US In countries keeping the coronavirus at bay, experts watch U.S. case numbers with alarm

In countries keeping the coronavirus at bay, experts watch U.S. case numbers with alarm
By
Rick Noack
June 19, 2020 at 10:38 a.m. GMT-4
As coronavirus cases surge in the U.S. South and West, health experts in countries with falling case numbers are watching with a growing sense of alarm and disbelief, with many wondering why virus-stricken U.S. states continue to reopen and why the advice of scientists is often ignored.

“It really does feel like the U.S. has given up,” said Siouxsie Wiles, an infectious-diseases specialist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand — a country that has confirmed only three new cases over the past three weeks and where citizens have now largely returned to their pre-coronavirus routines.
“I can’t imagine what it must be like having to go to work knowing it’s unsafe,” Wiles said of the U.S.-wide economic reopening. “It’s hard to see how this ends. There are just going to be more and more people infected, and more and more deaths. It’s heartbreaking.”

China’s actions over the past week stand in stark contrast to those of the United States. In the wake of a new cluster of more than 150 new cases that emerged in Beijing, authorities sealed off neighborhoods, launched a mass testing campaign and imposed travel restrictions.

Meanwhile, President Trump maintains that the United States will not shut down a second time, although a surge in cases has persuaded governors in some states, including Arizona, to back off their opposition to mandatory face coverings in public.
Commentators and experts in Europe, where cases have continued to decline, voiced concerns over the state of the U.S. response. A headline on the website of Germany’s public broadcaster read: “Has the U.S. given up its fight against coronavirus?” Switzerland’s conservative Neue Zürcher Zeitung newspaper concluded, “U.S. increasingly accepts rising covid-19 numbers.”

KEA63WN4DFFOHAQLKJMMO3W3UE.jpg


“The only thing one can say with certainty: There’s nothing surprising about this development,” a journalist wrote in the paper, referring to crowded U.S. beaches and pools during Memorial Day weekend in May.

Some European health experts fear that the rising U.S. caseloads are rooted in a White House response that has at times deviated from the conclusions of leading scientists.
“Many scientists appeared to have reached an adequate assessment of the situation early on [in the United States], but this didn’t translate into a political action plan,” said Thomas Gerlinger, a professor of health sciences at the University of Bielefeld in Germany. For instance, it took a long time for the United States to ramp up testing capacity.
Whereas the U.S. response to the crisis has at times appeared disconnected from American scientists’ publicly available findings, U.S. researchers’ conclusions informed the actions of foreign governments.

“A large portion of [Germany’s] measures that proved effective was based on studies by leading U.S. research institutes,” said Karl Lauterbach, a Harvard-educated epidemiologist who is a member of the German parliament for the Social Democrats, who are part of the coalition government. Lauterbach advised the German parliament and the government during the pandemic.

Despite its far older population, Germany has confirmed fewer than 9,000 coronavirus-linked deaths, compared with almost 120,000 in the United States. (Germany has about one-fourth of the United States’ population.)
Lauterbach cited in particular the work of Marc Lipsitch, a professor of epidemiology at Harvard University, whose research with colleagues recently said that forms of social distancing may have to remain in place into 2022. Lipsitch’s work, Lauterbach said, helped him to convince German Vice Chancellor Olaf Scholz that the pandemic will be “the new normal” for the time being, and it impacted German officials’ thinking on how long their strategy should be in place.

Regarding the effectiveness of face masks, Lauterbach added, “we almost entirely relied on U.S. studies.” Germany was among the first major European countries to make face masks mandatory on public transport and in supermarkets.

Lipsitch said Thursday that he was not previously aware of the impact of his research on German decision-making, but he added that he has spoken to representatives of several other foreign governments in recent weeks, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and officials or advisers from Canada, New Zealand and South Korea.
Even though Lipsitch cautioned it was impossible for him to say how or if his conversations influenced foreign governments’ thinking, he credited the overall European response as “science-based and a sincere effort to find out what experts in the field believe is a range of possible scenarios and consequences of decisions.”

Lipsitch said he presented some of his research to a White House group in the early stages of the U.S. outbreak but said the Trump administration’s response to the pandemic did not reflect his conclusions. “I think they have cherry-picked models that at each point looked the most rosy, and fundamentally not engaged with the magnitude of the problem,” he said.

Lipsitch said Thursday that he was not previously aware of the impact of his research on German decision-making, but he added that he has spoken to representatives of several other foreign governments in recent weeks, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and officials or advisers from Canada, New Zealand and South Korea.
Even though Lipsitch cautioned it was impossible for him to say how or if his conversations influenced foreign governments’ thinking, he credited the overall European response as “science-based and a sincere effort to find out what experts in the field believe is a range of possible scenarios and consequences of decisions.”

Lipsitch said he presented some of his research to a White House group in the early stages of the U.S. outbreak but said the Trump administration’s response to the pandemic did not reflect his conclusions. “I think they have cherry-picked models that at each point looked the most rosy, and fundamentally not engaged with the magnitude of the problem,” he said.

Meanwhile, several U.S. states have reopened despite rising case numbers.
“I don’t understand that logic,” said Reinhard Busse, a health-care management professor at the Technical University of Berlin.

Lauterbach said that even though most Germans disapproved of Trump before the pandemic, even his staunchest critics in Germany were surprised by how even respected U.S. institutions, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, struggled to respond to the crisis.
The CDC, for instance, initially botched the rollout of test kits in the early stages of the outbreak.
“Like many other aspects of our country, the CDC’s ability to function well is being severely handicapped by the interference coming from the White House,” said Harvard epidemiologist Lipsitch. “All of us in public health very much hope that this is not a permanent condition of the CDC.”

Some observers fear the damage will be difficult to reverse. “I’ve always thought of the CDC as a reliable and trusted source of information,” said Wiles, the New Zealand specialist. “Not anymore.”

---------

LINK
 
Oh goody, more pro-China articles from the Western media.
this is more european vs american. but the conclusion is wrong, the problem wasnt the white house, the problem was no cordinationen between state governments and the use of alot of stupid measurements that hurt the willingness of people to follow orders.
the white house has very limited power in this case.
 
In my hospital, we've seen a lot of cases and a good amount of deaths (and in fact that's why I haven't been on the Farms as much during the last few months; I'm an ID specialist, so needless to say, I've been somewhat busy), but 90+% of those deaths were either very old people, people with chronic, preexisting illnesses that targeted organs COVID can also target (heart, liver, kidneys), people with moderate-severe disabilities, smokers, addicts, obese people, homeless people who came/where brought to the ER, the very poor who waited until they were on death's door before coming in and who didn't take care of their health very well even before all this, etc.

Honestly, callous as it may sound, these were not people who were currently contributing much to society (you could perhaps say that when society sends us its Wu Flu victims, they are not sending us their best), so if I'm keeping it 100, society was in a lot more danger from having the economy obliterated because everywhere but fast food and Walmart was shut down than it was from a fat 70 year old smoker with chronic kidney disease on SSDI dying. This is the point some people in the GOP were tip-toeing around, but were too big of cucks to just say outright: better that a ton of fat, old, sick, addicted, homeless, disabled, welfare recipients (and a few younger, healthier people, sure) die than our economy gets so permafucked that the food/medicine/etc. supply collapses and possibly tens of millions die; and that's not even touching on the fact that conditions that desperate are what breed violent, extremist revolutions, which would kill even more.

A lot more people are gonna die from where we're at now, but we're going to come out of it with a much less strained welfare system and a society whose populace has shifted (to what degree, it's too soon to tell) towards younger, more productive, healthier people with better life habits, since those are the ones who aren't dying; this disease seems to fixate on the chaff and leave the wheat largely alone.
 
It's okay because the Kiwi Farm alt-right manlets who barely passed high school science told me that it's just a cold and that they know more than epidemiologists
You mean the same epidemiologists whose predictions have been repeatedly wrong by an order of magnitude? Or is it the same experts who believe protesting racism is more beneficial to public health than stopping the spread of coronavirus?
 
You mean the same epidemiologists whose predictions have been repeatedly wrong by an order of magnitude? Or is it the same experts who believe protesting racism is more beneficial to public health than stopping the spread of coronavirus?

You should look up the meaning of "order of magnitude", because you apparently don't understand what the term means. They've not been wrong because the lockdowns worked. We are now seeing cases go back up because Karen wanted to get her hair cut.

Epidemiologists haven't said to go protest (although dumbass politicians did).
 
90+% of those deaths were either very old people, people with chronic, preexisting illnesses that targeted organs COVID can also target (heart, liver, kidneys), people with moderate-severe disabilities, smokers, addicts, obese people, homeless people who came/where brought to the ER, the very poor who waited until they were on death's door before coming in and who didn't take care of their health very well even before all this, etc.

Now I'm kinda curious, and I probably already know the answer to this, but does that mean the constant deaths from China were from people that were already unhealthy to begin with? And if that's the case, does that mean the areas with the least numbers are technically the most healthiest?

I ask because I find it ironic that for a country (the USA) that is absolutely obsessed with being healthy, the numbers of infected victims are as high as OP's chart pic.

This is the point some people in the GOP were tip-toeing around, but were too big of cucks to just say outright: better that a ton of fat, old, sick, addicted, homeless, disabled, welfare recipients (and a few younger, healthier people, sure) die than our economy gets so permafucked that the food/medicine/etc. supply collapses and possibly tens of millions die; and that's not even touching on the fact that conditions that desperate are what breed violent, extremist revolutions, which would kill even more.

This bothers me more than it should. At one point I'm used to our government lying to us, but to purposefully withhold information like that is just outright retarded. If they were just honest from the get-go, a lot of shit could have been prevented, but it almost seems like the government WANTS the economy to crash and burn.
 
Now I'm kinda curious, and I probably already know the answer to this, but does that mean the constant deaths from China were from people that were already unhealthy to begin with? And if that's the case, does that mean the areas with the least numbers are technically the most healthiest?

I ask because I find it ironic that for a country (the USA) that is absolutely obsessed with being healthy, the numbers of infected victims are as high as OP's chart pic.



This bothers me more than it should. At one point I'm used to our government lying to us, but to purposefully withhold information like that is just outright retarded. If they were just honest from the get-go, a lot of shit could have been prevented, but it almost seems like the government WANTS the economy to crash and burn.

Most infected aren't threatened by it, from my understanding. If you are like me and have severe asthma, you could be killed pretty easily, but most people are not going to need a ventilator.
 
@Glad I couldn't help I hate to be a filthy centrist here but why the fuck isn't there a both sides/Americans in general option for the poll?

No one has been able to maintain a consistent opinion on it for even two fucking months.

Conservitards
  • China has unleashed a bioweapon, shut down all immigration and flights from China NOW!
  • Its just the flu, Trump has done nothing wrong! I'll die before I have to wear a mask!
  • *protests to open up the country in tight crowds with no masks*
Libtards
  • Its literally the flu; Go hug an Asian you racist! Don't let Trump restrict immigration on the excuse of this overblown pandemic!
  • Why didn't Trump immediately shut down the borders! We should have had immediate action on this pandemic!
  • *riots across the country ripping down statues with iconoclastic zeal in tight crowds with no masks*
 
Back