naptownskinsfan Posted June 29, 2020 Share Posted June 29, 2020 5 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Every Ohio poster under the sun is debating what their government should do and I'm just over here in Wisconsin with our big dumb supreme court that won't let us do anything. I haven't heard an update since the courts overturned everything. Has that been status quo since? If so, how are the cases in the state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted June 29, 2020 Share Posted June 29, 2020 5 hours ago, MWil23 said: Not so much what they should do, but rather what they will do. DeWine was the BBC poster child in March and has always been beloved by conservatives/moderates, but he’s showing that this issue isn’t/should t be partisan, whereas in Wisconsin...LOL LOL LOL LOL Hogan in Maryland was the same way, but it takes a special Republican to get elected to governor in this state as were are heavily blue. He's still maintained the phased openings, masks, etc, to the point where some of his base was doing more than grumbling. I think we've handled things as best as could be expected, especially with DC next door to us, and the Port of Baltimore being a busy hub of business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted June 29, 2020 Share Posted June 29, 2020 Just now, naptownskinsfan said: I haven't heard an update since the courts overturned everything. Has that been status quo since? If so, how are the cases in the state? Urgh. Dane County stats: 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted June 29, 2020 Share Posted June 29, 2020 4 hours ago, mission27 said: Yeah I agree. There are places in Europe with low levels of mask adoption though. There's more than one way to skin this cat, but Florida, Texas, and Arizona chose to take the worst approach of all... allow large numbers of people to congregated indoors, in the AC, without masks. You know, you've got the county health inspectors who do their audits, fire marshal does their audit and I am sure I am missing some for businesses. Heck, I have friends in the bar industry downtown and everyone knows when the fire marshal comes to do the occupancy check. Why not open up some jobs for people who are on unemployment or furloughed at the state/local level to go into bars and restaurants and verify occupancy? It should be a simple enough job, and needed when we are talking keeping the economy chugging along and not having to close things back down again. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVScout Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 Food for thought: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 3 minutes ago, TVScout said: Food for thought: I'm not sure what you're trying to point out in the first image. The second one doesn't surprise me in the least given the current... gatherings in that city in particular. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 (edited) On 6/28/2020 at 2:09 PM, skywindO2 said: Couldn't government basically require masks without passing any laws by ruling that businesses are liable for customers/employees getting catching Covid ? You'd think businesses would start mandating and enforcing mask policy if that was the case. In some ways, this is what happened with smoking in bars. Fighting the deep- pocketed tobacco companies wasn't a winning strategy, so what Cal - OSHA did was mandate that bars/restaurants have to provide clean air for their employees. Occupational Safety vs banning smoking. The bar owners could either buy $25-50 k worth of air handling/filtering equipment to meet the clean air standards OR they could ban smoking in their establishments. At that point, north of 95 % of the owners banned smoking in their establishments At the time, there was a hue and cry from the bar owners griping about their freedoms and that it would lead to a MASSIVE loss in business. The opposite happened and there wasn't really any mystery involved. Only 10 % of CA residents smoked, so catering to the other 90 % was the winning move all along. But nobody likes being told what to do and by giving them the choice (or the illusion of choice) it disarmed some of the pushback The decision was shifted to the bar owners and once they became true believers, so did their clientele. If your favorite restaurant says:"please wear a mask to protect all of the cool people who serve you" that's different than The Man telling you to wear one (for some people) Edited June 30, 2020 by Shanedorf 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 27 minutes ago, Danger said: I'm not sure what you're trying to point out in the first image. The second one doesn't surprise me in the least given the current... gatherings in that city in particular. Yeah the first image just drives home the fact that the US has done a good job of reducing mortality and that even though cases *looked* flat in reality the epidemic was coming much more under control through the end of May / beginning of June. What happens to that graph now that we are seeing such huge surges in the south, anyone's guess. If we do a better job with assisted living facilities, it remains mostly in the young populations, and therapeutic advances have reduced IFR significantly we may be able to flatten the mortality curve even with a lot of cases. But my personal guess is the deaths will start going up again sometime very soon (not to peak levels, but probably above 1k a day). We've set another all-time low trailing 7 day average deaths today though the gains are mixed. New York had 12 deaths today, New Jersey 5 which is just incredible when you consider these two states had 1500 deaths combined on a day in mid-April. But Mississippi had 20! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingseanjohn Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 Kansas City has a mask mandate that went into effect today. I went to the gym and only 3 out of maybe 40 people were wearing one. Guess it's back to body weight workouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenos Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 Interesting article about approaching the naysayers on masks a different way. Maybe instead of shaming people, we try advocating the positives? The AIDS and contraceptive analogy is kind of apt. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/613375/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, JDBrocks said: We already paid for the R&D. It is a bad price, and it's profiteering on a global pandemic. Its a legitimate concern and one posed by many, so I'll offer some comments. Gilead is not run by saints and they've had their share of mis-steps in pricing drugs over the years. They've not been a great corporate citizen in some cases, but they are also not the bad guys they are made out to be from my view. ( I don't work for them and I don't own their stock) Rams99 pointed out that drug $$ is a very complex issue, and it is. Gilead's treatment for Hepatitis C came out at $84,000 per person and people were understandably freaked out. That's an insane amount of $$ for a drug. But what happened is that the health insurance companies had changed the way they reimburse for new medicines. In the past, they'd pay for the latest and greatest even if it only offered a marginal upgrade vs the Standard of Care. So that meant lots of "me too" drugs going after the same patient population. Ten slightly different versions of the same cholesterol or blood pressure med and they'd fight over market share. That's not really helping humanity So the health insurance companies said, "we are going to pay for performance and value. If you can't deliver significantly better results, we won't pay for your shiny new drug " About that time, Gilead came out with their Hep C treatment that actually cured people. No more meds. No more treatments, no scans, no hospital visits, no liver transplants etc. Based on health economics - it was vastly cheaper to spend $84 K and cure those patients. Gilead didn't make those rules, but they surely used them to their advantage. As any for- profit company would. Back to COVID Gilead was given a $37.5 million federal grant for development of Remdesivir, but that is only a tiny fraction of the money they invested to bring it to market. Most new meds come in around $ 1 billion in clinical/regulatory/mfg costs. More for some, less for others but that's a fair number. So its not really fair to say " We already paid for the R&D" on Remdesivir More economics: They have to patent that Remdesivir molecule the second they think they have something useful and that buys them 20 years of exclusive sales on that drug before it goes generic. However, new drugs take between 10-15 years in clinical development, so they frequently only have a few years of sales left to cover all those costs, both for the winners and the losers before they go generic $3100 per patient for Remdesivir isn't out of line with the value it brings not only to the individual patient but to the taxpayers and communities as well. The cost of a visit to the ICU is immense by comparison, so keeping 1 patient out of there is worth it from a health economics POV. Those ICU costs are covered by insurance and those costs are passed on to all of us in our ever-growing premiums. So we are all better off with Remdesivir than without it. Yes, Gilead will earn a profit from this medicine - but they also stopped work on several of their other drugs in development and that's a steep price for them to pay. They also donated 1.4 million doses in the middle of this pandemic, that comes to over $400 million (at the proposed price) and once we add that to the ledger maybe they aren't the worst company ever. I don't really like it any more than you do, but once I understood more about it - I was more accepting of the economics. Edited June 30, 2020 by Shanedorf 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theJ Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 Can someone fact check this for me? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 1 hour ago, theJ said: Can someone fact check this for me? Thanks. The three million travelers figure should only say 350,000. Otherwise, it’s accurate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 2 hours ago, kingseanjohn said: Kansas City has a mask mandate that went into effect today. I went to the gym and only 3 out of maybe 40 people were wearing one. Guess it's back to body weight workouts. The gym is the very last place you'd find me now. No way. Thats just not happening. Entirely too many people breathing heavy from exercises. How far away is far enough? No thanks. I dont need to live life on those margins. I'll ride out the tide and wait till this things under control before I walk thru those doors again. Till then there's weights at home plus plenty of roads and trails to ride my bike....alone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted June 30, 2020 Share Posted June 30, 2020 10 hours ago, TVScout said: Food for thought: Is there anything outlining a state other than MN? Gut feeling says this is the same in other states (anecdotal reports in Texas echo a similar message - it's younger people impacted with this recent surge). If true, it's incredibly telling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts