The Left's Coronavirus Narrative Is a Myth
By: David Harsanyi (National Review)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A man walks by an illuminated flag of The United States as the coronavirus outbreak continues in Manhattan, New York City, March 13, 2020. (Andrew Kelly/Reuters)
To this point, 71 percent more Americans have died in New York nursing homes than have died in the entire state of Florida, which not only has a larger population but a population that skews older. To this point, New York's death rate has been ten times larger than Florida's. So, naturally, liberals are busy concocting a narrative that holds that the failures of the American response to coronavirus have been the fault of Trumpian nihilists in the Red States.
The "toxic imbecility" of Republicans is getting people killed, writes Max Boot. "Trumpism, not polarization, drives America's disastrous coronavirus politics" says Ezra Klein. Some pundits who push this myth, Paul Krugman in particular, had even had the temerity to suggest that the country look to New York State for advice.
I don't know what tomorrow will bring, but today it's clear that NYC has been the key spreader of the infection nationally, and clear, too, that NYC was unable to flatten the curve.
Deaths per million:
New Jersey: 1,708.7
New York: 1,651.6
Connecticut: 1,212.2
Georgia: 264.2
Florida: 163.2
Texas: 86.1
There are numerous factors beyond our control that created this reality — perhaps the weather, or the population density, or centralized nature of the city, or whatever else researchers will uncover one day. There's a reason why San Francisco recorded fewer than 50 coronavirus deaths and New York City has about 18,000, and it's probably not the ideology of its mayors. But that works both ways around. There is simply no way that an open-minded person can arrive at the conclusion that red states bear some unique responsibility for this tragedy.
Let's remember that initial national lockdown efforts were intended to flatten the curve so that hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed with COVID cases, not to shutter the economy in perpetuity (or until a Democrat wins the White House) to ensure that no one gets sick anymore. Other than the New York area, which is led by a governor who made perhaps the single most deadly policy mistake in the entire crisis, this goal has largely been achieved. In the United States, the death rate (the stat that matters more than any other) has been as low, or lower, than most major European nations:
Deaths per million:
Belgium: 854.0
UK: 657.7
Spain: 606.9
Italy: 575.3
Sweden: 523.7
France: 445.5
U.S.: 397.8
(All the foreign countries above, incidentally, have some form of socialized health-care system, which I'm constantly being assured by liberals would have mitigated the effects of coronavirus.)
Most nations that have done better than the United States in this regard (sans Germany) are far smaller, and have an easier time containing spread by shutting down borders; or are more authoritarian, with the kind of pliant populations and governments that some U.S. pundits seem to desire.
There was always going to be an accompanying spike with more testing and reopening, and states need to calibrate their reactions as the facts on the ground change. But, to borrow a phrase, this is primarily a question of science. The crude partisan tale we keep hearing regarding red states, on the other hand, is little more than a fiction.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
91 visitors
The facts are clear. The northeast isn't seeing as many cases, but that's where much of the death took place.
BTW deaths are down
Trump and his supporters are off topic
Thanks for seeding this great article that sets the record straight.
There are numerous factors beyond our control that created this reality
There are factors that are within our control, but too many are not taking them seriously.
Masks
Social Distancing
Avoiding large crowds
Hand washing
Staying at home whenever possible
I think those at most risk have taken the precautions. It's the younger crowd that seems to feel invincible
There has been a rise in infections in younger adults but sadly they still think they will be ok based on their age.
I agree.
As of May 4,2020, COVID survivors were no longer welcome as volunteers in some parts of the US military.
If it's just a flu or a cold, why was this even spoken out loud, let alone a Pentagon press release?
A few weeks later the Pentagon "revised the rules" to only exclude "hospitalized" survivors of COVID19.
Questions were asked about the West Point cadets in quarantine...leading to more discussions.
The current position has been revised again, to only exclude those testing positive and/or still suffering from side effects.
The pentagons reasoning is that the young, already infected, may become infected again,
or cost them in some other significant health related issue down the line.
Where are the experts? If you had it, do you build up immunity and cease being a carrier?
Any definitive answers?
No definitive evidence that recovering from COVID-19 means you cannot be re-infected. Recovered patients do have anti-bodies but they do not last long in the system. So the immunity, if it exists, would be short-lived.
Looks like the answer, today, is that it does not look like recovering from COVID-19 provides much protection from re-infection. Stay tuned, there is plenty of research going on to better understand the corona virus and its sociological effects.
So again, we have another unanswered question from the experts. It's easy to see why there is so much confusion and why the military is taking no chances.
If that is so, then what good is a vaccine? The vaccine produces the same short-lived anti-bodies, so what now, we re-vaccinate every 3 months?
Why do you presume that the experts will have all the answers? The experts (the underlying scientists) are still just human beings trying to unravel a mystery. They will naturally deliver information based on progress so we will start with knowing very little about the virus and gradually improve over time.
If a vaccine only produced short-lived antibodies then it would be of limited use. Why do you presume that a vaccine would necessarily mimic the frailty of natural antibodies?
Isn't the purpose of a vaccine to get the body to produce "natural anti-bodies"? I had chicken pox when I was 4 months never had them again, I had the mumps around 8 never had it again, I've be vaccinated against measles and polio never had them at all (my sister had the measles vaccine and contracted measles a few years later, found out it was a bad batch). So why is the corvid19 anti-bodies so frail?
I don't assume they would have all the answers, but I do want clarity and honesty from them.
A “ 60 Minutes” interview from early March 2020 with Dr. Anthony Fauci, has the leading expert saying "there was no reason people in the U.S. needed to wear a mask."
Then later he admitted lying about it because there might not be enough masks for medical workers. That doesn't generate much faith from the American people in the so called "experts" who btw told us initially that we would shut down for "two weeks" so "hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed."
No excuses for any of it. The experts have to be just as accountable as anyone else.
They appear to be well on their way to coming to their own conclusions.
At least the active duty who have malaria, can take some solace in the fact that the governmnet has 63 million doses of HCQ on hand for them.
Yes, but you presume that the only thing the vaccine would do is form the exact same antibodies seen in COVID-19 patients. If that is all the finally released vaccine can do then I will again note that the vaccine would be of limited use. I expect that the eventual vaccine will be substantially better than that (likely will involve the use of T cells).
Viruses are incredibly complex entities with very different properties. It is meaningless to compare polio to coronavirus other than at a superficial level (i.e. they are both in the broad category known as 'virus').
Quite an abrupt segue from scientists not being omniscient to the strategic lie of a talking head.
Dr. Fauci is one scientist who is currently operating in a political role. The experts (per my comments) are the scientists doing the research and analyzing the results. These experts are learning more each day about this complex pandemic and in particular the evolving state of coronavirus variants. They will continue to learn but this all takes time because, after all, these are simply human beings working on a very complex problem.
Well of course they should be held accountable. But you recognize that there are a lot of people operating in different roles and saying a lot of things. Dr. Fauci's strategic deception is not something I approve of (even though I understand why he did this).
That said, do you dismiss all that an individual says once you catch that individual in a falsehood? Think very carefully about this because this is a probative question.
At the end of the linked 60 Minutes interview:
No I don't.
Then just say that. The American people would have appreciated the truth.
He did, I quoted it. Sheesh.
I agree with your position; neither do I.
Dr. Fauci made a calculation apparently to help preserve the face masks (then in short supply) for front-line medical personnel. His method was deception. While I am no fan of this practice, I can understand why he acted as he did. That falsehood does not cause me to mistrust the balance of what Fauci offers and certainly would not cause me to generalize into an attitude that scientific recommendations in general on this pandemic should not be taken as credible (as many on this forum seem to argue).
Good for him. So maybe the deception was the result of an incomplete answer that was completed at the end of the interview.
The early and ongoing need to politicize this - such that the sickness is actually someone's fault and political points can be scored - is depressing. We have a lot of people who are way too obsessed with political power. They need to reexamine their priorities.
It also distracts us from issues that might actually matter. I see a lot of ordinary Americans who don't seem to believe that they should be doing anything to limit the spread themselves. And that impulse to do whatever the hell they feel like doing doesn't seem limited to a single political party or ideology.
The first thing that comes to mind is the political symbolism of the mask. Some have claimed it to virtue signal, yet they have no virtue. I like seeing the reporters at the WH press briefings who wear the mask during the briefing and quickly remove them when they think the camera's are gone.
I wear the masks when appropriate. You don't need one taking a walk by yourself on a deserted street or sitting out in a boat fishing on a lake. (Fishing! - that sounds like a pandemic pastime! - I might take it up)
I see people in cars, by themselves, wearing a mask. I just can't even imagine what for.
They're scared. We have some who don't think it will affect them and others who are petrified. There has been a lot of bad reporting mixed with confusion and politics.
Seems to me that they have not spent enough time understanding the recommended preventative measures and why. I suspect they only have in their mind 'must wear a mask' without knowledge of the actual purpose.
Thye don't want to take the chance of giving the virus to any flying insects that might be in the car.
It’s all about their control and our obedience...
There is a simple explanation for this. Until now, the disease has been basically confined to a small group of states, which were about the same size as most European countries. Now that the disease is more widespread, we (hopefully not) might start to see similar numbers.
I actually read the Op/Ed that the seed critiques and NOWHERE does the author claim that 'Red States' are responsible for anything. Boot sites multiple GOVERNORS and decries Trump's lack of leadership dealing with the pandemic.
I note that the author of the seed doesn't support that claim with any evidence.
NYC sure as hell HAS flattened the curve. What planet is this idiot living on?
I disagree. I think the total number of deaths is the stat that matters more than any other. In that and new confirmed cases, the US is #1 with a bullet.
Max Boot, Ezran Klein and Paul Krugman were all quoted there. If that's not enough one need only look at how the New York Times frames it nearly every day.
I note that the author of the seed doesn't support that claim with any evidence.
There is three quotes for all to see.
NYC sure as hell HAS flattened the curve.
Hint: the operative word: was
I think the total number of deaths is the stat that matters more than any other. In that and new confirmed cases
More important that the diminished death rate? Hummm, I wonder why?
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. I addressed one of them.
That would be off topic.
NONE of which says a fucking thing about NYC being "the key spreader of the infection nationally".
Why deflect?
Pffft.
If he was speaking of the past, WHY did he give the CURRENT death per million data?
Dr. Fauci said TODAY:
Yes, I heard that! He doesn't have to worry about anyone in my age group. We stay the course.
Then why did you ask me these questions: