The U.S. has the 33rd-highest mortality rate, measured as deaths divided by total cases, out of the 134 countries tracked by Johns Hopkins. That means more than 100 countries have lower mortality rates than the U.S., although many of those countries reported comparatively few cases. When compared only to the ten countries with the most cases, the U.S. ranks as the second-lowest mortality rate as a percentage of total cases. That means eight of those countries hardest-hit by the coronavirus have higher mortality rates than the U.S…When mortality is measured per 100,000 people among the ten countries with the most cases, the U.S. ranks seventh, with Iran, Germany, and China reporting lower numbers of deaths per 100,000 people…the lack of testing in the United States could lead to an undercounting of overall COVID-19 cases. If the total number of cases is actually higher, that would mean the current data might be overstating the death rate.
https://www.city-journal.org/covid-19-point-of-care-rapid-test
In June 1981, the rapid-response newsletter of the Center for Disease Control, the Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report, published news of an unusual pneumonia in otherwise healthy young men in Los Angeles. It would take four years from those first recorded cases of AIDS to the first FDA-approved test for HIV, and over a decade before the first rapid test. And so, if just a year ago, any of my colleagues had told me that we could have a point-of-care rapid test after mere months of a new pathogen’s emergence, I would have regarded it as hopelessly optimistic.
Yet that is what the first-of-its-kind alliance between the U.S. biotechnology industry and the federal government has delivered. Just four months after the emergence of Covid-19, a dizzying array of tests is available to patients, physicians, and researchers. The initial tests, dependent on identifying the viral genome, have now been supplanted by much faster, much less expensive antibody tests. Unlike genomic tests, which require laboratory equipment and take several hours to complete, the new antibody-based tests are portable, and some don’t require any special materials other than saline. The antibody tests may answer questions not only about a patient’s current state but also about whether he has been exposed in the past by measuring antibodies that the immune system creates in response to the coronavirus. Finally, just today, the FDA announced that it is granting authorization for the first Covid-19 test that can be taken at home, affording an opportunity for many people in at-risk groups who have forgone testing up to now. By all measures, the emergency regime set up by the FDA has opened the floodgates of innovation on one of the most vexing problems of responding to a viral outbreak, and with great success.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/1-in-5-new-york-city-residents-infected-with-ccp-virus-antibody-testing-shows_3324032.html
Preliminary results from antibody testing in New York state found a 13.9 percent infection rate, officials announced Thursday, suggesting 2.7 million in the state have been infected by the CCP virus.
People who test positive are believed to have had the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes the COVID-19 disease, in the past. Some patients with virus never show symptoms and have no idea they were infected. Experts believe past infection could make people immune to the virus, though that theory has not been confirmed.
Preliminary results from 3,000 tests carried out across 19 New York counties found 13.9 percent of those tested have antibodies against COVID-19. But that figure climbed to 21.2 percent in New York City and dropped to 3.6 percent in counties outside the city, Long Island, and Westchester and Rockland counties.
The percent positive on Long Island was 16.7 percent and 11.7 percent in Westchester and Rockland counties combined.
Forty three percent of those tested were in New York City, 14.4 percent were on Long Island, 9.8 percent were in Westchester and Rockland counties, and 32.8 percent of them were in the rest of the state.
Antone Melton-Meaux (Democratic Party) is running for election to the U.S. House to represent Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District. He declared candidacy for the Democratic primary scheduled on August 11, 2020.
Read All About him at: https://antoneforcongress.com/about/
Israel/Palestine
For decades, the United States and Israel have represented a strong, united alliance in both the Middle East and beyond. In a region where too many people live under oppression and without basic freedoms, Israel has long stood as a beacon of liberal democracy. Our two countries are part of the same family of nations that recognize the rights of every citizen regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation. We believe in a free press and the rule of law. We believe in leaving a safer, healthier, and more just world for our children. We understand the importance of the land of Israel to the Jewish people.
It is vital to the national interests of both Israel and the United States that our two countries continue to be collaborative allies. It cannot be overstated how critical our Israeli partners are in pushing back against Iranian aggression, as well as setting the example of a vibrant democracy for its neighbors. This is why we should continue to support our mutual goals for the stability of the region and its people. Movements such as Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel (BDS) only serve to further the conflict, elevate the violence, and harm those they seek to help. That is why I will always oppose BDS.
https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/RIGHT-FROM-WRONG-Hell-hath-no-fury-like-Bibi-haters-scorned-625706
According to a Channel 13 poll, most Israelis support the coalition deal signed on Monday between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Blue and White leader Benny Gantz. The numbers (62% in favor and 22% opposed) are not surprising.
Following three Knesset elections that ended in deadlock and numerous negotiations that led to nowhere, the public is both fed up and beaten down. The prospect of returning to the ballot box for a fourth time – particularly with the country in the throes of the coronavirus crisis – made the very inking of the Netanyahu-Gantz agreement for an “emergency national unity government” palatable. Under any other circumstances, the deal in question would be cause for dismay, if not outrage.
With more than a quarter of the workforce unemployed and small businesses bankrupt due to forced closures, the provision for 36 ministers and up to 16 deputy ministers – not to mention a second official Prime Minister’s Residence – is pretty shocking to taxpayers of all ideological stripes. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that the deal, which requires the changing of Basic Laws, will pass muster with the Supreme Court.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/23/looks-like-trump-was-right-about-the-coronavirus-fatality-rate/
Two new studies suggest that President Trump was right in early March when he guessed the fatality rate for coronavirus is under 1 percent.
In early March, President Donald Trump was lambasted for saying on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show that he had a hunch the coronavirus fatality rate, which the World Health Organization pegged then at 3 to 4 percent, was in fact much lower, under 1 percent. Many commentators, myself included pointed out that the beginning of a pandemic medical crisis was not the time to be floating hunches. But, as we always knew was possible, it looks now like the president might well have been right.
New data from random antibody tests conducted in New York State suggest that as many as 2.7 million people statewide have had the coronavirus. That along with the just over 15,000 deaths that have occurred leads to a fatality rate for the virus of .5 percent according to Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Here is what Trump said on March 4:
“Well, I think the 3.4 percent is really a false number. Now, and this is just my hunch, and — but based on a lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this. Because a lot people will have this and it’s very mild. They’ll get better very rapidly. They don’t even see a doctor. They don’t even call a doctor.”
He went on to say:
“I think that that number (the WHO number) is very high. I think the number, personally, I would say the number is way under 1 percent.”
Democrats and media pundits blasted Trump for spreading “misinformation.”
While this data is preliminary, it is backed up by another study in Los Angeles that found 40 times more people had carried the virus then were previously known. This dropped the fatality rate in LA from 4.5 percent to .1-.3 percent.
It is difficult to stress how important these findings are. The 5-week lockdown that has destroyed the American economy was put in place by contemplating what looks to be rather absurd numbers by the WHO.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/a-joe-biden-scotus-list-would-be-good-news/
. . . for conservatives.
CBS News is reporting that liberal groups are calling on Joe Biden to release a list of potential Supreme Court nominees and “copy the playbook” of Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.
At first glance, this seems like a useful idea. Trump’s SCOTUS list was a highly effective campaign maneuver, shoring up wobbly support from originalists and social conservatives. Before the election, I was highly skeptical that Trump would adhere to his promises on judges, but he has, and for many of us, these picks are the most important legacy of his first term.
But what does Biden gain from assembling such a list? Probably not much. In fact, it could hurt him.
While it’s true that the liberal base is animated by resisting conservative justices, contemporary Democrats have never been exceptionally troubled by the philosophical disposition of their judges, mostly because their presidents never make mistakes.
Of course, it’s easy to make the right call when you’re picking from a group whose only unifying ideology of jurisprudence is malleably partisan. There is no Federalist Society laying down intellectually consistent cases on the left, because there can’t be any consistency. There is virtually no space between the Left’s conception of Constitution and the Left’s constantly evolving views and policy goals. And those goals increasingly lay outside the limits of traditional constitutional governance. Liberal judges exist to justify, literally, those policy goals, and in the vast majority of cases, they do.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/stacey-abrams-says-she-could-help-biden-by-turning-out-more-black-voters/ar-BB13653l?li=BBnb7Kz
Former Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams reiterated her interest in serving as presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s running mate, saying she would be valuable in ensuring people of color turnout to vote in the November election.
Abrams, who previously served as the minority leader in the Georgia state House of Representatives, has repeatedly voiced her interest in running as the Democratic Party’s vice-presidential candidate. The politician from Georgia reasserted that desire and explained why she’d make a good partner for Biden during an interview with CNN’s David Axelrod on the Thursday episode of his podcast The Axe Files.
“I have the deepest respect for every woman who is being talked about and who should be considered for this post,” Abrams told Axelrod. “But I know that for communities of color, particularly for the black community, there has got to be a recognition that their needs are met. And we have to have candidates who are able to not only speak to them, but turn them out.”
“There has to be an intentionality to turning them out. A lot of folks can do that. I’m one of those people,” she said. “And I have proven it by turning out more people of color in an election than anyone in 2018 did. Not by race, but by raw number.”
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/23/how-the-media-made-the-crisis-even-worse/
The news media in the UK and worldwide has rarely seemed more important or influential than during the coronavirus crisis. Web searches for ‘news’ have hit record highs, with Covid-19 dominating more than any issue on record.
The British government lists journalists as ‘key workers’; media sources praise them as the ‘unsung heroes’ of the crisis. Top news correspondents have become the main public interface with the authorities, questioning government ministers and experts in front of millions at daily briefings. When The Sunday Times published a lengthy attack on the UK government response to coronavirus, headlined ‘The 38 days when Britain sleepwalked into disaster’, the UK government felt obliged to issue an unprecedented rebuttal of the allegations that was almost as long.
The coronavirus crisis has clearly demonstrated the value of good journalism. Yet the response of too much of the media has also shown how bad journalism can help to make a terrible situation even worse.
Here are a few quick notes on some problems with the media response to Covid-19. Most of these issues are not new. The crisis has acted as a catalyst and accelerated some dangerous trends that were already becoming evident in the media BC – Before Coronavirus.
Apocalypse News
The coronavirus crisis is quite real and bad enough. It surely does not need any sensationalism or exaggeration. Yet too often it has seemed that the worst-case scenario makes the best and biggest headlines. When a senior war correspondent from a top British newspaper can write that, in corona-hit London, ‘popping out to buy milk might prove as deadly as driving on Kabul’s most suicide-bombed road’, you know that journalism has taken a wrong turn towards apocalypticism.
https://amgreatness.com/2020/04/22/the-chinese-coronavirus-is-this-generations-tiananmen-test/
We are suffering a catastrophe of the Chinese Communist Party’s making. It must be held accountable, made to pay for the destruction it has caused, putting every lever of American power on the table to ensure it.
Observers of the Chinese coronavirus crisis have cast it, with good reason, as a potential Chernobyl for General Secretary Xi Jinping’s Chinese Communist Party regime.
America, too, is faced with a challenge with relevant historical parallels, separate and apart from the wartime comparisons regarding the mobilization and sacrifices of our countrymen.
As with the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989, we are once again at an inflection point in our relationship with China, faced with the carnage caused most directly by a malevolent CCP.
The Chinese coronavirus crisis may well represent this generation’s Tiananmen Square test.
The test is as follows: With the CCP inflicting incalculable costs in blood and treasure through its unique role in spreading the coronavirus, and its related menacing behavior, will we demand reparations, or will we let the regime off scot-free, emboldening it, and encouraging it to act with impunity and still more reckless abandon in its quest for hegemony going forward?
We failed this test in 1989.
Then, when presented with the image of “Tank Man,” we did something even worse than turning our back on him. Our immediate response to the CCP’s massacre of democracy protesters was toothless. But ultimately, we proceeded still further to embrace the Communist regime, effectively rewarding its villainy by integrating it into the global economic, financial, and geopolitical system.
