U.S. savages WHO as it promises pandemic review, but China pledges $2 billion

[Sujo]

24 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Trashing the US economy, which Trump is rightly reluctant to do, would cost far more deaths than the glorified flu epidemic which caused the WHO to get their knickers in such a twist.

Then why did trump close down businesses.

[Eric Loh]

Rest of the world lead by WHO are moving along well without USA. They are working and collaborating on helping poorer countries like Africa with medical aids and equipment. They care less for Trump’s political agenda and laugh at his 30 days demand for change. Under WHO, more vaccines are being developed by combining the talents of countries and some of the candidate vaccines are moving to phase 2 soon. China will soon developed a drug for treatment and immunity. By distancing US from global collaboration, Trump has disadvantage his own people from getting the best health care. 

[ChouDoufu]

5 hours ago, Dap said:

No one is going to argue with a $2 Billion donation!

but that's exactly what trump is claiming!

 

our assessed fees are 5x china's (two years in arrears), plus we donate an additional 400 million per year, yet trump is claiming somehow that the who is "china-centric."

 

now the claim is that china paying their dues (on time), paying our dues (on time), and now making approximately the same donation is a bribe and puts the who in china's back pocket.

 

wouldn't our major payments mean they were, as trump phrased it in his letter, "serving america's interests"?

 

propaganda is confusing sometimes.

 

 

[Krataiboy]

2 hours ago, Sujo said:

Then why did trump close down businesses.

He hasn't. Blame panicky state governors like New York's Cuomo.

[ChouDoufu]

 

 

3 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

If Trump is smart, he won't waste another cent backing of a UN agency clearly in the pockets of the Chinese and messianic vaccines "king" Bill Gates.

 

One can only speculate how many lives were lost as a result of the WHO'S rash public endorsement of China's initial claim that the COVID virus could not be spread by human transmission.

 

 

 

 

when did china claim "COVID virus was not spread by human transmission."

 

there have been so many articles and reports, i can't seem to find that.

[pedro01]

So WHO are going to investigate COVID - focusing on the role of China and WHO after being given US$2BN from China?

[ChouDoufu]

4 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

So WHO are going to investigate COVID - focusing on the role of China and WHO after being given US$2BN from China?

would you prefer they investigate after the who is given US$2BN from the usa?

 

oh.

[simple1]

6 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

So WHO are going to investigate COVID - focusing on the role of China and WHO after being given US$2BN from China?

trump's lack of international leadership and leanings to isolationism have provided openings for further Chinese influence. trump didn't address the WHO conference on the proposed Covid investigation, no surprise China took the lead.

[Krataiboy]

5 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

 

when did china claim "COVID virus was not spread by human transmission."

 

there have been so many articles and reports, i can't seem to find that.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/who-trashed-for-sharing-chinese-study-claiming-humans-cant-spread-coronavirus-during-outbreaks-onset

[ChouDoufu]

51 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/who-trashed-for-sharing-chinese-study-claiming-humans-cant-spread-coronavirus-during-outbreaks-onset

hahaha!  that old twoot again?  haven't we been over this before?  we'll ignore the report of limited transmission announced during their press briefing the very same day, making this twattering meaningless. 

 

please read your claim and compare to the actual quote from within the article below:

 

you stated:  "China's initial claim that the COVID virus could not be spread by human transmission. "

 

from your link:  "Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in Wuhan, China," the organization tweeted on Jan. 14.

 

it's usually a good idea to read the entire article, not just skim the headline, as oftentimes the editors take liberties when monetizing the clickbait headers.

 

 

Edited May 20, 2020 by ChouDoufu

[Dap]

17 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

but that's exactly what trump is claiming!

 

our assessed fees are 5x china's (two years in arrears), plus we donate an additional 400 million per year, yet trump is claiming somehow that the who is "china-centric."

 

now the claim is that china paying their dues (on time), paying our dues (on time), and now making approximately the same donation is a bribe and puts the who in china's back pocket.

 

wouldn't our major payments mean they were, as trump phrased it in his letter, "serving america's interests"?

 

propaganda is confusing sometimes.

 

 

What I meant but failed to state clearly enough was that the WHO is not going to complain whatsoever where the $2 Billion comes from and China (meanwhile) comes out smelling like a rose.

[Krataiboy]

17 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

hahaha!  that old twoot again?  haven't we been over this before?  we'll ignore the report of limited transmission announced during their press briefing the very same day, making this twattering meaningless. 

 

please read your claim and compare to the actual quote from within the article below:

 

you stated:  "China's initial claim that the COVID virus could not be spread by human transmission. "

 

from your link:  "Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in Wuhan, China," the organization tweeted on Jan. 14.

 

it's usually a good idea to read the entire article, not just skim the headline, as oftentimes the editors take liberties when monetizing the clickbait headers.

 

 

Pointless hair-splitting.

[ChouDoufu]

1 hour ago, Krataiboy said:

Pointless hair-splitting.

pointless?  splitting of hairs?  it's the difference between visiting your friendly local physician for a covid19 test about a feeling you might have had the virus already, and being told either:

 

1)  from the symptoms you describe having last fall, i suspect you may have been exposed to an early strain of the new coronavirus.  your tests, however, came back negative.  your blood contains no antibodies, and there are no signs of lung damage.  you have some liver damage, a potential sign of covid infection, but also could be related to your excessive drinking.   so there is no clear evidence of infection. 

 

2)  no, you did not have covid 19.

 

not pointless.  it's the difference between reading for comprehension and reading for confirmation bias.

[Krataiboy]

31 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

pointless?  splitting of hairs?  it's the difference between visiting your friendly local physician for a covid19 test about a feeling you might have had the virus already, and being told either:

 

1)  from the symptoms you describe having last fall, i suspect you may have been exposed to an early strain of the new coronavirus.  your tests, however, came back negative.  your blood contains no antibodies, and there are no signs of lung damage.  you have some liver damage, a potential sign of covid infection, but also could be related to your excessive drinking.   so there is no clear evidence of infection. 

 

2)  no, you did not have covid 19.

 

not pointless.  it's the difference between reading for comprehension and reading for confirmation bias.

Irrelevant nonsense.

[jcsmith]

On 5/20/2020 at 5:09 PM, Krataiboy said:

He hasn't. Blame panicky state governors like New York's Cuomo.

Panicky? There's nearly 29,000 dead bodies in New York, and over 366,000 infected. You could bet that would be many magnitudes higher without the shut downs.

[Krataiboy]

2 hours ago, jcsmith said:

Panicky? There's nearly 29,000 dead bodies in New York, and over 366,000 infected. You could bet that would be many magnitudes higher without the shut downs.

There is no proof shutdowns reduce overall mortality rates. There is, however, plenty of evidence that Cuomo's decision to return still-infectious elderly patients from hospitals to care homes fuelled their disproportionate contribution to COVID mortality figures.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2020/05/15/new-york-coronavirus-reporting-nursing-home-deaths-undercounting/

[metisdead]

A post using a trolling reference to President Trump has been removed. 

[simple1]

52 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

There is no proof shutdowns reduce overall mortality rates.

Most governments clearly state Covid mitigation policies have minimised the spread of Covid infection, therefore reducing Covid related deaths. As an example where government had not put in-place mitigation strategies e.g. Brazil Covid injections and deaths are sky rocketing. Same outcome with trump administration delaying mitigation strategies for weeks. Where is the credible link to support your claim?

[Krataiboy]

4 hours ago, simple1 said:

Most governments clearly state Covid mitigation policies have minimised the spread of Covid infection, therefore reducing Covid related deaths. As an example where government had not put in-place mitigation strategies e.g. Brazil Covid injections and deaths are sky rocketing. Same outcome with trump administration delaying mitigation strategies for weeks. Where is the credible link to support your claim?

Of course no government which has taken the lockdown route is going to admit they were wrong to do so. But that is not evidence that lockdowns work. 

 

The fact is, right now there isn't any proof either way. I know because I looked long and hard for an independent study. It seems you fared no better.

 

We'll just have bate or breath until the pandemic is over for a proper assessment of which policies did and didn't work. Hopefully, next time around, the world wil fare better.

[candide]

36 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Of course no government which has taken the lockdown route is going to admit they were wrong to do so. But that is not evidence that lockdowns work. 

 

The fact is, right now there isn't any proof either way. I know because I looked long and hard for an independent study. It seems you fared no better.

 

We'll just have bate or breath until the pandemic is over for a proper assessment of which policies did and didn't work. Hopefully, next time around, the world wil fare better.

Maths prove it. Whatever the coefficient used, reducing the number of contacts hinders  the spread.

[Crazy Alex]

It makes sense China would pledge such a large amount of money to WHO, given WHO does their bidding. All the more reason to abandon that corrupt, useless organization- which just happens to be run by a terrorist supporter.

[sscc]

On 5/18/2020 at 7:28 PM, Mama Noodle said:

 

2 billion over 2 years is literal pocket change. 

 

 

 

Is this amount literal pocket Change for USA   ?   

 

 

 

 

[Mama Noodle]

Just now, sscc said:

Is this amount literal pocket Change for USA   ?   

 

The USA has provided 10 (yes TEN) Billion US dollars for international coronavirus relief. 

 

That is compared to Chinas pocket-change 2 Billion 'over 2 years' 

 

So yeah, China sucks. 

[Krataiboy]

10 hours ago, candide said:

Maths prove it. Whatever the coefficient used, reducing the number of contacts hinders  the spread.

Reality is making a mockery of the maths. Lockdown loony bins like the UK, US, Spain, France and Italy have the world's highest COVID death rates, as well as the most economic damage.

 

Imperial College modellers thought they'd got the maths right when they predicted up to 500,000 dead in the UK - more than ten times the current total.

 

It's a shame nobody's bothered doing the maths for people who have died or will suffer future premature death caused by lockdown. Some analysts predict the final figure will be higher than the COVID toll.

[Eric Loh]

3 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

The USA has provided 10 (yes TEN) Billion US dollars for international coronavirus relief. 

 

That is compared to Chinas pocket-change 2 Billion 'over 2 years' 

 

So yeah, China sucks. 

Sadly for fighting diseases such as HIV/AIDS, Ebola, Malaria and mostly from previous governments. Very little by Trump’s government for fighting corona virus. China again embarrass Trump by their hefty donation for global fight against the virus. 

 

[simple1]

12 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Of course no government which has taken the lockdown route is going to admit they were wrong to do so. But that is not evidence that lockdowns work. 

 

The fact is, right now there isn't any proof either way. I know because I looked long and hard for an independent study. It seems you fared no better.

 

We'll just have bate or breath until the pandemic is over for a proper assessment of which policies did and didn't work. Hopefully, next time around, the world wil fare better.

Article below, not peer reviewed.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/us-coronavirus-deaths-avoided-lockdowns-imposed-two-weeks-earlier-nyt-2020-5

[Opl]

12 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Of course no government which has taken the lockdown route is going to admit they were wrong to do so. But that is not evidence that lockdowns work. 

 

The fact is, right now there isn't any proof either way. I know because I looked long and hard for an independent study. It seems you fared no better.

 

We'll just have bate or breath until the pandemic is over for a proper assessment of which policies did and didn't work. Hopefully, next time around, the world wil fare better.

Wuhan without lockdown.. 

[Krataiboy]

11 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Article below, not peer reviewed.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/us-coronavirus-deaths-avoided-lockdowns-imposed-two-weeks-earlier-nyt-2020-5

"Could have been. . ."  "Researchers estimate". . .  "This implies that. . . "

 

Sounds about as iffy as the modelling from the opposite side of the Pond that got us all into this mess in the first place.

 

I'm waiting for somebody to model the costs of lockdowns in terms of social and economic terms. Now THAT should make interesting reading.

 

 

[nausea]

Whenever I look at a review, or survey, or whatever, I always look at who is funding it. The US is on a losing wicket if you ask me. Hopefully, they'll put up a good fight before the inevitable happens. Like you can retire with good grace or go the UK route. The UK reminds me of my miniature poodle, small size but big heart.

[candide]

1 hour ago, Krataiboy said:

Reality is making a mockery of the maths. Lockdown loony bins like the UK, US, Spain, France and Italy have the world's highest COVID death rates, as well as the most economic damage.

 

Imperial College modellers thought they'd got the maths right when they predicted up to 500,000 dead in the UK - more than ten times the current total.

 

It's a shame nobody's bothered doing the maths for people who have died or will suffer future premature death caused by lockdown. Some analysts predict the final figure will be higher than the COVID toll.

Your logic is completely flawed. They introduced shutdowns because there was a strong outburst.already occurring. Hence the high number of deaths.

 

When I talked about maths, I talked about very elementary school maths, such as:

John is infected

Case one: he stays in a room and never has any close contact with anyone. How many people can he infect?

Case two: he has close contacts with 10 persons

Case three: he has close contacts with 20 persons

Etc...

 

Then the difficulty is to estimate the infection coefficient. What is the % of I contact persons infected. That, among other coefficients, determines model results.