SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Trump threatens to take US out of WHO entirely and stop all funding:
In a letter to WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Trump alleged that "the repeated missteps by you and your organization in responding to the pandemic have been extremely costly for the world" and that the WHO must "demonstrate independence from China."
"[I]f the World Health Organization does not commit to major substantive improvements within the next 30 days, I will make my temporary freeze of United States funding to the World Health Organization permanent and reconsider our membership in the organization," Trump wrote. "I cannot allow American taxpayer dollars to continue to finance an organization that, in its present state, is so clearly not serving America's interests."
Trump posted the letter on Twitter, writing, "It is self-explanatory!"
Trump has repeatedly denied any responsibility for COVID-19 spreading in America and said on April 14 that the US would temporarily halt funding the WHO until his administration completed a review of the group's response to the coronavirus pandemic. Trump's letter yesterday said that "review has confirmed many of the serious concerns I raised last month and identified others that the World Health Organization should have addressed, especially the World Health Organization's alarming lack of independence from the People's Republic of China."
[...] Trump's letter then lists a series of claims, the first being that the WHO "consistently ignored credible reports of the virus spreading in Wuhan in early December 2019 or even earlier, including reports from the Lancet medical journal."
The Lancet quickly issued a response explaining that Trump is wrong. "This statement is factually incorrect," The Lancet said. "The Lancet published no report in December, 2019, referring to a virus or outbreak in Wuhan or anywhere else in China." The Lancet's first reports on the topic were published on January 24, 2020 the statement said.
[...] Trump's letter yesterday said, "Throughout this crisis, the World Health Organization has been curiously insistent on praising China for its alleged 'transparency.'" Trump's letter did not mention that Trump himself praised China for its "transparency" on January 24 or that Trump repeatedly praised China for its coronavirus response throughout February.
[...] Health experts say Trump's travel ban had little effect on the pandemic's spread. Trump continued to downplay the virus's severity by comparing it to the flu as late as March 24, nearly two months after the WHO declared a global health emergency. Trump has also fought state governors over their cautious approaches to reopening the economy.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday May 21 2020, @11:16AM (48 children)
Splain to me then how 90K deaths from coronaids, which we have no treatment to mitigate or prevent, is a catastrophe while 60K from the flu, despite the vaccines and treatments we have, is a big ole yawnfest that we take for granted.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by janrinok on Thursday May 21 2020, @11:43AM (29 children)
I understand the point you are making but the Covid deaths haven't replaced the flu deaths - they are in addition to them. How many problems which result in 60k or more US deaths per year do you want to see before you feel that we ought to do something about them?
I clearly remember people protesting the loss of American lives in Vietnam - all of which could have been saved by one simple decision - but now we have something that has accounted for more US deaths than Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq combined. Can you clearly state now how many lives have to be lost before you feel that anyone should show interest, concern or compassion? Does it have to affect you personally before it becomes an important issue? Or is it a case that as long as your life isn't changed the rest of the world should just put up with it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @11:56AM (1 child)
At the very least, any cases of co-infection with flu and coronavirus are counted as COVID, as the WHO mandated, and no person can die twice.
Another thing, the vulnerable group is the same for flu and COVID, the infection route is the same, the measures reducing the spread are the same, so if you prevented one you likely prevented both, and if not, then again no person can die twice.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday May 21 2020, @12:25PM
Just because you are not counting them doesn't mean they aren't occurring. People are still dying from flu this year - without having COVID too. We will not know the true figures for many months until we have the number of Excess Deaths i.e. how many people have died this year more than would be expected to die in any other year. But if you are not testing then you cannot assume that any death is COVID either. Very few countries are testing sufficiently to assure that the final figures will be accurate.
(Score: 2) by GlennC on Thursday May 21 2020, @12:33PM (25 children)
It appears to me that for TMB and those like him, the answer to that question is yes.
If it doesn't affect them personally, it doesn't exist.
Sorry folks...the world is bigger and more varied than you want it to be. Deal with it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @01:02PM (22 children)
I've been trying to explain that about him to people for years here and apparently not getting anywhere. The guy's a high-functioning (debateably...) sociopath. There is only one actual human in the mind of a sociopath, and that is the self. Everyone else is just as much of an object, a means to an end, as every*thing* else.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 21 2020, @01:02PM (12 children)
Damn it, misclicked again. That was me.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday May 21 2020, @02:18PM (11 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @03:48PM (7 children)
Because of the message or your abikity to see the IP hash?
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday May 21 2020, @04:06PM
Because of her writing style and the fact that it is a view that she has expressed numerous times elsewhere.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Thursday May 21 2020, @04:25PM (5 children)
The IP hashes change frequently for some people - sometimes for each internet session. They are useful for tying 2 comments made by an AC together over a short period of time. There is no way that I can get the IP from the hash and simply changing the proxy or vpn that is in use defeats even linking comments together.
But so many of our community have very distinctive writing styles, identifiable political views, or specific interests and expertise, and other natural traits so, for some, any post that they make that contains a reasonable amount of content gives enough information to make a guess at their identity with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @05:41PM (3 children)
You mean people using VPNs or TOR. For everyone else you get a nice reliable hash that doesn't change. You may not store the hashed IP for each comment for more than 2 weeks(?) but that hash doesn't change. So if someone's ISP doesn't change their IP in a year then you can identify that IP if you recognize or copy down the hash.
Basically editors and admins can tie messages to a specific IP, and if users aren't on VPNs or TOR then admins/eds can track them. I do love how every time this stuff comes up you and TMB try to minimize the tracking advantages you have over users. The way you attempt to describe the IP hasing makes it sound a lot more anonymous than it actually is.
All that said, yes writing style and repeated arguments are also a thing so I doubt you had to check Azuma's IP hash even though it is sitting right in front of you. No need to dig or anything :P
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday May 21 2020, @07:07PM (2 children)
No - read what I said. I cannot convert the hash to an IP. I have no access to any IP addresses. Whether they change or not - I CANNOT SEE IP ADDRESSES EVER. I do NOT have direct access to the database. I do NOT have access to server logs. I do NOT have access to any personally identifiable information that you might have provided, unless you have put your email on a submission for the whole world to see. That is something that far exceeds the privileges granted to an editor. There may be sysadmins who can see more than that, but as an Editor I cannot.
Currently you are AC "e546c182ae" - but that could change at any time you choose to change it. I haven't got Azuma's IP, nor your IP nor anyone else's IP. Nor do I want it. All I need to be able to do is help maintain the site's operation - and I don't need IP addresses to do that task. I do need to be able to identify site abuse, but that doesn't require me to have anyone's IP address. Now, smart-ass, rather than come here and start stirring the pot over something which is entirely off-topic, you show me a way of converting that hash into your IP.
Put up or shut up time.
Simple - I haven't got them and I'll bet that the majority of people working on this site haven't got them either. And of those that might have them no-one has ever given any information to me. Now, tell me again about the 'advantages' that I have...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2020, @03:46AM (1 child)
Sheesh, I never once said you could see the actual IP, just that the hash remains the same. I guess you got lost when I said "tracking", which actually just meant you can tell if any set of comments come from the same person. Well, the likely same person, people using IP anonymizing services could occasionally post from the same IP.
I just like to remind people around here what a certain privileged segment of the users around here are privy to ;)
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday May 22 2020, @06:07AM
Read the very first quote of your statement in my previous comment. You DID say IP. You also said that we do tracking - NO we don't. Perhaps you should choose your words more carefully.
You know very well that every server you contact has to know your IP address in order to return the data you have requested. However, we immediately hash it and work entirely with the hash. Very few people on this site have access to the IP address. We protect it. If you think that every server in the world is actually tracking you then perhaps you should always stay behind a VPN/proxy or simply avoid using the internet at all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @07:55PM
This is indubitably untrue! ACs are all known to the admins, and the eds. SN is a trap!
#Freearistarchus!!!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday May 23 2020, @01:26AM (2 children)
I never post AC, except by accident like this, and always reply with a "derp-a-derr, that was me." It's cowardly (hell, it's even in the name!), low, dishonorable, and a sign of someone's arguments and ideas being weak. Were I able to set policy here, AC posts would be at -1 by default.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 23 2020, @09:13AM (1 child)
Or it is a sign that they can stand on their own without the extra attention or moderation boost they get from being tied to an explicit identity.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday May 24 2020, @04:32PM
...have you *seen* most of the AC posts? The ones that aren't outright trolling tend to be pretty damn low on the signal-to-noise ratio.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 24 2020, @07:04AM (8 children)
Your "trying" remains deeply flawed - for example, not providing any evidence for the above assertions and fabricating straw men. But maybe repeatedly trying in the same broken way will eventually work? It supposedly works for Russian Facebook trolls so why not you?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday May 24 2020, @04:33PM (7 children)
It's never going to get anywhere with you because you're one of the said sociopaths. There are about half a dozen serious offenders on this site, I'd say, and you have a place on the list.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Sunday May 24 2020, @05:32PM (6 children)
This is far from the first time that you've claimed that you have to abandon your pretense to rational argument by throwing [soylentnews.org] a [soylentnews.org] label [soylentnews.org] on [soylentnews.org] someone [soylentnews.org] else [soylentnews.org].
In order, the labels were "lost cause", "RWNJs, the kind of sociopath", "demon in a skin suit" (more labels in that one), "demented psychopathic God-concept", "social Dunning-Krugeritis", and "tired old misogyny". Basically, the pattern is label someone, insinuating or as in your above post explicitly stating that the label means the target is unworthy of a rational response, and then ad hominem away.
Well, there's a difference between bald statements never backed by fact and a long established pattern of dysfunctional reasoning going back years.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday May 24 2020, @05:44PM (5 children)
Your post history is all the proof we need. You make my argument for me better than I ever could. And the best part? *You never know when to shut the fuck up.* I find that's a common failing with others of your kind as well; you're convinced you're correct and no one else is even human, so why bother showing even a modicum of self-restraint or careful consideration before speaking?
Keep yapping, Hallow. You do more damage to yourself than anything I could ever say about or do to you on this forum.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 24 2020, @05:57PM (4 children)
I notice that you never ever go through my post history for examples. Another pattern you exhibit - unfounded assertions.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday May 24 2020, @10:46PM (3 children)
Same reason fish never go through the ocean looking for an example of water...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 25 2020, @07:44PM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday May 25 2020, @08:41PM (1 child)
False choice. I am not a fish of any sort, in this metaphor.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 25 2020, @10:59PM
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @09:08PM (1 child)
Like God?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 24 2020, @05:34PM
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 22 2020, @02:12PM
Actually, they mostly have. The flu isn't nearly as contagious or stealthy as covid-19 and the hide-in-a-hole panic has all but killed this year's flu season.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Aegis on Thursday May 21 2020, @02:27PM (1 child)
90k deaths in 4 months. How many do you think that will be after 12 months math genius?
Also, you are lying about flu deaths. There were 34,157 deaths caused by the last ANNUAL flu season. [cdc.gov]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 22 2020, @02:13PM
Yes, there were. And that was a weak-ass flu season. 60K is not remotely out of the ordinary, just the high end of normal.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Thursday May 21 2020, @04:56PM (2 children)
It's not a catastrophe. Yet. SARS-COV-2 is just getting started. 90K is the tip of the iceberg, and the US is running full steam towards it.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 22 2020, @02:15PM (1 child)
Good. I'd rather take the losses and gain herd immunity than hide in my house until it gets repossessed and we have to start eating each other.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Tuesday May 26 2020, @06:30PM
Great plan. Unfortunately we can't count on getting lasting herd immunity because we simply don't know if SARS-COV-2 works that way yet.
Your plan also hinges on you not being in the "losses" category, which at our age isn't that unlikely. I prefer to give our scientists time to figure this bug out before we simply let it loose on the populace. That way you and I can be around to argue on the internet.
Besides, I'm a damned introvert who burns easily and attracts skeeters, so hiding in my house is SOP!
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday May 21 2020, @05:51PM (5 children)
> Splain to me then how 90K deaths from coronaids, which we have no treatment to mitigate or preven
I think the reason for lockdown is that all the experts and models say a few million deaths if you don't do lockdown/etc.
Maybe the models and experts are wrong. But I think they are doing their best and they have spent years studying this sort of thing - so it would be bold not to follow their advice.
Note this seems consistent with the sorts of numbers coming out (of uk) - 1 % of population have got it so far, with lockdown, which corresponds to 30,000 deaths at least. If that number goes up to 50 % of population, then you are looking at 30k*50 = 1.5 million deaths in uk.
So - detailed studies with reasonably understood mechanism done by experts support naive thumb in the air guess work. Why would you not follow their lead?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2020, @12:51AM
serological tests are starting [sky.com] and it seems t-cells could be primed with other coronaviruses [sciencemag.org] which is interesting since the virus itself targets t-cells [news-medical.net] and type 1 diabetics (a t-cell mediated disease) are high risk. [nursingtimes.net]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 22 2020, @02:19PM (3 children)
You're working off bad data. That one percent is reported cases. We have no idea how many people were asymptomatic entirely, thought it was just allergies, or weren't arsed enough by its effects to do anything but buy OTC cold medicine. Actually, we do have some idea but it's really bad data. 4-10+x reported cases are showing as already immune in the US whenever we test for antibodies.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Friday May 22 2020, @03:42PM (2 children)
> That one percent is reported cases
No, the number of confirmed cases is about 250,000 which is about 0.5 %.
Let's say confirmed cases are only people requiring hospitalisation. Estimate is that 20 % of people infected require hospitalisation
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf [who.int]
Sorry its a WHO report! So in the assumption that the 250,000 confirmed cases in UK are *only* hospitalisation, then that means the infection rate is 2.5 % in UK. Ah, sorry, on that basis its only half a million people dead.
Again, thumb in the air estimates indicate 100,000s of people will die, with people who worry about these sorts of things supporting those estimates.
Do you have counter evidence?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday May 23 2020, @01:58PM (1 child)
*headdesk*
Let's not. Let's go with the truth instead. Confirmed cases are all cases that have been confirmed. There is not even an implication of needing hospitalization.
No, let's take a legitimate number instead of double it. Only about ten percent of *confirmed* cases require hospitalization, last I looked.
Now consider that antibodies appear to confer a respectably lasing immunity and that there appears to be zero adverse reaction to having antibodies in your system and further exposure.
Then add on the fact that every single time they test for antibodies, a whole lot more folks show up with antibodies saying they've already had it and gotten over it without ever even seeing a doctor than there are infected people. Up to ten times as many, depending on where you check.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Saturday May 23 2020, @07:13PM
> Let's not.
But if you work under that assumption, the mortality rate goes *up*. I was making a conservative approximation.
> No, let's take a legitimate number instead of double it.
Please give a reference. I gave a citation for my numbers.
> Then add on the fact that every single time they test for antibodies, a whole lot more folks show up with antibodies
Please give a reference. I gave a citation for my numbers.
> Up to ten times as many, depending on where you check.
Well, let's go with your number. 10 times as many people have been infected and are immune as have been confirmed. So in UK 250,000 confirmed cases -> 2.5 million total cases, or about 4 % of the population, and 30,000 deaths. Let's say the disease saturates when 50 % of the population have had it (herd immunity), then that means about 400,000 deaths, even neglecting any effect due to saturation of intensive care beds.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Thursday May 21 2020, @06:38PM (1 child)
Ah...the old Petitio Principii. You must have gotten that from Ol' Lush Dimball himself.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21 2020, @07:34PM
Mega Dildos Lush
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday May 22 2020, @06:17AM (4 children)
That's just the first wave. Pretty well every pandemic in history has had a second worst wave.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 22 2020, @02:21PM (3 children)
Nice try but covid-19 has shown absolutely zero instances of antibodies in your system causing a worse second wave. And it has been looked for. Hell, we just ran a story on that shat like a week ago.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Informative) by dry on Friday May 22 2020, @03:40PM (2 children)
The second wave attacks people who avoided the first wave, not people who were infected in the first wave. The Spanish flu for example had a much more deadly second wave even with the immunity created by the first wave with the second wave killing more healthy people with cytokine storms killing them.
Between people getting complacent and needing to work, and just get out, lock down measures only work so long. Anyways time will tell.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday May 23 2020, @02:06PM (1 child)
Already having antibodies in your system from the first round made the second round far more likely to trigger a cytokine storm. Which is what I was talking about above. This virus shows absolutely no indication of such and that response has been tested for.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday May 23 2020, @03:34PM
There's still a likely second wave as we open up, either soon or more likely come September. The problem is that a second lock down is likely to fail. People are tired of the lock down, it's likely to not be nation wide (neither in Canada or the US), which is already causing problems here with some Provinces currently doing well and some not and the mixed messaging which is already happening here. Prime Minister says stay inside, Provinces health officer keeps saying to get outside for mental well being and that being outside is fairly safe.
Really what it comes down to is having a good testing and tracing capability. Here in BC we've done quite well, out testing S. Korea on a population basis even though we were the first infected due to our BCCDC figuring out this virus was coming back in January and a government that was willing to put the head of health, a civil servant who has become very respected, in charge. Good leadership includes knowing when to step back and defer to the experts.