Trump pushes conspiracy theory denying Puerto Rico hurricane death toll

Via:  tessylo  •  2 months ago  •  99 comments

Trump pushes conspiracy theory denying Puerto Rico hurricane death toll

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T






Trump pushes conspiracy theory denying Puerto Rico hurricane death toll



 Christopher Wilson 1 hour 11 minutes ago 

















Carmen Yulín Cruz

@CarmenYulinCruz








This is what denial following neglect looks like: Mr Pres in the real world people died on your watch. YOUR LACK OF RESPECT IS APPALLING!





Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Tessylo
1  seeder  Tessylo    2 months ago

What a lying sack of shit.  

 
 
A. Macarthur
1.1  A. Macarthur  replied to  Tessylo @1    2 months ago
What a lying sack of shit.  

Why denigrate sacks of shit?

 
 
Tessylo
1.1.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.1    2 months ago

Yes even sacks of shit, such as manure, serve a purpose.

Hey AMac, you should check out ItIsMe's seed about the debunked fraud in Puerto Rico.  

 
 
A. Macarthur
1.1.2  A. Macarthur  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.1    2 months ago

Will Do.

 
 
Tessylo
1.1.3  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.1.2    2 months ago

Knock him out with your facts and the truth.  

You'll get nothing but the ItIsMe sidestep.  

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
1.1.4  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.1    2 months ago
Why denigrate sacks of shit?

Because they're sacks of shit.  Isn't that what they deserve?  

 
 
badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη
1.1.5  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @1.1.4    2 months ago

You seem angry, would you like to hold my squeeze ball?

images.jpg

 
 
Trout Giggles
1.1.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.3    2 months ago
ItIsMe sidestep.  

Is that a new dance the young uns are doing these days?

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
1.1.7  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη @1.1.5    2 months ago
You seem angry, would you like to hold my squeeze ball?

I've never been so happy as in the past few weeks since Nov. 2016.   And increasing almost by the day.  Your diagnostic skills need adjusting.*

 * by which I mean, chucking onto the burnpile. 

 
 
A. Macarthur
1.1.8  A. Macarthur  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @1.1.4    2 months ago
Why denigrate sacks of shit?
Because they're sacks of shit.  Isn't that what they deserve?  

I was referring to actual sacks of fecal matter … why denigrate them by lowering them to Trump level.

My bad for not better explaining myself.

 
 
badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη
1.1.9  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @1.1.7    2 months ago

That's the Atheist that I know....lol

 
 
Tessylo
1.1.10  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.1.6    2 months ago

I don't know TG, I can't keep up with those little whippersnappers any more hon.  

 
 
A. Macarthur
3  A. Macarthur    2 months ago

Only a heartless, self-serving-ego-maniacal-narcissistic-piece-of-excrement BLAMES THE VICTIMS OF TRAGEDY in order to cover his culpable fat ass and heap untruthful praise upon himself.

So far, the ordinarily effete Paul Ryan and the oft-apologist Orrin Hatch, have, each in their own way, called "bullshit!" on Trump's disgraceful display!

Incarceration of children -- intentional misfeasance leading to thousands of deaths in Puerto Rico … TWO COUNTS OF "CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY"!

 Crimes against humanity
  1. deliberate acts, typically as part of a systematic campaign, that causes human suffering or death on a large scale.
 
 
Trout Giggles
4  Trout Giggles    2 months ago

Would you believe I am actually speechless over this latest bullshit by Fearfull Leader?

 
 
Skrekk
4.1  Skrekk  replied to  Trout Giggles @4    2 months ago

Apparently black and brown lives don't count for much in the mind of our Glorious Leader, particularly since those deaths are really due to his utter incompetence and lack of concern.

But at least he tossed a few rolls of paper towels at Puerto Ricans, right?

 
 
Tessylo
4.1.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Skrekk @4.1    2 months ago

And told them to have a good time

 
 
Skrekk
4.1.2  Skrekk  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.1    2 months ago

He really is a sociopath, isn't he?  No empathy whatsoever for other people.

 
 
Tessylo
4.1.3  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Skrekk @4.1.2    2 months ago

And totally batshit crazy.  The only person he cares about is himself 

 
 
cjfrommn
5  cjfrommn    2 months ago

Well what gets me is that at some point the band wagon of trump folks will hit this seed. And of course suggest we all are the ones who are wrong and so on and so forth. 

And every seed i seem them show up at i always ask my self -- do any of these trump supporters here at NT have daughters. Because i always take what he does and run it through my "boyfriend test". Meaning if one of my 3 girls showed up with this trump guy would he pass my test, of course not. 

He lies, he tells half truths , he has a morality problem and a lack of abilty to acknowledge when he is wrong and surely based on ms daniels would most likey cheat on my daughter and break her heart and i cant have that. 

and then he spouts off about the number not being correct. Well if my memory serves me correct, this would be the second time in as many months were Paul Ryan has stated on record that trumps claim is not correct and that he is confident of the source that produced the total amount that died in Puerto Rico. 

But what gets me the most is his need to go back to OLD SHIT as if the NEW SHIT in front of him doesnt matter enough to address. Ahhhhhh Florence will also be a killer but lets not address that ooooh no lets talk about the other storm. 

just a very sad man and whats worst is the ones who follow this guy like puppy dogs, that to me is truly embarrassing. Not because they dont have the right to feel or support him but that they dont seem to recognize that he only wants the ones who cant think for themselves. sad times we are in for sure. 

 
 
bugsy
5.1  bugsy  replied to  cjfrommn @5    2 months ago
And of course suggest we all are the ones who are wrong and so on and so forth. 

I'm not stating that anyone is "wrong" here, but the death toll in Puerto Rico has fluctuated from 64, even several months after Maria, to around 4000 today. Both of these numbers, and the many in between this time frame,  come from the Puerto Rican government. Why such a huge difference?

I have read that the methodology of how the 4000 came is a bit disingenuous, and there were probably hundreds, if not thousands, of deaths not directly attributed to hurricanes, but those that were of old age, in some sort of health problem, or other natural deaths that were mixed into this 4000 number.

I also think it is no coincidence that these numbers came out right at the eve of Florence about to hit the east coast. The media has done everything they could, with a little help from Trump himself, to paint him in a bad light.

Now is not the time to making unfortunate deaths a political ploy.

 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  bugsy @5.1    2 months ago

I also think it is no coincidence that these numbers came out right at the eve of Florence about to hit the east coast."

.

This total came out over a month ago or so.

Trump is the one who put it front and center yesterday.

try again,

but Y ?

 
 
cjfrommn
5.1.2  cjfrommn  replied to  bugsy @5.1    2 months ago

lets clear something up -- paul ryan said " i have no reason to dispute the findings of the study conducted".

Do you know what that means.....................it means he understands that the US government with trump as the leader dropped the ball by not having his FEMA group ready to deploy and respond in a reasonable amount of time.  and have assets on the ground that could CORRECTLY IDENTIFY the major issues that was a result of that storm. 

So he understands that a person of the people he knew that people died and some were unaccountable and any government response was not to determine who died but how to help those who didnt. 

and over the course of time complications that were identified (no electric for months) no fresh water(working pumps) no airport support and other factors - would impact the ability for anyone to survive this life threatening situation.

so again, the fact that the government was not ready and sure didn't respond any better then it did to the Katrina situation puts the ABILITY OF THIS PRESIDENT to suggest anything less, is irresponsible and arrogant. 

By the way this is political because at no time since this issue was raised to a national debate, has trump made an attempt to suggest how HE SHOULD have responded and thus changing the conversation on what should have been done to prevent ANY DEATHS. 

but his lack of tact and need to tweet is why this STAYS A POLITICAL issue. 

 
 
DRHunk
5.1.3  DRHunk  replied to  bugsy @5.1    2 months ago

where can one find the methodology used? I am curious to read about it.

 
 
bugsy
5.1.5  bugsy  replied to  cjfrommn @5.1.2    2 months ago
and have assets on the ground that could CORRECTLY IDENTIFY the major issues that was a result of that storm. 

True, but it is very difficult to pinpoint direct effects of the storm when the infrastructure, especially the electrical grid, was bankrupt and ready to give out anyway. The storms just added to the major problems PR had long before the storms.

BTW, the governor of Puerto Rico made several statements that the federal government reacted exactly the way it should have and was ready to help before and after the storms hit.

The fact that PR is an island, and the damage sustained to ports and airports, did not make things easy when delivering relief goods.

Speaking of relief goods, I wonder if you think that the millions of bottles of water sitting on a tarmac, delivered to the PR government, and not delivered to the people of PR, is Trump's fault?

 
 
bugsy
5.1.6  bugsy  replied to  cjfrommn @5.1.2    2 months ago
but his lack of tact and need to tweet is why this STAYS A POLITICAL issue. 

True, but the President does have a right to defend himself from what may be yet another media/liberal/political lie.

If the numbers are right, he needs to STFU.

 
 
cjfrommn
5.1.7  cjfrommn  replied to  bugsy @5.1.5    2 months ago

well sadly the governors statement was not yesterday or today, unlike the tweet storm,

making excuses for old this or that grid doesn't change HOW this group of citizens was dealt with. And in the end, the president YES is to blame because a leader asks the questions and gets the answers needed to make a tarmac full of water to disappear. 

 
 
MrFrost
5.1.8  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @5.1.6    2 months ago
If the numbers are right, he needs to STFU.

You realize that it's trumps own staff that verified the numbers, right? 

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
5.1.9  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  bugsy @5.1    2 months ago
has fluctuated from 64, even several months after Maria, to around 4000 today

Where are you getting 4,000 from? All the reporting I've seen and the actual report done said 2,975 so just under 3,000 deaths attributed to the hurricane. I think the initial number of confirmed deaths directly from the hurricane was just under 100 but the resulting deaths from lack of clean water, power and medicine, the slow response from the federal government, and trouble with the logistics of getting the power, water and sewers working again led to another 2900 deaths over the last year. These were preventable deaths, and we'll never know exactly how many can legitimately be laid at the feet of this inept administration, but the fact is one is too many. The right wing seemingly lost their minds when 4 Americans died in Benghazi and they desperately tried to blame Hillary Clinton. Are we going to have the 8 investigations they had of Hillary looking into the Trump administrations response that likely led to nearly 3,000 Americans deaths? Of course not, Republicans aren't trying to find truth, they're trying to monopolize partisanship and weaponize other peoples suffering to attack their opponents.

 
 
bugsy
5.1.10  bugsy  replied to  cjfrommn @5.1.7    2 months ago
the president YES is to blame because a leader asks the questions and gets the answers needed to make a tarmac full of water to disappear. 

Even if the water was delivered to the local government? The water was no longer in federal hands, so the President was no longer responsible.

Is the President responsible if your local trash pickup did not happen on your scheduled day? By your logic he is.

 
 
DRHunk
5.1.11  DRHunk  replied to  bugsy @5.1.10    2 months ago

if not getting that trash picked up results in deaths of 100's of people....yea its his responsibility to ensure it gets done.

 
 
bugsy
5.1.12  bugsy  replied to  DRHunk @5.1.11    2 months ago
All this is just another lame attempt at trump trying to defend his ego.

Nice try....trash pickup is a local issue, just like water delivered to a local government gets distributed to its population.

Relying on the federal government gets you nowhere.

 
 
cjfrommn
5.1.13  cjfrommn  replied to  bugsy @5.1.10    2 months ago
Even if the water was delivered to the local government? The water was no longer in federal hands, so the President was no longer responsible.

calling bullshit..unless you can provide a link that tells us exactly where the water came from - we can assume the federal government in the administrative role was aware of the water. and either they help with the screw up of the distribution or they did not CREATE the ability for it to be distributed properly. so yes this is the presidents fault. And fema and any other bureaucracy  that failed to figure out a way to get this water out to the people. 

Is the President responsible if your local trash pickup did not happen on your scheduled day? By your logic he

no but what he could be responsible for is not helping them keep cost down via his stupid tariff crap if the company passes on the cost it takes to get the type of trash trucks it used be able to purchase and had to change them. 

lets not play games here. he was the man in charge and dropped the ball. sadly like most folks who make excuses for trump, i am more appalled at how those type seem to keep disregarding that these are OUR OWN CITIZENS.!! 

 
 
Tessylo
5.1.14  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.1.9    2 months ago

I was wondering too where the 4,000 came from.  

 
 
bugsy
5.1.15  bugsy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.1.9    2 months ago

My apologies to the 4000 number. I do understand it is closer to 3000.

Facts remains, however, is that the media and their liberal counterparts are trying to make it look like the 3000 is a direct result of the hurricanes, when the vast majority could have come from other sources, such as the ones I described and you also noted.

The federal government may have a large part in this, but the PR government also needs to take blame for their failures. The infrastructure of PR was on its last leg long before the hurricanes, and millions of dollars in relief goods were never delivered to the population after is was handed over to them.

 
 
Tessylo
5.1.16  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  bugsy @5.1.15    2 months ago
'when the vast majority could have come from other sources, such as the ones I described and you also noted.'

The vast majority did not come from other sources.  

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
5.1.17  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  bugsy @5.1.15    2 months ago
when the vast majority could have come from other sources

So how many deaths are you willing to accept were a direct result from the federal governments slow response? 1? 2? 4? 400? 2400? As I point out, all it took was 4 American deaths for the right wing to lose their minds over Benghazi, where is the outrage here? I guess it's not that an administration or State Department may of mishandled things that led to 4 Americans deaths causing the need for 8 partisan investigations, it was that it was a Democrat administration and State department that made it important. Now we have the possibility that a feckless governments response likely led to well over 2,000 Americans deaths but because the ones in charge were Republican, no investigations are necessary. Republicans have taken hypocrisy to whole new heights.

 
 
Dulay
5.1.19  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @5.1.5    2 months ago
True, but it is very difficult to pinpoint direct effects of the storm when the infrastructure, especially the electrical grid, was bankrupt and ready to give out anyway. The storms just added to the major problems PR had long before the storms.

Yet homes are stupidly built in flood plains on Houston, get rebuilt or the electrical grid in the Florida keys gets obliterated, gets FIXED. Both get funding from the US government almost immediately.

More importantly, the initial EMERGENCY response for Texas was immediate. As an example, US Northern Command had 73 helicopters in Houston within 3 days.  

Not so with Puerto Rico, where 1 million were ALREADY without power after Irma. It took 3 WEEKS for 70 helicopters to arrive and where they were MUCH more necessary for delivering EMERGENCY provisions to mountain communities cut off because of bridge and levee damage on top of downed trees. Contractors dumped provisions on the dock but truck drivers couldn't deliver provisions because the roads were impassable, they NEEDED helicopters.

It's not like FEMA just realized that Puerto Rico was a mountainous island the day AFTER Maria. If FEMA was REALLY prepared for Puerto Rico, they would have packed provisions in helicopter sized load with a mix of MRIs, water, meds, batteries, a small generator and diesel. Roll each load out, hook it up to a helo and drop it into communities all over the island. THEN load 'at risk' citizens for the flight back to town and a hospital, or later to the Comfort. 

BTW, after Irma, the Comfort should have been loaded and ready to rock BEFORE Maria and SHOULD have been @ sea ready to sail into Puerto Rico after Maria. Instead it took 3 weeks. 

FEMA reassessed and amended their 'major disaster declaration' 10 days after Harvey, they didn't do so for Puerto Rico for 43 days. 

 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.20  XDm9mm  replied to  Dulay @5.1.19    2 months ago
Yet homes are stupidly built in flood plains on Houston, get rebuilt or the electrical grid in the Florida keys gets obliterated, gets FIXED. Both get funding from the US government almost immediately.

First, Texas and Houston are states and the electrical grids in both are part of the critical infrastructure of the continental United States.

Second, the worst parts of the electrical grids of both Texas and Florida are better than the best elements of the Puerto Rico grid.  BEFORE Maria hit, there were huge parts of the island that suffered electrical disruption and why many residents already had generators.  Of course, those outages generally never affected the 'tourist' areas of the island.  They couldn't afford to lose what little revenue sources they had.

By the way....  it's my understanding that before we 'fixed' the Mississippi with levees, the 'flood plain' for that one river covered nearly the center third of the country.   Of course, before the levees the 'flooding' was generally limited to minor annoyance inches.  Now that we've "fixed" it with levees, and effectively forced the big mouth of the upper portion of the river into the little hole in the bottom of a funnel, when those levees break, we see catastrophic flooding.   But we're oh so fucking smart wen we try to fuck with nature.

 
 
Trout Giggles
5.1.21  Trout Giggles  replied to  bugsy @5.1.15    2 months ago
the media and their liberal counterparts are trying to make it look like the 3000 is a direct result of the hurricanes,

No, they didn't. The media explained that the majority of deaths came after the hurricane because of lack of water, food, and medicine. If you didn't get that from the news reports and the media I can't help you

 
 
Trout Giggles
5.1.22  Trout Giggles  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.20    2 months ago

Houston isn't a state. And when the power goes off in Houston it doesn't affect me.

 
 
Dulay
5.1.23  Dulay  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.20    2 months ago
First, Texas and Houston are states and the electrical grids in both are part of the critical infrastructure of the continental United States.

I think you meant Florida, not Houston...

Yet BOTH grids are privately owned are they not? 

Second, the worst parts of the electrical grids of both Texas and Florida are better than the best elements of the Puerto Rico grid.  BEFORE Maria hit, there were huge parts of the island that suffered electrical disruption and why many residents already had generators.  Of course, those outages generally never affected the 'tourist' areas of the island.  They couldn't afford to lose what little revenue sources they had.

Again, so fucking what? If a D- rated bridge in MO gets wiped out by a tornado, do we rebuild it or say that is sucked before the storm so it's their fault that it failed?  

By the way....  it's my understanding that before we 'fixed' the Mississippi with levees, the 'flood plain' for that one river covered nearly the center third of the country.   Of course, before the levees the 'flooding' was generally limited to minor annoyance inches.  Now that we've "fixed" it with levees, and effectively forced the big mouth of the upper portion of the river into the little hole in the bottom of a funnel, when those levees break, we see catastrophic flooding.   But we're oh so fucking smart wen we try to fuck with nature.

Yet there are still millions of acres in the flood plain and which get flooded on a regular basis. It only going to get worse. 

IMHO, if you buy land to build in a flood plain, you shouldn't expect to be compensated for your losses. Houston let that shit get built by design. It was stupid and they shouldn't rebuild that shit. City designers should get their shit together and figure out how to get the water OUT of the city or keep it from coming in, PICK ONE. Then they need to change building codes AND were they permit building in the first place. 

It's NOT like we don't KNOW where flooding will occur. In fact FEMA has a handy dandy tool for just that...

 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.24  XDm9mm  replied to  Dulay @5.1.23    2 months ago
I think you meant Florida, not Houston...

Oop's...   

Again, so fucking what? If a D- rated bridge in MO gets wiped out by a tornado, do we rebuild it or say that is sucked before the storm so it's their fault that it failed?

I never said it shouldn't be rebuilt and from what I understand it's pretty much been accomplished.  But, considering that effectively the entire islands grid had to be rebuilt it's been a pretty good job.  The vast majority of Texas and Florida, hell the vast majority of the grid for the entire continental US is privately owned.  Granted there are some municipal power authorities, but they're minor local operations which cooperate with the larger private operators.  Puerto Rico on the other hand is government owned and operated.

ThePuerto Rico Electric PowerAuthority (PREPA) —Spanish: Autoridad de Energía Eléctrica (AEE)— is anelectric powercompany and thegovernment-ownedcorporation ofPuerto Ricoresponsible forelectricitygeneration,powerdistribution, andpowertransmission on the island.

Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=is+the+puerto+rican+electrical+grid+private+or+government+owned&oq=is+the+puerto+rican+electrical+grid+private+or+government+owned&aqs=chrome..69i57.24447j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

As to building in flood plains, I agree.  If you build in one, then it's on you or your insurance company.   Much the same with earthquake prone locations.  Build on a fault line, fine.  Just don't ask me to rebuild it for you.

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.1.25  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  bugsy @5.1    2 months ago
but the death toll in Puerto Rico has fluctuated from 64, even several months after Maria, to around 4000 today.

Every subsequent estimate after that absure 64 number has shown an increase.  This study was the first systematic and carefully conducted epidemiologic study.  The authors even admit that their estimate of 4,645 is probably low:

Our estimate of 4645 excess deaths from September 20 through December 31, 2017, is likely to be conservative since subsequent adjustments for survivor bias and household-size distributions increase this estimate to more than 5000. 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.1.26  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.1.21    2 months ago
The media explained that the majority of deaths came after the hurricane because of lack of water, food, and medicine.

In other words a massive failure of response and recovery.  This seems to be recurrent theme when Republicans are "in charge." 

 
 
Dulay
5.1.27  Dulay  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.24    2 months ago
If you build in one, then it's on you or your insurance company.

Only the federal government insures floods. 

As to earthquake fault lines, One CAN'T build on one. One of my friends owns a big ranch in Hollister, CA and the San Andreas fault runs right through it. Every day they take a front loader out and regrade the road over the fault. I lived in the Bay Area during the 1989 quake. We were 50 miles from the epicenter and still had extensive damage to our home. It moved my king size waterbed a foot off of the wall. 

 
 
Skrekk
5.1.28  Skrekk  replied to  DRHunk @5.1.3    2 months ago
where can one find the methodology used? I am curious to read about it.

See # 2.3 for a summary.   It's the same "excess death" methodology which is widely used by epidemiologists who study conflict zones and other disasters.    Here's a link to the GWU study and a link to an explanation:

https://publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/downloads/projects/PRstudy/Acertainment%20of%20the%20Estimated%20Excess%20Mortality%20from%20Hurricane%20Maria%20in%20Puerto%20Rico.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/08/29/why-hurricane-marias-death-toll-is-misunderstood-and-incomparable-to-other-disasters/

Here's a similar analysis which shows 1,085 excess deaths for just the Sept-Oct 2017 period (vs the 6 month period used by GWU).    Note that the real experts in the methodology are at GWU.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stijn_Van_Weezel/publication/325539271_Excess_Deaths_and_Hurricane_Maria/links/5b13c1cda6fdcc4611dfebc4/Excess-Deaths-and-Hurricane-Maria.pdf

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.1.29  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  DRHunk @5.1.3    2 months ago
where can one find the methodology used? I am curious to read about it.

From the NEJM article itself :

Methods

SAMPLING FRAMEWORK

We conducted a randomized survey of 3299 households from January 17 through February 24, 2018. The target sample of approximately 3000 households was calculated to detect a 50% increase in the annual mortality rate from a historic (September 20 through December 31) baseline rate of 8 per 1000,21with 80% power at a significance level of 0.05. To ensure sampling of households across geographic regions, we stratified the population according to remoteness, defined according to the travel time to the nearest city with a population of at least 50,000 persons.22,23We determined an average remoteness index for each of the 900 barrios (administrative units) by using population and road-network data from official government sources.24Barrios were grouped into eight categories according to percentile from least remote (category 1) to most remote (category 8), and 13 barrios were randomly sampled from each category (Fig. S1 in theSupplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org). We randomly sampled an additional barrio from each of the two inhabited island municipalities off the northeast coast, Vieques and Culebra, and excluded largely uninhabited barrios such as nature reserves.

We randomly selected 35 households from each barrio using OpenStreetMap (OSM) layers to identify buildings.25When data collectors encountered an abandoned home or nonhome structure, they sampled a house from all surrounding visible houses using a random number generator. The same process was followed if consent was declined, if the house was empty at the time of the interview, or when sparsely populated barrios had fewer than 35 points sampled because of incomplete data structures on OSM. Our survey logistics did not allow for the data collectors to revisit an empty house (see theSupplementary Appendixfor details).

Data collectors did not record any personal identifiers; global positioning system (GPS) coordinates were aggregated after data collection. To avoid coercion and reduce bias, no compensation was provided. The participants were informed that their responses would not result in direct benefits to them or their families. If respondents requested health services, data collectors provided information on accessible resources identified by local partners. Consent for participation was acquired before administration of the survey. This study was granted a human subjects research exemption (45CFR46) by the institutional review board of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

We used a hybrid census method, collecting information about each household member, including all persons who had moved in, moved out, been born, or died in 2017.26Persons who were reported to be missing from households, but not known to be deceased, were considered to be alive for our calculations. Households were defined as a person or a group of persons, related or unrelated, who live together. The survey was administered to one adult respondent per household and took less than 10 minutes to complete. The survey instrument is provided in theSupplementary Appendix. The survey included questions on age, sex, cause of death if after the hurricane, hurricane-related migration, neighborhood deaths, and access to electricity, water, and cellular network coverage on an ordinal scale for each month (0 days, 1 to 7 days, 8 to 14, 15 to 30 days, or all month).

POPULATION ESTIMATION

Survey weights (w) were constructed by calculating the inverse probability of selection of a household and were defined as

and

We used the following formulas to calculate the general population estimate:

and

whereiis the household. Weights and estimates of excess deaths were constructed with the use of the most recent official population estimate in 2016.27

Statistics was a subject I never could get a handle on but maybe this makes sense to you. 

 
 
bugsy
5.1.30  bugsy  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.18    2 months ago

They don't care, XD. All they know is that they were told that Puerto Rico did not receive relief supplies, and they blame Trump, even though it has been proven that all relief that was requested was delivered to the PR government.

To them, the PR government holds zero responsibility.

 

 
 
Skrekk
5.1.31  Skrekk  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @5.1.29    2 months ago

FYI, that's the Harvard study not the GWU study.    Harvard used a different time range and different statistical analysis which results in a much broader range of excess deaths (and I think didn't account for subsequent migration from the island).

The GWU study is where the 2975 figure comes from, and they're the real experts in the field:

https://publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/downloads/projects/PRstudy/Acertainment%20of%20the%20Estimated%20Excess%20Mortality%20from%20Hurricane%20Maria%20in%20Puerto%20Rico.pdf

 
 
bugsy
5.1.32  bugsy  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @5.1.29    2 months ago

Thanks for the explanation, but it is kinda sad the PR government had to use statistics to get a death toll instead of using actual reported deaths directly and indirectly related to hurricanes.

I'm curious how many of those "indirect casualties" were actually because of the hurricanes, or they simply died for natural reasons during the time period.

 
 
bugsy
5.1.33  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @5.1.19    2 months ago
Yet homes are stupidly built in flood plains on Houston, get rebuilt or the electrical grid in the Florida keys gets obliterated, gets FIXED. Both get funding from the US government almost immediately.

Most homes in Houston were modern with quick access to rebuilding whereas PR had neither immediately on hand.

Same with electrical grids.....The PR grid was ancient to begin with, so when it was blasted, there was no repair as we would describe repair, but basically had to be rebuilt from the ground up all over the island.

The rest I am not completely familiar but I can see why it took so long to get goods there. PR is an island with many remote areas where the infrastructure (all types) were destroyed and much relief had to wait until minimal repairs were made to get goods in.

 
 
Skrekk
5.1.34  Skrekk  replied to  bugsy @5.1.32    2 months ago
it is kinda sad the PR government had to use statistics to get a death toll instead of using actual reported deaths directly and indirectly related to hurricanes. I'm curious how many of those "indirect casualties" were actually because of the hurricanes, or they simply died for natural reasons during the time period.

That comment demonstrates a real lack of awareness of the issues, everything from how deaths are reported to how people actually die as the result of disasters.    Sounds like you need to read the study summary to learn something about it.   Here's a link:

https://publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/downloads/projects/PRstudy/Acertainment%20of%20the%20Estimated%20Excess%20Mortality%20from%20Hurricane%20Maria%20in%20Puerto%20Rico.pdf

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.1.35  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  bugsy @5.1.32    2 months ago
I'm curious how many of those "indirect casualties" were actually because of the hurricanes, or they simply died for natural reasons during the time period.

But those "natural cause" deaths often had to do with the lack of access to medical care, especially emergency care, due to the very poor recovery measures.  Roads, communications, power and other basic infrastructure needs still haven't been restored to much of the island.  At that is a scandal both for the federal and territorial response to this disaster.  

 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.36  XDm9mm  replied to  Dulay @5.1.27    2 months ago

And the government should not be in the insurance business.....    that's the only reason some people build there.   And a MAJOR failure of that is that they rebuild, and rebuild and rebuild, since it's effectively taxpayer money doing the rebuilding, who cares right?   I think it was last year, John Stossel, noted the abject stupidity of the program......   and he admitted that he had used it several times to rebuild his homes in the Hamptons.   He questioned why the government was insuring multimillionaires for the multimillion dollar mansions they built and rebuilt in the same footprint when they got ruined in hurricanes and nor'eaters and such.

And you 'can't' build on known major ones......    but I know several buildings here in Texas that have been built right on minor fault lines.....   (government owned of course) that were still built even after having rep's from USGS come in with maps of where they were!

But, therein lies another problem, if we dent building on all places with known issues, our build-able space is very limited.

 
 
Trout Giggles
5.1.37  Trout Giggles  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.36    2 months ago

Does Stossel own those homes in the Hamptons? If he does he's a major hypocrite...which I've always suspected

 
 
bugsy
5.1.38  bugsy  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @5.1.35    2 months ago
But those "natural cause" deaths often had to do with the lack of access to medical care, especially emergency care, due to the very poor recovery measures.  Roads, communications, power and other basic infrastructure needs still haven't been restored to much of the island.  At that is a scandal both for the federal and territorial response to this disaster.  

I have made that observation before. However, we really don't know if all of those deaths were truly direct or indirect causes from the hurricanes. Could be the PR government lumped in those that simply died because they were elderly and they just happened to die during the time frame of the study.

People die every day from things other than hurricanes....even in PR.

 
 
Dulay
5.1.39  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @5.1.33    2 months ago
Most homes in Houston were modern with quick access to rebuilding whereas PR had neither immediately on hand.

My point about the homes in Houston is that they are in KNOWN flood plains, yet they are being rebuilt ANYWAY, many with FEMA grants. Every couple of years, rinse and repeat...

 
 
Dulay
5.1.40  Dulay  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.36    2 months ago

Think tornado alley. MO, AR, OK and NE would have to be empty. 

Check out that New Madrid quake zone. 

Those 2 alone eliminate the majority of the breadbasket of the country. 

 
 
Tessylo
5.1.41  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  bugsy @5.1.6    2 months ago

No, this not a media/political/liberal lie FFS.  It's the cold hard truth 

Thanks but no thanks for the rumpsplanation

 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.42  XDm9mm  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.1.37    2 months ago

Yep....  right on the water.

He ADMITS that the program is obscene, but like tax deductions, if it's available and legal, use it.   There's no hypocrisy in that.

 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
5.1.43  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  bugsy @5.1.10    2 months ago
Even if the water was delivered to the local government? The water was no longer in federal hands, so the President was no longer responsible.

Tell me you are not serious.  PR's infrastructure was totally destroyed.  Exactly how were the suffering masses supposed to get the supplies they needed...by osfreakingmosis?  The United States failed to take care of their own, and your boy Trump was in the driver's seat.  The neglect in and of itself was heinous enough.  But for Trump to dispute the death total and turn the travesty into a partisan issue pretty much makes him the biggest dick on the planet.  Again.  But you go ahead and continue your genuflecting if it makes you feel better.  Trump deserves a punch in the face, not adulation.

 
 
Trout Giggles
5.1.44  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @5.1.43    2 months ago
osfreakingmosis? 

Can I borrow that?

 
 
DRHunk
5.1.45  DRHunk  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @5.1.29    2 months ago

HATED Statistics, I actually had to take that class 3 ties before i passed it...Ironic though, my career path out of college led me to become a Six Sigma Black Belt for some time where statisticaly sound data collection and analysis of that, data is an everyday event....The world is very humorous.

Looks to me like their methodology is sound and they took all precautions to get a good unbiased sample size. population size of 3,000 is a pretty good number to get a reliable data set from. The question is, how did they analyze that data, they must have been able to show there was a statistically significant relation between the hurricane and the deaths.

 
 
cjfrommn
5.1.46  cjfrommn  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.18    2 months ago
Now, the President had the military coordinate delivery of supplies TO PUERTO RICO....

The GOVERNMENT of Puerto Rico is responsible for delivering the supplies to the people of the Island.

The governor of Puerto Rico has the National guard at HIS disposal to accomplish that task.

hey you might have missed something........the government of Puerto Rico and the Governor and there national guard were on the Island at the time of the Hurricane ----so if nothing works---then ............................................................................................................................................................ding ding ding, its the people arriving to assist that should have brought things that would help. 

That means heavy duty equipment and labor trucks and so on. 

WHY ?

Because everything was touched by the storm----do you get it YET....................................thats why trump and fema and any other NON BASED ISLAND agency failed. 

 
 
Tessylo
5.1.47  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  cjfrommn @5.1.46    2 months ago

He missed nothing.   It doesn't matter what Rump does or doesn't do, they always support the scumlappingshitbag.

 
 
Kavika
6  Kavika     2 months ago

In the delusional world of Trump his statement is true...Screw the evidence...It's fake news...

 
 
bugsy
7  bugsy    2 months ago

[deleted]

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/13/fact-check-trump-is-right-critics-are-manipulating-puerto-rico-death-toll-estimate-hurricane-maria/

Many studies addressed a real concern that the Puerto Rican government lacked the competence to do an accurate death count, but much of the media hype around the results was clearly motivated by the attempt to damage the Trump administration.

The Washington Post noted just some of the studies as of June 2018 (original links):

  • The New York Times calculated 1,052 deaths through October.
  • The Center for Investigative Reporting calculated 985 through October.
  • University of Puerto Rico-Mayagüez professors calculated 822, with a 95 percent confidence range that the total was somewhere between 605 and 1,039.
  • Pennsylvania State University professors calculated excess deaths of about 500 in September, or a total of 1,085 if the same pattern held in October. That estimate was based on six weeks of mortality records.
  • A Latino USA analysis, using updated data from Puerto Rico’s Department of Health, calculated 1,194 excess deaths in September and October.

The Post noted that the new estimates hovered around the 1,000 mark.

Then, in June, a Harvard study published in the New England Journal of Medicine estimated the number of deaths from Hurricane Maria at 4,645 instead of the official figure of 64. The researchers had conducted a survey and extrapolated the results — an extremely sloppy methodology.

 Even the Post was skeptical of the absurdly high estimate: “This is not a verified number, unlike body counts in wars. The Harvard study offers only an estimate – a midpoint along a broad range of possibilities. It is not based on death records, only estimates of deaths from people who were interviewed in a survey.”

Now.....commence with your favorite emoji...or..."but, but, but...the source". We already know it's coming.

To be fair, if Breitbart is prohibited here from being used as the source of a seed, why would you post a link to it? {SP}

 .

 
 
bugsy
7.1  bugsy  replied to  bugsy @7    2 months ago

Disregard the height, width, etc part of the post. It is a box I cannot delete

I put the cursor at the right lower corner and backspaced  {SP}  it disappeared...

 
 
MrFrost
7.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @7.1    2 months ago

No worries, I have had the same problem. 

 
 
bugsy
7.1.2  bugsy  replied to  bugsy @7.1    2 months ago

Thanks I did not know that. I also did not know that Breitbart is not allowed as a seed. If it links to other sources that have relevant info and they are allowed, then Breitbart should be allowed to be linked for that info.

 
 
MrFrost
7.2  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @7    2 months ago

Pretty funny that you are trying to pass off brietbart as something factual. I knew it wouldn't be long before a link or seed showed up to spin this so it makes trump look like he is right. 

TRUMP LIED, AGAIN. DEAL WITH IT. 

All this is just another lame attempt at trump trying to defend his ego. No normal person sees his response in Puerto Rico as, "good". It was and is an EPIC failure. 

 
 
bugsy
7.2.1  bugsy  replied to  MrFrost @7.2    2 months ago
Pretty funny that you are trying to pass off brietbart as something factual.

Pretty funny that you did exactly what I said you guys would do in the very last sentence of the post you responded to. Let me recap...

"Now.....commence with your favorite emoji...or..."but, but, but...the source". We already know it's coming."  .

All this is just another lame attempt at trump trying to defend his ego.

[deleted] I specifically STATED that Trump himself is part of the problem as to why the media is piling on him.

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.2.2  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  bugsy @7.2.1    2 months ago
Pretty funny that you did exactly what I said you guys would do in the very last sentence of the post you responded to.

Breitbart doesn't even try to pretend that it's nothing but a pukefunnel for rightwing lies and propaganda.  The only reason I can think for anyone using it is to play that "but...but....the source" gambit to try to pretend it's just like, say, the New England Journal of Medicine.

 
 
bugsy
7.2.3  bugsy  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @7.2.2    2 months ago
Breitbart doesn't even try to pretend that it's nothing but a pukefunnel for rightwing lies and propaganda. 

Many people think the same as Salon, NYT, HuffPo, or Washington Post and left wink puke.

What's your point?

 
 
Skrekk
7.2.4  Skrekk  replied to  bugsy @7.2.3    2 months ago
Breitbart doesn't even try to pretend that it's nothing but a pukefunnel for rightwing lies and propaganda. 
Many people think the same as Salon, NYT, HuffPo, or Washington Post and left wink puke

Hmmmm......that would indicate that lefties are much smarter and far less gullible than righties.    No wonder Trump loves the uneducated and ran as a Republican.

 
 
Tessylo
7.3  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  bugsy @7    2 months ago

Breitfart?  laughing dude

What a surprise, NOT.  

 
 
bugsy
7.3.1  bugsy  replied to  Tessylo @7.3    2 months ago

I see you chose "all of the above"

From #7

Now.....commence with your favorite emoji...or..."but, but, but...the source". We already know it's coming. 

You are too easy.

Of course, you also chose to ignore the direct links to other sources, such as the NYT and WaPo. Are they now far right wing rags? By your "logic", they are

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.3.2  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  bugsy @7.3.1    2 months ago
Of course, you also chose to ignore the direct links to other sources, such as the NYT and WaPo.

It's really funny and enjoyable to see you now defending the "lying" NYTimes and WaPo.  If that doesn't reek of desperation then I don't know what would. It's almost like you think we can't see you.  

 
 
bugsy
7.3.3  bugsy  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @7.3.2    2 months ago
It's really funny and enjoyable to see you now defending the "lying" NYTimes and WaPo

Where did I say I was defending them? It is well known that very few sources that lean far left are to be believed on here, so I figured I would throw a couple of them out there for you.

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.4  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  bugsy @7    2 months ago
The researchers had conducted a survey and extrapolated the results — an extremely sloppy methodology.

Yeah, the Harvard School of Epidemiology is well known for its "sloppy methodology" and the New England Journal of Medicine also famous for publishing fake medical articles (/sssssss).  What is it about the rightwing that it cannot even grasp the slightest difference between what several previous estimates of the deaths, one of which was obviously absurdly low at 64,  and a systematic study?  I know Shitbag and his never-facts supporters.  Scumbag's joke of a FEMA response was certainly not going to even try to do a count much less an accurate one.   He was happy to go with that laughable number of 64 that the massively inept and corrupt and self-serving territorial government came up with.  But just like every lie that trumpsters defend to the max, the truth always emerges--sometimes right away and sometimes it takes longer.  

 
 
Dulay
7.5  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @7    2 months ago
To be fair, if Breitbart is prohibited here from being used as the source of a seed, why would you post a link to it? {SP}

To be fair, since Breitbart IS a prohibited source here, why is it allowed to be posted as a link? 

 
 
MrFrost
8  MrFrost    2 months ago

Once again, trump lies his ass off. How socking...Eye Roll It wont be long before 'someone' seeds an article defending trump and spins some wild conspiracy theory about how trump is right. 

And once again, trump blames the dems. Republican president, SCOTUS, Congress...."it's the dems fault". What a f*cking moron. 

 
 
MrFrost
11  MrFrost    2 months ago

Has trump offered any proof at all of his claims? Newp, and as usual, most of his base buys it as absolute fact. Next thing we know we will have some other idiot saying Sandy Hook was a hoax.... Oh wait. 

 
 
Skrekk
11.1  Skrekk  replied to  MrFrost @11    2 months ago
as usual, most of his base buys it as absolute fact.

"I love dumb people!"

 
 
Tessylo
11.1.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Skrekk @11.1    2 months ago

And Rump loves himself more than anyone and anything so . . . . 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Jasper2529
Freefaller
Sunshine
pat wilson
Jerry Verlinger


46 visitors