COVID-19. Some governors have recognized the folly and suspended their CON programs during the pandemic. Singleton's case shows why these changes should be made permanent.

If he wants to collect from Medicare for any surgery he performs, the doctor must travel two miles down the road to a competitor's outpatient facilities in the CarolinaEast Health System. Besides doubling or tripling the costs for most procedures, the coerced arrangement creates accessibility problems.

By the time Singleton made his afterhours diagnosis on June 19, the doors at the state-approved facility had already shut for Father's Day weekend. "Once it's closed, you're done," Singleton says.

Faced with no other option, he did what his oath dictated. He performed the surgery at his own clinic, knowing he never would get paid. "If somebody is in really bad need, I just write it off and do the surgery," he says. "They are not Patient No. 643 dash 21. They are my patient, and we have a personal relationship."

CarolinaEast takes a more corporate approach. With the government ensuring so much business, the $1.3 billion system can inflate facility fees without worrying about losing customers. "Hospitals set their own pay schedules, and they are quite confidential about how they arrive at those," Singleton says. "You can't get in to see their black books, so they can charge what they want."

Picking Winners and Losers

Such protectionism would not stand in most other industries. When entrepreneurs want to open a restaurant or coffee shop, for example, they do their own market research. They don't let the government determine need, and they certainly don't let their competitors decide.

The opposite happens with CON laws, which function like government permission slips. North Carolina and many other states don't just appoint panels of bureaucrats to determine what services are "needed"; they invite existing providers to testify against their potential rivals. The rigged rules all but guarantee unequal treatment.

If regulators decide that a particular neighborhood does not need another provider or service, the applicant is out of luck. Independent doctors and patients have little say in the process.

The red tape that interferes with doctor-patient relationships in New Bern is just one example. Overall, 35 states and the District of Columbia use CON laws to limit growth. Regulators even use their veto powers to stop colon cancer screenings and low-cost MRI scans.

None of the oversight has anything to do with public health or safety. Separate laws govern who may practice medicine and what kinds of procedures they may perform. Applicants would carry the same medical credentials as those currently in the marketplace. The real goal of CON laws is to limit competition for established providers.

"Who is hurt the most? It is easily the patient," Singleton says.

Rather than accept the protectionism, he partnered with the nonprofit Institute for Justice and fought back in court. (Full disclosure: The authors of this article work for the institute.) Health care providers in Kentucky, Nebraska, Virginia and Iowa have joined the Institute for Justice in separate lawsuits.

"The CON idea is obviously a failed experiment," Singleton says. "But large hospital systems guard CON laws fiercely because they are very good at generating revenue and controlling competition locally."

Playing Both Sides

CON law supporters claim that different economic rules apply to health care. HopeHealth President and CEO Diana Franchitto made this argument explicitly in a May 19, 2020, letter to Rhode Island's CON board.

"While market competition is generally healthy for most industries," she wrote, "the state's certificate of need requirements for healthcare recognize that unregulated increases in some healthcare services can result in unnecessary duplication of services, higher-cost care and lower quality of care."

Franchitto provided no evidence to support her claims, nor did she address her conflict of interest. When she wrote the opinion, she and other established providers were rallying to stop a potential competitor, Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care, from entering the Rhode Island market. The campaign paid off on June 9, when the CON board voted unanimously to block the interloper.

Singleton sees similar campaigns in North Carolina. He says CON advocates talk about health care like a business when it serves their purposes—like when they complain about lost revenue from canceled surgeries during COVID-19—but then turn around and talk about health care like a community service when they want tax breaks and CON protection.

"You have to pick a side," Singleton says. "If you treat it like a business, you must allow other people to enter the market and compete with you like every other business. If you treat it like a public partnership, then you can't enrich yourself on the backs of Medicare patients. You can't have it both ways."

Singleton made a medical decision, not a business decision, when he performed the free cataract surgery for his after-hours patient, an African-American retiree from a low-income community. But unlike the CON board, which makes decisions for others, he acted on his own.

History of Failure

Decades of history and multiple studies show that CON laws are both anticompetitive and anti-scientific.

New York passed the first medical CON law in 1964, saying it reduced costs by cutting down on unnecessary services. The American Hospital Association, recognizing the system's money-making potential, then began a campaign to pass similar laws nationwide. By 1974 the U.S. government had joined in, offering states financial incentives to adopt CON laws.

The lure of federal funding led every state but Louisiana to establish CON programs. But over time, evidence of the harmful effects accumulated. Finally in 1986, Congress admitted its error and repealed funding. Since then, 15 states—including California, Colorado, and most recently New Hampshire—have eliminated their CON programs.

None of these states has experienced any negative effects. Indeed, Matthew Mitchell, a researcher at George Mason University's Mercatus Center, says states that got rid of their CON laws have more hospitals and surgery centers per capita, along with more hospital beds, dialysis clinics, and hospice care facilities.

"Forty years of peer-reviewed academic research suggests that CON laws have not only failed to achieve their goals but have in many cases led to the opposite of what those who enacted the laws intended," he says.

CON advocates ignore the evidence, including a joint report from two federal antitrust agencies—the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department. The 2004 study finds no reliable evidence that CON laws achieve any public benefit.

Kentucky hired Deloitte to provide another opinion in 2013, but regulators rejected the results when the consulting firm recommended dismantling the state's entire CON program. Big hospitals suggested a few tweaks instead, and the state complied.

Killing Innovation

These laws also block innovation from entrepreneurs with fresh ideas for serving their communities. Another Institute for Justice client, Dipendra Tiwari, discovered that when he tried to launch a home health care agency in Kentucky that focused on Nepali speakers from the Himalayan region where he was born.

Tiwari spoke the language, understood the culture, and had the connections to deliver customized care that no other agency in the state could match. He also had the requisite business skills. After immigrating to the United States in 2008, he earned an MBA and launched an accounting firm. Yet when Tiwari stepped forward to fill the market gap in home health care, the state CON board shut him down.

Customers wanted his service, yet regulators determined lack of "need" based on a formula that fails to consider factors like culture and language. Instead, the system counts all Kentucky residents the same—like interchangeable widgets on a spreadsheet.

The impersonal approach benefits Baptist Healthcare System, a $2 billion conglomerate founded almost a century ago. Despite the rigid CON rules that would block Tiwari regardless of his qualifications, Baptist Health piled on with a formal objection to his application.

Tiwari says his lawsuit is not just for himself, but for people like his bedridden neighbor, a refugee from the Nepali-speaking Lhotshampa community in Bhutan. It's not easy to get truly personal care from providers who do not know your language or culture.

"Few things are as personal as home health care," Tiwari says. "Families should be able to choose for themselves who comes into their bedrooms."

Adapting to the Pandemic

Many states, including Connecticut, Georgia, and South Carolina, suspended their CON laws after the pandemic came to America. Other states, such as Rhode Island, rolled back CON laws at hospitals and nursing facilities but not outpatient surgery centers or hospices.

Instead of just being a temporary reprieve, these emergency actions should be expanded and made permanent. COVID-19 could change the health care landscape for years to come, and communities will need responsive providers willing to adapt—not government-mandated restrictions, anticompetitive red tape, and monopolistic high costs.

"All we're asking the state to do is to repeal a bad law," Singleton says. "Sometimes you make mistakes, so you have to go back and take care of that mistake."

Things worked out for Singleton's emergency patient. "Now his pressure is normal, and he is seeing better," Singleton says. But the next case could be worse. States should not force patients to press their luck.

Yet another reason why government needs to get out of the healthcare business.

 

[Muda69]

As Indiana sees rise in coronavirus cases, governor requires Hoosiers to wear face masks: https://www.indystar.com/story/news/health/2020/07/22/indiana-coronavirus-governor-announces-mandatory-face-masks/5488294002/

Quote

Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb announced that face masks would be mandatory throughout the state during a press conference Wednesday. 

Starting July 27, anyone age 8 or older will be required to wear a face mask in indoor public spaces, commercial entities, transportation services or in outside public spaces where social distancing is not possible.

"The simple act of covering our faces, as odd as it may feel, can help us prevent the transmission of the virus, which is why this is the next prudent step that we as a state need to take," Holcomb said.

In school, masks will be required for any children in third grade or older, as well as faculty, staff, volunteers and anyone else in the school. Masks will also be required for co-curricular and extracurricular activities that do not involve strenuous physical activity. 

While not required, it is recommended that children ages 2 to 7 wear a mask as well. 

Anyone who is eating, drinking, participating in strenuous physical activity or has a medical condition that prevents them from wearing a mask is exempt.

While not wearing a mask is considered a Class B misdemeanor, Holcomb said enforcement will not be strict. 

"Please know that the mask police will not be patrolling Indiana streets," Holcomb said.

 

[Bobref]

I’ve defended Dr. Fauci against @Howe and others ... but that stops now. This is indefensible.

 

[psaboy]

 

Here is your scientist that spreads FEAR PORN. The old saying “do as I say not as I do”

[Howe]

11 hours ago, Bobref said:

I’ve defended Dr. Fauci against @Howe and others ... but that stops now. This is indefensible.

 

Has Major League Baseball ever had a scientist throw out the first pitch of a baseball game? It is obvious Fauci has never thrown a baseball in his life.

Fauci loves attention.

[swordfish]

[Irishman]

19 hours ago, Bobref said:

I’ve defended Dr. Fauci against @Howe and others ... but that stops now. This is indefensible.

 

To be fair though, his job is to make sure as many people as possible don’t catch anything. 

[TheStatGuy]

On 7/24/2020 at 10:42 AM, Howe said:

Has Major League Baseball ever had a scientist throw out the first pitch of a baseball game? It is obvious Fauci has never thrown a baseball in his life.

Fauci loves attention.

Bill Nye did. 

[Howe]

Bill Nye is not a scientist. He has a degree in engineering

[Bobref]

[Muda69]

Couple banned by Walmart after wearing Nazi flag face masks at Marshall, Minnesota store: https://www.fox5ny.com/news/couple-banned-by-walmart-after-wearing-nazi-flag-face-masks-at-marshall-minnesota-store

Quote

A couple who wore Nazi flag face coverings to a Walmart in Marshall, Minnesota have been told not to return.

Police say the couple has been issued trespass notices. Officials said they are banned from visiting any Walmart facility for at least a year.

Video posted on social media showed the couple going through a checkout lane on Saturday with the masks that featured the Nazi swastika flag. Onlookers appeared shocked by the masks and demanded the couple to remove them.

The woman seen wearing the mask argued she wasn't a Nazi and indicated she was wearing the flag as a protest against socialism in America.

Saturday marked the first day of Minnesota's mask mandate, requiring face coverings be worn in public places. However, Walmart's mask policy took effect on Monday.

In a statement, a Walmart spokesperson said the incident was upsetting: "What happened today at our store in Marshall, MN is unacceptable. We strive to provide a safe and comfortable shopping environment for all our customers and will not tolerate any form of discrimination or harassment in any aspect of our business. We are asking everyone to wear face coverings when they enter our stores for their safety and the safety of others and it’s unfortunate that some individuals have taken this pandemic as an opportunity to create a distressing situation for customers and associates in our store."