hotair--2020-04-01--Classified U.S. intel report: China is hiding the true scope of its coronavirus cases and deaths

This is like finding out that U.S. intelligence has formally concluded that China is maintaining concentration camps for Uighurs .
We all already know .
But it ’ s gratifying to see them call a lie a lie .
Next they ’ re going to tell us that Russia and Iran are hiding the scope of the outbreak within their own borders .
It seemed beyond belief that a country with 80,000+ official cases of a highly infectious novel virus somehow brought the number down to zero new cases in the span of about 10 weeks .
Even the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Confirmed : It ’ s beyond belief .
China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country , under-reporting both total cases and deaths it ’ s suffered from the disease , the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House , according to three U.S. officials .
The officials asked not to be identified because the report is secret and declined to detail its contents .
But the thrust , they said , is that China ’ s public reporting on cases and deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials said the report concludes that China ’ s numbers are fake… While China eventually imposed a strict lockdown beyond those of less autocratic nations , there has been considerable skepticism of China ’ s reported numbers , both outside and within the country .
The Chinese government has repeatedly revised its methodology for counting cases , for weeks excluding people without symptoms entirely , and only on Tuesday added more than 1,500 asymptomatic cases to its total .
Circumstantial evidence that the outbreak in China was more severe than reported has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from last weekend , which focused on the number of urns reportedly being sent to Wuhan , for some choicer morsels .
Jim Geraghty has been tracking signs that authorities there remain worried about the scope of the problem and points to this latest news from Shanghai : Shanghai isn ’ t near Wuhan , the epicenter of the outbreak .
It ’ s on the coast , more than 400 miles away .
The government is clearly managing multiple hot spots inside its borders .
What are the implications of China lying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current data about coronavirus is largely worthless because most of it comes from China ’ s cooked books .
That ’ s changing by the hour as American and European doctors get to observe firsthand how the disease afflicts its victims ; we ’ ll have a more reliable data set soon for calculating the fatality rate , the infection rate , and so on .
But certain assumptions that originated from the Chinese data , like the idea that severe cases are concentrated among the elderly , may need to be rethought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are much more likely to succumb , per Italy ’ s experience , but U.S. hospitals have already seen many cases of people in younger demographics needing ventilators to survive .
Another implication : We should never again trust , or fund , the World Health Organization once this crisis has passed .
They ’ ve been China ’ s loyal mouthpiece throughout the episode , treating the Chinese numbers as reliable .
They ’ re either willing propagandists or dupes .
Deborah Birx made the point noted in Ed ’ s post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ honest about the scope of its own outbreak early , governments in other countries may have scrambled to act sooner than they did .
Chinese denial seeded the contagion globally by covering up the fact of human-to-human transmission while the plague was spreading in Wuhan and then Chinese denial seeded an underreaction internationally by health authorities who were led to believe the epidemic wasn ’ t as severe as it was .
( That ’ s a far better excuse for the administration ’ s slow-footed reaction to the crisis than impeachment is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
We should be done with them as soon as it ’ s responsible to be done with them .
Being done with China is harder , certainly impossible in the near term .
But there ’ ll be some , shall we say , “ social distancing ” between western nations like the U.S. and Beijing going forward .
The smart play right now for the Chinese government would be to come clean and attempt to make amends with more honest data ; the new reporting on asymptomatic cases may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ massive propaganda campaign to shift blame to the U.S. is still in motion .
They haven ’ t even closed down the “ wet markets ” from which the virus likely originated .
They smashed the global economy and covered it up .
The relationship between the east ’ s great power and the west ’ s will never recover .
Bloomberg claims that the White House has had this classified report about China cooking the books since last week , but Trump hasn ’ t mentioned it .
Birx alluded to it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s certainly been no aggressive messaging effort by the U.S. to accuse China of deceiving us .
If anything , Trump has grown more conciliatory towards China after a phone call with Xi Jinping .
He ’ s stopped using terms like “ Chinese virus ” and he ’ s tweeted encouragingly about relations : Did he agree to keep the classified report under wraps in return for some concession , e.g.
, greater candor in reporting their data going forward ?
Maybe he ’ s not in a position to demand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Chinese manufacturers for medical supplies , starting with drugs and protective equipment for doctors .
Now isn ’ t the moment for antagonism .
Which may explain why this is being leaked — some U.S. officials might be angry that China ’ s getting a pass on its deception for reasons of supply-chain necessity and decided to leak the report to embarrass them .
Or , alternately , they ’ re aggrieved that Trump isn ’ t doing more to call out Beijing publicly for whatever odd reason and figured they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the report with the media .
He ’ ll be asked about this at his next coronavirus briefing .
What will he say ?
Exit quotation from Ben Sasse , commenting on today ’ s news : “ The claim that the United States has more coronavirus deaths than China is false .
Without commenting on any classified information , this much is painfully obvious : The Chinese Communist Party has lied , is lying , and will continue to lie about coronavirus to protect the regime .
Beijing ’ s garbage propaganda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the World Health Organization , by independent journalists , or by the American epidemiologists who are going to beat this terrible virus .
”

This is like finding out that U.S. intelligence has formally concluded that China is maintaining concentration camps for Uighurs.
We all already know. But it’s gratifying to see them call a lie a lie.
Next they’re going to tell us that Russia and Iran are hiding the scope of the outbreak within their own borders.
It seemed beyond belief that a country with 80,000+ official cases of a highly infectious novel virus somehow brought the number down to zero new cases in the span of about 10 weeks. Even the most draconian lockdown can achieve only so much. Confirmed: It’s beyond belief.
China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials. The officials asked not to be identified because the report is secret and declined to detail its contents. But the thrust, they said, is that China’s public reporting on cases and deaths is intentionally incomplete. Two of the officials said the report concludes that China’s numbers are fake… While China eventually imposed a strict lockdown beyond those of less autocratic nations, there has been considerable skepticism of China’s reported numbers, both outside and within the country. The Chinese government has repeatedly revised its methodology for counting cases, for weeks excluding people without symptoms entirely, and only on Tuesday added more than 1,500 asymptomatic cases to its total.
Circumstantial evidence that the outbreak in China was more severe than reported has been mounting for weeks. Read this post from last weekend, which focused on the number of urns reportedly being sent to Wuhan, for some choicer morsels. Jim Geraghty has been tracking signs that authorities there remain worried about the scope of the problem and points to this latest news from Shanghai:
Shanghai’s skyscrapers – Shanghai Tower, Shanghai Oriental Pearl Tower, and Jinmao Tower – will temporarily close again starting Monday after reopening for 19 days. Earlier, the Shanghai Oriental Pearl Tower, Shanghai History Museum were reopened on March 12. In addition, Shanghai Haichang Ocean Park, Madame Tussauds Shanghai, and other indoor sightseeing and entertainment attractions have also been suspended. The move is considered as part of the city’s efforts to prevent and control the coronavirus epidemic and ensure visitor’s safety and health, according to the tourist sites’ announcement on Sunday afternoon.
Shanghai isn’t near Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak. It’s on the coast, more than 400 miles away. The government is clearly managing multiple hot spots inside its borders.
What are the implications of China lying? Most basically, much of the current data about coronavirus is largely worthless because most of it comes from China’s cooked books. That’s changing by the hour as American and European doctors get to observe firsthand how the disease afflicts its victims; we’ll have a more reliable data set soon for calculating the fatality rate, the infection rate, and so on. But certain assumptions that originated from the Chinese data, like the idea that severe cases are concentrated among the elderly, may need to be rethought. It does appear that the elderly are much more likely to succumb, per Italy’s experience, but U.S. hospitals have already seen many cases of people in younger demographics needing ventilators to survive.
Another implication: We should never again trust, or fund, the World Health Organization once this crisis has passed. They’ve been China’s loyal mouthpiece throughout the episode, treating the Chinese numbers as reliable. They’re either willing propagandists or dupes. Deborah Birx made the point noted in Ed’s post earlier that if China had been more honest about the scope of its own outbreak early, governments in other countries may have scrambled to act sooner than they did. Chinese denial seeded the contagion globally by covering up the fact of human-to-human transmission while the plague was spreading in Wuhan and then Chinese denial seeded an underreaction internationally by health authorities who were led to believe the epidemic wasn’t as severe as it was. (That’s a far better excuse for the administration’s slow-footed reaction to the crisis than impeachment is.) The WHO aided and abetted them. We should be done with them as soon as it’s responsible to be done with them.
Being done with China is harder, certainly impossible in the near term. But there’ll be some, shall we say, “social distancing” between western nations like the U.S. and Beijing going forward. The smart play right now for the Chinese government would be to come clean and attempt to make amends with more honest data; the new reporting on asymptomatic cases may be a glimmer of that. But their massive propaganda campaign to shift blame to the U.S. is still in motion. They haven’t even closed down the “wet markets” from which the virus likely originated.
They smashed the global economy and covered it up. The relationship between the east’s great power and the west’s will never recover.
Bloomberg claims that the White House has had this classified report about China cooking the books since last week, but Trump hasn’t mentioned it. Birx alluded to it, as noted above, but there’s certainly been no aggressive messaging effort by the U.S. to accuse China of deceiving us. If anything, Trump has grown more conciliatory towards China after a phone call with Xi Jinping. He’s stopped using terms like “Chinese virus” and he’s tweeted encouragingly about relations:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1243407157321560071
Did he agree to keep the classified report under wraps in return for some concession, e.g., greater candor in reporting their data going forward? Maybe he’s not in a position to demand concessions: The U.S. still relies heavily on Chinese manufacturers for medical supplies, starting with drugs and protective equipment for doctors. Now isn’t the moment for antagonism. Which may explain why this is being leaked — some U.S. officials might be angry that China’s getting a pass on its deception for reasons of supply-chain necessity and decided to leak the report to embarrass them. Or, alternately, they’re aggrieved that Trump isn’t doing more to call out Beijing publicly for whatever odd reason and figured they’d do it for him by sharing the report with the media. He’ll be asked about this at his next coronavirus briefing. What will he say?
Exit quotation from Ben Sasse, commenting on today’s news: “The claim that the United States has more coronavirus deaths than China is false. Without commenting on any classified information, this much is painfully obvious: The Chinese Communist Party has lied, is lying, and will continue to lie about coronavirus to protect the regime. Beijing’s garbage propaganda shouldn’t be taken seriously by the World Health Organization, by independent journalists, or by the American epidemiologists who are going to beat this terrible virus.”


hotair--2020-04-01--Joe Scarborough: Unlike Trump, 'everybody saw this coming in early January'

Everybody saw this disaster coming in January , Joe Scarborough claimed on MSNBC today : This is a delusion that it appears many on the left now have .
As they rant and rave about President Trump dithering they simultaneously believe they were exceptions .
They saw this coming months earlier .
They knew how serious it was immediately .
If only we had listened to them .
But in Joe Scarborough ’ s case , it ’ s possible to actually look at his record .
For instance , how many times did Joe tweet about the virus in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Okay , but surely Joe used his own TV show to warn the nation .
Tom Elliot found the first time the virus was mentioned on Morning Joe .
And what message did Joe ’ s expert send on that date : That Americans should be more worried about the flu .
Elliot later corrected himself .
The clip above is from January 27th , not the 24th .
Far from sounding the alarm , it seems Joe was downplaying the seriousness of the virus to Americans in January .
And to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the time .
Many media sites published pieces suggesting the seasonal flu could be worse than the coronavirus .
People forget that in mid-January , China and the WHO were still denying the virus could spread from person to person .
This is from January 14 : So it was actually impossible to be appropriately concerned about the virus in early January because China was lying to the world at that point .
To take another example , on January 24 , Vox published a piece titled “ The coronavirus outbreak is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WHO says.
” It wasn ’ t until January 30 that Vox published a follow up : “ The coronavirus outbreak is now a global health emergency , WHO says.
” Had the alarm finally been sounded ?
Here ’ s a sample of that piece : Just because the emergence of the new coronavirus is now officially a global health emergency doesn ’ t mean it ’ ll become a pandemic .
It ’ s important to note the outbreak is still heavily centered on mainland China… It ’ s possible that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look more like the common cold than like SARS .
That ’ s because infectious diseases typically look more severe when they ’ re first discovered , since the people showing up in hospitals tend to be the sickest .
Once more of these mild or asymptomatic cases are discovered , this virus could wind up looking a lot less scary .
Getting back to Joe Scarborough , Tom Elliot says his first real commentary about the potential impact the virus might have on American society was on February 26th .
Note this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mardi Gras took place in New Orleans .
As you can see in this clip , Joe is just starting to think about the fact that businesses and events might be shut down “ if ” the crisis continues .
But again , it ’ s easy to pick on Joe Scarborough for his false memories of raising the alarm about the virus .
He asked for it by claiming everyone saw this coming in early January when in fact that was impossible .
But the important point is that most media outlets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mentioned Vox ’ s two stories about the virus from January .
Here ’ s a sample of what they published in February .
Feb 8 : “ What happens next in the coronavirus outbreak ?
We mapped 8 scenarios ” Feb 13 : “ Coronavirus cases in China just jumped by 14,000 — but not for the reason you think ” Even though it may feel like the coronavirus crisis is dragging on , we ’ re actually early in the outbreak of a newly discovered virus .
The way this disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much a work in progress .
And as more countries get diagnostic tools and come up with their own ways of classifying Covid-19 cases , we will surely be in for more spikes and plateaus that don ’ t actually tell us much about how the virus is spreading on any given day .
Feb 14 : “ Why the coronavirus outbreak might be much bigger than we know ” For now , it ’ s important to remember that a disease can spread widely , and even become a pandemic , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook video , Prime Minister Lee repeatedly asked Singaporeans not to panic , reminding them that this virus already appears to behave more like seasonal flu than SARS : While it ’ s more contagious than SARS , it looks much less deadly — a point Fauci recently reaffirmed .
At the same time , even a less severe pandemic has the potential to overwhelm a country ’ s health infrastructure .
There are studies out of China suggesting as many as a quarter of patients need care in the ICU , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on health systems and cost billions .
“ There ’ s always chance [ this disease could ] overwhelm health systems in a number of countries , even in countries with good health systems , ” Fauci said .
Feb 25 : “ ‘ We are at a turning point ’ : The coronavirus outbreak is looking more like a pandemic ” Feb 26 : “ If the coronavirus hits America , who ’ s responsible for protecting you ?
” This one contains an interesting section : The first question to ask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Who is in charge ?
You may think “ the White House , ” or some arm of the federal government .
But per the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution , public health is not a power specifically given to the federal government , and so it rests mainly with the states , as well as large cities with strong public health departments , like New York City .
“ It ’ s important to remember that public health is actually a police power that is delegated to the states , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Center for Global Health Science and Security at Georgetown .
Feb 28 : “ WHO raises Covid-19 alert to highest level after cases found in nearly 50 countries ” The point is that even if you were following this closely at a progressive news site , no one was sure what was coming even in early February .
As the month progressed there was growing concern but it wasn ’ t until late February ( which ended on the 29th ) that it became clear this was probably going to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually declare it a pandemic until March 11 , which is when many U.S. businesses like Broadway , the NBA , NHL , etc .
began shutting down .
Scarborough and others can claim everything that has happened was predictable months ago but it ’ s just not true .
It ’ s helpful to remember how gradually this crept up on us and how relatively recent is was that we realized the unprecedented impact this would have .

Everybody saw this disaster coming in January, Joe Scarborough claimed on MSNBC today:
Scarborough on Trump and the Coronavirus: Unlike him, “Everybody saw this coming in early January” pic.twitter.com/rB2ZZNgzb6 — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 1, 2020
This is a delusion that it appears many on the left now have. As they rant and rave about President Trump dithering they simultaneously believe they were exceptions. They saw this coming months earlier. They knew how serious it was immediately. If only we had listened to them. But in Joe Scarborough’s case, it’s possible to actually look at his record. For instance, how many times did Joe tweet about the virus in January? Glenn Greenwald tallied the numbers:
Look what a pathological liar @JoeNBC is. Today he said about the coronavirus pandemic in the US: "Everybody saw this coming in early January." Number of @JoeNBC tweets in January by topic: Impeachment – 29
Election – 11
Sports – 7
Coronavirus – 0pic.twitter.com/qjhX11wguH — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 1, 2020
Okay, but surely Joe used his own TV show to warn the nation. Tom Elliot found the first time the virus was mentioned on Morning Joe. And what message did Joe’s expert send on that date: That Americans should be more worried about the flu.
CORRECTION: That was the first mention on MSNBC. The first mention on Morning Joe was Jan. 24th, when an “expert” said Americans should worry about the flu, not the Coronavirus pic.twitter.com/aG0BjwHxKj — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 1, 2020
Elliot later corrected himself. The clip above is from January 27th, not the 24th. Far from sounding the alarm, it seems Joe was downplaying the seriousness of the virus to Americans in January. And to be fair, that was fairly common at the time. Many media sites published pieces suggesting the seasonal flu could be worse than the coronavirus.
https://twitter.com/gazordroig/status/1245334206198296576
People forget that in mid-January, China and the WHO were still denying the virus could spread from person to person. This is from January 14:
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🇨🇳. pic.twitter.com/Fnl5P877VG — World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) January 14, 2020
So it was actually impossible to be appropriately concerned about the virus in early January because China was lying to the world at that point. To take another example, on January 24, Vox published a piece titled “The coronavirus outbreak is not yet a global health emergency, WHO says.” It wasn’t until January 30 that Vox published a follow up: “The coronavirus outbreak is now a global health emergency, WHO says.” Had the alarm finally been sounded? Here’s a sample of that piece:
Just because the emergence of the new coronavirus is now officially a global health emergency doesn’t mean it’ll become a pandemic. It’s important to note the outbreak is still heavily centered on mainland China… It’s possible that as we learn more, 2019-nCoV will look more like the common cold than like SARS. That’s because infectious diseases typically look more severe when they’re first discovered, since the people showing up in hospitals tend to be the sickest. Once more of these mild or asymptomatic cases are discovered, this virus could wind up looking a lot less scary.
Getting back to Joe Scarborough, Tom Elliot says his first real commentary about the potential impact the virus might have on American society was on February 26th. Note this was a Wednesday, one day after Mardi Gras took place in New Orleans. As you can see in this clip, Joe is just starting to think about the fact that businesses and events might be shut down “if” the crisis continues.
Took awhile, but I’ve found the first time Scarborough offers any kind of commentary on the Coronavirus. It’s from Feb. 26th … only about 2 months after he said “everybody” was talking about it pic.twitter.com/klOfkc87oi — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 1, 2020
But again, it’s easy to pick on Joe Scarborough for his false memories of raising the alarm about the virus. He asked for it by claiming everyone saw this coming in early January when in fact that was impossible. But the important point is that most media outlets followed the same learning curve. I mentioned Vox’s two stories about the virus from January. Here’s a sample of what they published in February.
Feb 8: “What happens next in the coronavirus outbreak? We mapped 8 scenarios”
Feb 13: “Coronavirus cases in China just jumped by 14,000 — but not for the reason you think”
Even though it may feel like the coronavirus crisis is dragging on, we’re actually early in the outbreak of a newly discovered virus. The way this disease is being diagnosed and tracked is very much a work in progress. And as more countries get diagnostic tools and come up with their own ways of classifying Covid-19 cases, we will surely be in for more spikes and plateaus that don’t actually tell us much about how the virus is spreading on any given day.
Feb 14: “Why the coronavirus outbreak might be much bigger than we know”
For now, it’s important to remember that a disease can spread widely, and even become a pandemic, and not be particularly severe. In his Facebook video, Prime Minister Lee repeatedly asked Singaporeans not to panic, reminding them that this virus already appears to behave more like seasonal flu than SARS: While it’s more contagious than SARS, it looks much less deadly — a point Fauci recently reaffirmed. At the same time, even a less severe pandemic has the potential to overwhelm a country’s health infrastructure. There are studies out of China suggesting as many as a quarter of patients need care in the ICU, for example — something that could wreak havoc on health systems and cost billions. “There’s always chance [this disease could] overwhelm health systems in a number of countries, even in countries with good health systems,” Fauci said.
Feb 25: “‘We are at a turning point’: The coronavirus outbreak is looking more like a pandemic”
Feb 26: “If the coronavirus hits America, who’s responsible for protecting you?” This one contains an interesting section:
The first question to ask about outbreak response in the United States: Who is in charge? You may think “the White House,” or some arm of the federal government. But per the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution, public health is not a power specifically given to the federal government, and so it rests mainly with the states, as well as large cities with strong public health departments, like New York City. “It’s important to remember that public health is actually a police power that is delegated to the states,” says Rebecca Katz, director of the Center for Global Health Science and Security at Georgetown.
Feb 28: “WHO raises Covid-19 alert to highest level after cases found in nearly 50 countries”
“This virus has pandemic potential,” said Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director general of the WHO, on Thursday. (A pandemic means a new virus is spreading in multiple regions of the world, but it doesn’t say anything about a disease’s severity.) It was the first time the agency’s director general acknowledged what other public health experts had been saying in recent weeks with increasing urgency: that we appear to be on the precipice of a pandemic, if we’re not already in one.
The point is that even if you were following this closely at a progressive news site, no one was sure what was coming even in early February. As the month progressed there was growing concern but it wasn’t until late February (which ended on the 29th) that it became clear this was probably going to be a pandemic. The WHO didn’t actually declare it a pandemic until March 11, which is when many U.S. businesses like Broadway, the NBA, NHL, etc. began shutting down.
Scarborough and others can claim everything that has happened was predictable months ago but it’s just not true. It’s helpful to remember how gradually this crept up on us and how relatively recent is was that we realized the unprecedented impact this would have.


hotair--2020-04-01--ABC: Will we <i>really</i> have a COVID-19 vaccine in 12-18 months?

Americans can ’ t fully get back to normal in this coronavirus pandemic until researchers not just find a vaccine but also confirm its effectiveness and mass-produce it .
Can that be done in the twelve-to-eighteen-month timeline cited by government and the pharmaceutical industry ?
ABC News throws some cold water on that projection , with one expert warning it ’ s “ probably not going to happen ” : Although it likely will take more than a year before a vaccine is ready for the public , Fauci also said COVID-19 vaccine development is on track to be “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done.
” With more people being infected and lockdown orders creating immense financial burdens with so many not allowed to work , the question becomes even more pressing : Is there a viable vaccine in sight ?
Dr. Maria Elena Bottazzi , co-director of the Texas Children ’ s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development , believes a previously stated 12- to 18-month timeline may be too optimistic .
“ My concern is that people are hearing we are going to see things in a year or 18 months , ” Bottazzi told ABC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s probably not going to happen .
We may have some real optimism and some safety evidence by then , but not a vaccine.
” “ There ’ s a long road after safety — you still have to do a lot of things before you can confirm the efficacy and give this to the public en masse , ” Bottazzi added .
“ That ’ s the hard message .
It ’ s not just a 30- or 40-people trial to lead us to a solution.
” It won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ABC went to USAMRID to get a sense of their progress , and their researchers are working around the clock to find a formula to stop the coronavirus : The pessimistic appraisal stands in stark contrast to other messaging from the Trump administration and from the pharmaceutical industry itself .
Human trials on at least one vaccine candidate have already begun , and Johnson & Johnson announced this week that their billion-dollar effort will have its trials in September , through their Janssen unit working on the problem now .
One way this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bottazzi ’ s concerns — is that manufacturers could start mass production ahead of larger-scale trials and final approval .
That would be quite a risk , but that appears to be the plan : The Janssen vaccine clinical trials are expected to begin “ no later than ” this fall , according to the HHS announcement , which also said the goal is to get a COVID-19 vaccine ready for emergency use in the U.S. in early 2021 .
Meanwhile , the company will begin preparation for large-scale vaccine production Wednesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ email .
The company would be able to make 600 million vaccine doses by the end of 2020 , with 300 million manufactured in the U.S. , she wrote .
“ We are however investing in new production facilities to increase that number.
” If Janssen ’ s vaccine is proven safe and effective , the company will also make it available “ in China and other parts of the world , ” said a statement by Paul Stoffels , chief scientific officer at Johnson & Johnson .
Moderna ’ s early vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the National Institutes of Health .
BARDA will support phase 2 and 3 clinical trials , which typically involve hundreds or thousands of patients .
“ Given the pandemic , Moderna has already started to prepare for the rapid acceleration of its manufacturing capabilities that could allow for the future manufacture of millions of doses should mRNA-1273 prove to be safe and of expected benefit , ” the company said in a statement .
“ Moderna is engaged in discussions for outside funding , including with BARDA , of such activities and will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other third parties to responsibly and rapidly move forward.
” The risk here is that a rejection by the FDA would mean billions of dollars in product would become useless .
Congress and the Trump administration could solve that problem — and may already have — by indemnifying manufacturers against the losses .
That would be similar to wartime production of new weapons systems and aircraft ; in World War II , the military paid for a lot of systems on spec that never saw a single battle .
They needed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to innovate , and they needed innovation to overcome the initial technological advantage our enemies had .
Few complained after the war that it had been too costly ( with the exception of politicians who singled out Howard Hughes over it ) .
It ’ s a costly policy for taxpayers and arguably incentivizes recklessness in R & D , but these are not normal times .
The US and the world need a vaccine ready to roll out as soon as it gets approval , not six months down the road .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ trials and approval saves us that much time , the cost of eating hundreds of millions of ineffective formulations will seem very much like a great investment .
Just how desperate are scientists to find a widely distributed vaccine quickly ?
Perhaps desperate enough to work with these companies : British American Tobacco , the maker of brands including Lucky Strike , Dunhill , Rothmans and Benson & Hedges , has said it has a potential coronavirus vaccine in development using tobacco plants .
BAT has turned the vast resources usually focused on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of smokers worldwide to battling the global pandemic .
“ If testing goes well , BAT is hopeful that , with the right partners and support from government agencies , between 1m and 3m doses of the vaccine could be manufactured per week , beginning in June , ” the company said .
… “ Tobacco plants offer the potential for faster and safer vaccine development compared with conventional methods , ” the company said .
BAT said its US biotech subsidiary , Kentucky BioProcessing ( KBP ) , has moved to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis .
As they used to say in the other Great Wars … smoke ’ em if you got ’ em .
This all-hands-on-deck has yet to be tried , so we don ’ t know whether it can produce a vaccine within a 12-to-18-month timeline .
Let ’ s not assume it will work , but let ’ s also assume that the normal rules for predicting a timeline don ’ t necessarily apply here , too .

Americans can’t fully get back to normal in this coronavirus pandemic until researchers not just find a vaccine but also confirm its effectiveness and mass-produce it. Can that be done in the twelve-to-eighteen-month timeline cited by government and the pharmaceutical industry? ABC News throws some cold water on that projection, with one expert warning it’s “probably not going to happen”:
Although it likely will take more than a year before a vaccine is ready for the public, Fauci also said COVID-19 vaccine development is on track to be “literally the fastest that we have ever done.” With more people being infected and lockdown orders creating immense financial burdens with so many not allowed to work, the question becomes even more pressing: Is there a viable vaccine in sight? Dr. Maria Elena Bottazzi, co-director of the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development, believes a previously stated 12- to 18-month timeline may be too optimistic. “My concern is that people are hearing we are going to see things in a year or 18 months,” Bottazzi told ABC News. “The reality is: That’s probably not going to happen. We may have some real optimism and some safety evidence by then, but not a vaccine.” “There’s a long road after safety — you still have to do a lot of things before you can confirm the efficacy and give this to the public en masse,” Bottazzi added. “That’s the hard message. It’s not just a 30- or 40-people trial to lead us to a solution.”
It won’t be for lack of trying. ABC went to USAMRID to get a sense of their progress, and their researchers are working around the clock to find a formula to stop the coronavirus:
The pessimistic appraisal stands in stark contrast to other messaging from the Trump administration and from the pharmaceutical industry itself. Human trials on at least one vaccine candidate have already begun, and Johnson & Johnson announced this week that their billion-dollar effort will have its trials in September, through their Janssen unit working on the problem now.
One way this might go faster — and get around Bottazzi’s concerns — is that manufacturers could start mass production ahead of larger-scale trials and final approval. That would be quite a risk, but that appears to be the plan:
The Janssen vaccine clinical trials are expected to begin “no later than” this fall, according to the HHS announcement, which also said the goal is to get a COVID-19 vaccine ready for emergency use in the U.S. in early 2021. Meanwhile, the company will begin preparation for large-scale vaccine production Wednesday, Janssen spokeswoman Katie Buckley wrote in an email. The company would be able to make 600 million vaccine doses by the end of 2020, with 300 million manufactured in the U.S., she wrote. “We are however investing in new production facilities to increase that number.” If Janssen’s vaccine is proven safe and effective, the company will also make it available “in China and other parts of the world,” said a statement by Paul Stoffels, chief scientific officer at Johnson & Johnson. Moderna’s early vaccine trials are already underway with help from the National Institutes of Health. BARDA will support phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, which typically involve hundreds or thousands of patients. “Given the pandemic, Moderna has already started to prepare for the rapid acceleration of its manufacturing capabilities that could allow for the future manufacture of millions of doses should mRNA-1273 prove to be safe and of expected benefit,” the company said in a statement. “Moderna is engaged in discussions for outside funding, including with BARDA, of such activities and will continue to work with government, industry and other third parties to responsibly and rapidly move forward.”
The risk here is that a rejection by the FDA would mean billions of dollars in product would become useless. Congress and the Trump administration could solve that problem — and may already have — by indemnifying manufacturers against the losses. That would be similar to wartime production of new weapons systems and aircraft; in World War II, the military paid for a lot of systems on spec that never saw a single battle. They needed to keep the defense industry alive in order to innovate, and they needed innovation to overcome the initial technological advantage our enemies had. Few complained after the war that it had been too costly (with the exception of politicians who singled out Howard Hughes over it).
It’s a costly policy for taxpayers and arguably incentivizes recklessness in R&D, but these are not normal times. The US and the world need a vaccine ready to roll out as soon as it gets approval, not six months down the road. If putting production in parallel to final trials and approval saves us that much time, the cost of eating hundreds of millions of ineffective formulations will seem very much like a great investment.
Just how desperate are scientists to find a widely distributed vaccine quickly? Perhaps desperate enough to work with these companies:
British American Tobacco, the maker of brands including Lucky Strike, Dunhill, Rothmans and Benson & Hedges, has said it has a potential coronavirus vaccine in development using tobacco plants. BAT has turned the vast resources usually focused on creating products that pose health risks to millions of smokers worldwide to battling the global pandemic. “If testing goes well, BAT is hopeful that, with the right partners and support from government agencies, between 1m and 3m doses of the vaccine could be manufactured per week, beginning in June,” the company said. … “Tobacco plants offer the potential for faster and safer vaccine development compared with conventional methods,” the company said. BAT said its US biotech subsidiary, Kentucky BioProcessing (KBP), has moved to pre-clinical testing and that it will work on the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis.
As they used to say in the other Great Wars … smoke ’em if you got ’em. This all-hands-on-deck has yet to be tried, so we don’t know whether it can produce a vaccine within a 12-to-18-month timeline. Let’s not assume it will work, but let’s also assume that the normal rules for predicting a timeline don’t necessarily apply here, too.


hotair--2020-04-01--Florida gov on not issuing a stay-at-home order: If the White House recommends it, that'll carry wei

Florida gov on not issuing a stay-at-home order: If the White House recommends it, that'll carry weight with me; Update: DeSantis issues order

I don ’ t know why Ron DeSantis wants to be governor .
If he ’ s willing to issue a statewide shelter-in-place order but can ’ t muster the nerve without an official benediction from Trump to appease Florida ’ s MAGA fans , even after dozens of other governors have provided him cover by going first in their own states , he just shouldn ’ t have the job .
Let Trump govern Florida from the White House .
Gov .
Ron DeSantis of Florida , who has been criticized for refusing to set more statewide mandates as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus there has soared over 6,700 , said on Tuesday that one reason he had not was because the White House ’ s task force had not recommended it .
“ If they do , that ’ s something that would carry a lot of weight with me , ” said Mr. DeSantis , a Republican who has been conciliatory to the White House and received praise in return .
It ’ s technically true that the White House hasn ’ t asked him to act but they ’ ve been sending signals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anthony Fauci endorsed the idea on March 15 .
Trump just extended the national guidelines on social distancing through April 30 .
The surgeon general , Jerome Adams , was on NBC this morning and was asked about DeSantis ’ s remark , specifically why the White House hasn ’ t called for Floridians to stay home until further notice .
Uh , we have , said Adams , pointing to Trump ’ s guidelines : DeSantis might point to that and say , “ Well , we already have national guidelines .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ formally issue an order.
” Or he could point to the Kinsa “ health weather ” data showing that fevers are already trending downward across Florida as evidence that a stay-at-home order might be redundant at this point .
But he ’ s not doing that .
He seems to believe that there is value to a stay-at-home order issued by the governor .
He just refuses to do it until Trump tells Trump fans in Florida not to be mad at the governor if he pulls the trigger .
Another White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the epidemic model cited by Trump at yesterday ’ s briefing , agrees that there ’ s value to a statewide stay-at-home order .
It ’ s time for one in Florida , he told the Miami Herald .
Now .
Ali Mokdad , a professor at the University of Washington ’ s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation , said he told Florida ’ s top health official Monday night that the governor should issue a blanket stay-at-home order mandating the closure of non-essential businesses and social isolation in order to control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ institute ’ s model — which is updated daily as data changes — predicts that even if such an order is given , the state ’ s coronavirus outbreak is on pace to peak in early May in numbers that will overwhelm intensive care units and potentially lead to thousands of deaths by the summer .
“ These estimations are based on [ the expectation that ] Florida will implement stay-at-home measures within a week from now .
We ’ re assuming next Monday this will be in place , ” Mokdad , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Disease Control and Prevention , told the Miami Herald .
“ If they don ’ t , these numbers will go up.
” Mokdad , who spoke to the Miami Herald Monday afternoon before speaking to Florida Surgeon General Scott Rivkees , said he would “ strongly recommend shutting down everything.
” Remember , according to Kinsa ’ s data , exhortations to the public to stay home don ’ t work very well to contain the spread .
Closing things down is what works .
It ’ s DeSantis ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s , but I don ’ t know why Trump doesn ’ t throw him a bone at this point by formally requesting that he shut things down .
The president is already all-in on that position nationally per his briefings this week .
It ’ s hard to see why Floridians would hold him more responsible for the local economic downturn if he made a personal request to their governor instead of encouraging shutdowns across the country generally .
Especially since Florida has been unusually well supplied with medical equipment from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states by the federal government .
I wonder why : Three days after requesting 430,000 surgical masks , 180,000 N95 respirators and other equipment on March 11 , Florida received all of the items .
The state received an additional shipment less than two weeks later .
As of late last week , it was awaiting a third shipment… One White House official said Trump is attuned to the electoral importance of Florida in November , giving added weight to the arguments DeSantis has made to the administration that his state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The president knows Florida is so important for his reelection , so when DeSantis says that , it means a lot , ” said the official , who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be frank .
“ He pays close attention to what Florida wants.
” What Florida wants and what Florida needs are two different things , though .
Trump seemed to finally accept that distinction a few days ago when he endorsed social distancing for another month despite the economic pain it would cause .
If he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a matter of public health , Floridians will forgive both of them for the lost wealth .
They ’ re trying to save lives .
Here ’ s Scott Gottlieb making very clear on CNBC this morning that Florida is the state he ’ s most concerned about right now .
It was seeded early with coronavirus cases , Gottlieb believes , probably in February ; DeSantis and his team have moved sluggishly to shut things down , most notoriously by allowing spring break to proceed ; now they ’ re moving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gottlieb thinks that whether the grim model of 100,000+ American deaths that Fauci and Birx have been touting proves true or not might depend on what big states like Florida and Texas that haven ’ t moved aggressively enough to contain their outbreaks do soon .
Maybe it ’ s time for Trump to call DeSantis and Greg Abbott .

I don’t know why Ron DeSantis wants to be governor. If he’s willing to issue a statewide shelter-in-place order but can’t muster the nerve without an official benediction from Trump to appease Florida’s MAGA fans, even after dozens of other governors have provided him cover by going first in their own states, he just shouldn’t have the job. Let Trump govern Florida from the White House.
Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who has been criticized for refusing to set more statewide mandates as the number of confirmed cases of the coronavirus there has soared over 6,700, said on Tuesday that one reason he had not was because the White House’s task force had not recommended it. “If they do, that’s something that would carry a lot of weight with me,” said Mr. DeSantis, a Republican who has been conciliatory to the White House and received praise in return.
It’s technically true that the White House hasn’t asked him to act but they’ve been sending signals about a national shutdown for weeks. Anthony Fauci endorsed the idea on March 15. Trump just extended the national guidelines on social distancing through April 30. The surgeon general, Jerome Adams, was on NBC this morning and was asked about DeSantis’s remark, specifically why the White House hasn’t called for Floridians to stay home until further notice. Uh, we have, said Adams, pointing to Trump’s guidelines:
"My advice to America would be that these guidelines are a national stay-at-home order."— U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams pic.twitter.com/UWGtO2BpJO — TODAY (@TODAYshow) April 1, 2020
DeSantis might point to that and say, “Well, we already have national guidelines. You don’t need me to formally issue an order.” Or he could point to the Kinsa “health weather” data showing that fevers are already trending downward across Florida as evidence that a stay-at-home order might be redundant at this point. But he’s not doing that. He seems to believe that there is value to a stay-at-home order issued by the governor. He just refuses to do it until Trump tells Trump fans in Florida not to be mad at the governor if he pulls the trigger.
Another White House advisor, an epidemiologist who contributed to the epidemic model cited by Trump at yesterday’s briefing, agrees that there’s value to a statewide stay-at-home order. It’s time for one in Florida, he told the Miami Herald. Now.
Ali Mokdad, a professor at the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, said he told Florida’s top health official Monday night that the governor should issue a blanket stay-at-home order mandating the closure of non-essential businesses and social isolation in order to control the spread of the virus. The institute’s model — which is updated daily as data changes — predicts that even if such an order is given, the state’s coronavirus outbreak is on pace to peak in early May in numbers that will overwhelm intensive care units and potentially lead to thousands of deaths by the summer. “These estimations are based on [the expectation that] Florida will implement stay-at-home measures within a week from now. We’re assuming next Monday this will be in place,” Mokdad, a former epidemiologist for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told the Miami Herald. “If they don’t, these numbers will go up.” Mokdad, who spoke to the Miami Herald Monday afternoon before speaking to Florida Surgeon General Scott Rivkees, said he would “strongly recommend shutting down everything.”
Remember, according to Kinsa’s data, exhortations to the public to stay home don’t work very well to contain the spread. Closing things down is what works.
It’s DeSantis’s responsibility to act here, not Trump’s, but I don’t know why Trump doesn’t throw him a bone at this point by formally requesting that he shut things down. The president is already all-in on that position nationally per his briefings this week. It’s hard to see why Floridians would hold him more responsible for the local economic downturn if he made a personal request to their governor instead of encouraging shutdowns across the country generally.
Especially since Florida has been unusually well supplied with medical equipment from the national stockpile relative to some other states by the federal government. I wonder why:
Three days after requesting 430,000 surgical masks, 180,000 N95 respirators and other equipment on March 11, Florida received all of the items. The state received an additional shipment less than two weeks later. As of late last week, it was awaiting a third shipment… One White House official said Trump is attuned to the electoral importance of Florida in November, giving added weight to the arguments DeSantis has made to the administration that his state’s economy should reopen as soon as possible. “The president knows Florida is so important for his reelection, so when DeSantis says that, it means a lot,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be frank. “He pays close attention to what Florida wants.”
What Florida wants and what Florida needs are two different things, though. Trump seemed to finally accept that distinction a few days ago when he endorsed social distancing for another month despite the economic pain it would cause. If he asks DeSantis to issue a stay-at-home order as a matter of public health, Floridians will forgive both of them for the lost wealth. They’re trying to save lives.
Here’s Scott Gottlieb making very clear on CNBC this morning that Florida is the state he’s most concerned about right now. It was seeded early with coronavirus cases, Gottlieb believes, probably in February; DeSantis and his team have moved sluggishly to shut things down, most notoriously by allowing spring break to proceed; now they’re moving sluggishly again in issuing a stay-at-home order. Gottlieb thinks that whether the grim model of 100,000+ American deaths that Fauci and Birx have been touting proves true or not might depend on what big states like Florida and Texas that haven’t moved aggressively enough to contain their outbreaks do soon. Maybe it’s time for Trump to call DeSantis and Greg Abbott.
Dr. Scott Gottlieb says he’s worried that large states like Florida and Texas have not been aggressive enough in combatting the coronavirus outbreak. “I don’t understand why those governors have not acted more forcefully.” https://t.co/jB8m6i5yyO pic.twitter.com/IqAMbhKQ4h — CNBC (@CNBC) April 1, 2020
Update: Finally.
https://twitter.com/jonfranks/status/1245399808715751424


hotair--2020-04-01--Obama blasts Trump's "denials" on coronavirus, climate change

Remember the days when a former president moved to the sidelines and let his predecessor lead the nation without petty criticism ?
Those days are long gone .
Barack Obama ugly tweeted President Trump with an attack on his administration ’ s rolling back of vehicle emissions standards and threw in a reference to Trump ’ s perceived “ denial ” of the coronavirus for good measure .
Former President Obama doesn ’ t actually use the current president ’ s name in the tweet , he chooses instead to tweet in a passive-aggressive way to his 114.9 million followers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitter followers , for reference . )
He wants to publicly criticize President Trump but fails miserably to sound like a brave , bold member of The Resistance .
Obama tweeted out an article in the L.A. Times about the Environmental Protection Agency and Transportation Department ’ s easing of overzealous fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks .
Obama conflates the Trump administration ’ s slow response to the coronavirus outbreak to the narrative that anyone not willing to destroy a major sector of the U.S. economy ( like the oil and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saving the planet must be called out .
You may remember that the Obama administration was the least business-friendly administration of modern administrations .
His administration targeted the energy sector as well as major industries like the auto industry with vigor , using global warming alarmism as their justification , especially through the EPA .
Apparently rolling back gas mileage standards is a bridge too far .
Obama was too triggered to stay in his lane .
In 2012 the Obama administration put into place strict gas mileage and emissions requirements as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration ’ s move doesn ’ t completely stop the Obama mandate of a 5 % annual increase in fuel economy moving forward , as Trump originally proposed , but lessens the mandate to 1.5 % a year .
The goal is to achieve an average of about 40 miles per gallon by 2026 .
The Obama era goal was reaching an average of 54 mpg by 2025 .
The Trump administration sees the change as a reasonable compromise between environmental concerns and the auto industry .
The former president even falls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweet , that even during a pandemic climate change over-regulation should take precedence .
Never mind the deaths caused by COVID-19 , climate change will kill us all .
“ We are delivering on President Trump ’ s promise to correct the current fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards , ” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement .
The administration ’ s plan , he said , “ strikes the right regulatory balance that protects our environment and sets reasonable targets for the auto industry.
” Environmentalists and public health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to thousands of premature deaths and asthma attacks .
They criticized the decision to make the new standards final in the midst of a global pandemic , arguing that the rollback would damage public health at a time when thousands of people are gravely ill and the nation ’ s economy is in tatters .
President Trump is slowly but surely dismantling Obama ’ s successes with the left ’ s wish list from his days in office .
The Obama legacy has been shattered .
Each time a major move is made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one by the EPA – Obama comes forward and pushes back .
He used this occasion as a get out the vote move , too .
Obama makes a plea to his followers , “ especially young people ” , to get out and vote this fall .
The Trump administration finalized the rollback to meet an April 1 deadline .
The new standards will apply to the 2022 model year of vehicles .
Also , after May 19 , under the Congressional Review Act , new rules can be validated by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but lawsuits will now come forward , most assuredly from states like California .
Automakers are in talks with California officials to strike a voluntary emissions agreement – not as relaxed as the Trump administration ’ s but not as zealous as those of the Obama administration .
During these days of the great hunkering down across America , fewer vehicles are on the road and many businesses are scaling back or suspending operations .
This is lessening the release of emissions into the atmosphere , ironically , during the pandemic .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are happy to advocate draconian measures like the keep it in the ground agenda that calls for the complete elimination of the oil and gas industry .
The United States is not prepared to operate without fossil fuels , and neither is the world in general .
The advocates of this nonsense are just ignorant .
You would think that a former president would understand the basic economics of how the energy sector , for example , fuels the American economy .
Rolling back the emissions standard for the auto industry will help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the devastation of the coronavirus pandemic .
As far as Obama ’ s criticism of Trump ’ s “ denial ” of the coronavirus pandemic , that ’ s a bit rich .
His own administration ’ s handling of the H1N1 pandemic was slow and flat-footed , as it was with the Ebola outbreak which the Obama administration downplayed until it didn ’ t .
Spare me the 20/20 hindsight now from Barack Obama , especially as we are still in the midst of combatting the COVID-19 outbreak .
Barack Obama ushered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governing style made Trump ’ s style the natural continuation of how a president conducts himself .
Thank goodness in these uncertain economic times we have a businessman in the White House , not a hyper-partisan run-of-the-mill politician like Obama .

Remember the days when a former president moved to the sidelines and let his predecessor lead the nation without petty criticism? Those days are long gone. Barack Obama ugly tweeted President Trump with an attack on his administration’s rolling back of vehicle emissions standards and threw in a reference to Trump’s perceived “denial” of the coronavirus for good measure.
Former President Obama doesn’t actually use the current president’s name in the tweet, he chooses instead to tweet in a passive-aggressive way to his 114.9 million followers. (President Trump has 75.6 million Twitter followers, for reference.) He wants to publicly criticize President Trump but fails miserably to sound like a brave, bold member of The Resistance. Obama tweeted out an article in the L.A. Times about the Environmental Protection Agency and Transportation Department’s easing of overzealous fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks.
We've seen all too terribly the consequences of those who denied warnings of a pandemic. We can't afford any more consequences of climate denial. All of us, especially young people, have to demand better of our government at every level and vote this fall. https://t.co/K8Ucu7iVDK — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) March 31, 2020
Obama conflates the Trump administration’s slow response to the coronavirus outbreak to the narrative that anyone not willing to destroy a major sector of the U.S. economy (like the oil and gas industry) in the name of saving the planet must be called out. You may remember that the Obama administration was the least business-friendly administration of modern administrations. His administration targeted the energy sector as well as major industries like the auto industry with vigor, using global warming alarmism as their justification, especially through the EPA. Apparently rolling back gas mileage standards is a bridge too far. Obama was too triggered to stay in his lane.
In 2012 the Obama administration put into place strict gas mileage and emissions requirements as a way to slow climate change. The Trump administration’s move doesn’t completely stop the Obama mandate of a 5% annual increase in fuel economy moving forward, as Trump originally proposed, but lessens the mandate to 1.5% a year. The goal is to achieve an average of about 40 miles per gallon by 2026. The Obama era goal was reaching an average of 54 mpg by 2025. The Trump administration sees the change as a reasonable compromise between environmental concerns and the auto industry. The former president even falls for the claims of alarmists in his tweet, that even during a pandemic climate change over-regulation should take precedence. Never mind the deaths caused by COVID-19, climate change will kill us all.
“We are delivering on President Trump’s promise to correct the current fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards,” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement. The administration’s plan, he said, “strikes the right regulatory balance that protects our environment and sets reasonable targets for the auto industry.” Environmentalists and public health advocates said the change would likely contribute to thousands of premature deaths and asthma attacks. They criticized the decision to make the new standards final in the midst of a global pandemic, arguing that the rollback would damage public health at a time when thousands of people are gravely ill and the nation’s economy is in tatters.
President Trump is slowly but surely dismantling Obama’s successes with the left’s wish list from his days in office. The Obama legacy has been shattered. Each time a major move is made by the Trump administration – like this one by the EPA – Obama comes forward and pushes back. He used this occasion as a get out the vote move, too. Obama makes a plea to his followers, “especially young people”, to get out and vote this fall.
The Trump administration finalized the rollback to meet an April 1 deadline. The new standards will apply to the 2022 model year of vehicles. Also, after May 19, under the Congressional Review Act, new rules can be validated by the next Congress. The rules apply nationwide but lawsuits will now come forward, most assuredly from states like California. Automakers are in talks with California officials to strike a voluntary emissions agreement – not as relaxed as the Trump administration’s but not as zealous as those of the Obama administration.
Just hours after the administration unveiled the final rule Tuesday, Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, disclosed that Volvo was in talks with the state to reach a voluntary emissions agreement. Four other automakers — Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and BMW — have already made a deal with the state that would preserve emissions standards that are not as tough as the Obama standards, but are significantly more ambitious than Trump’s proposal.
During these days of the great hunkering down across America, fewer vehicles are on the road and many businesses are scaling back or suspending operations. This is lessening the release of emissions into the atmosphere, ironically, during the pandemic. This must please the climate change alarmists who are happy to advocate draconian measures like the keep it in the ground agenda that calls for the complete elimination of the oil and gas industry. The United States is not prepared to operate without fossil fuels, and neither is the world in general. The advocates of this nonsense are just ignorant. You would think that a former president would understand the basic economics of how the energy sector, for example, fuels the American economy. Rolling back the emissions standard for the auto industry will help as the U.S. economy comes back after the devastation of the coronavirus pandemic.
As far as Obama’s criticism of Trump’s “denial” of the coronavirus pandemic, that’s a bit rich. His own administration’s handling of the H1N1 pandemic was slow and flat-footed, as it was with the Ebola outbreak which the Obama administration downplayed until it didn’t. Spare me the 20/20 hindsight now from Barack Obama, especially as we are still in the midst of combatting the COVID-19 outbreak.
Barack Obama ushered in the Trump era. His divisive governing style made Trump’s style the natural continuation of how a president conducts himself. Thank goodness in these uncertain economic times we have a businessman in the White House, not a hyper-partisan run-of-the-mill politician like Obama.


hotair--2020-04-01--It took 27 days for CNN to say what they previously accused Trump of lying about

Watching the media response to President Trump ’ s handling of the pandemic has been an educational experience for anyone who has been paying attention .
It seems no matter what actions the President takes or what comments and opinions he offers , somebody at the major cable networks and newspapers is standing by to jump all over him .
Unfortunately , on several notable occasions , Trump has turned out to be right .
And then comes the embarrassing moment when the media talking heads have to reluctantly deliver the same news .
One key example of this phenomenon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President offered an opinion about the mortality rate for the novel coronavirus .
At that time , Dr. Anthony Fauci was estimating it to be “ around two percent.
” Some other medical authorities had put the figure as high as 2.6 % .
Trump declared that he thought it was going to be considerably lower , “ way lower than one percent , ” specifying that this was just “ a hunch ” that he had .
That was all it took .
The press was all over him .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He was “ contradicting the medical community.
” Trump was “ at odds with what health experts are saying.
” But yesterday , CNN found themselves describing the mortality rate for the virus in new terms .
Oops .
How many people die after being infected with the novel coronavirus ?
Fewer than previously calculated , according to a study released Monday , but still more than die from the flu .
The research , published in the medical journal The Lancet Infectious Diseases , estimated that about 0.66 % of those infected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus death rate , which is lower than earlier estimates , takes into account potentially milder cases that often go undiagnosed — but it ’ s still far higher than the 0.1 % of people who are killed by the flu .
So that ’ s at least one bright spot of good news amidst an otherwise grim forecast for the virus .
The linked report is a rather lengthy article with plenty of good information in it , including quotes from multiple medical authorities .
It also includes a brief reference to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is “ lower than earlier estimates.
” But do you know who isn ’ t quoted in that article ?
President Donald J. Trump .
In fact , his name is never even mentioned .
And , of course , there is no reference whatsoever to the CNN personalities who were excoriating the President when his “ hunch ” told him that it would wind up being “ considerably lower ” than the previous estimates and “ way lower than one percent .
0.66 % sure sounds “ considerably lower ” than 2.6 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s basically just a quarter of the old estimate .
And it ’ s barely more than half of one percent .
Let ’ s take a walk down memory lane here and remember what some of the more high-profile talking heads on CNN had to say back then .
Here ’ s Jim Sciutto on March 4th .
“ Trump has misled before .
He has not until now done so during a health crisis .
Will federal institutions , such as CDC , Congress & friendly media challenge him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take his word over the facts and experts ?
” “ Here ’ s what Chris Cillizza had to offer the following day on March 5th .
“ No big deal — just the President of the United States contradicting the medical community on the mortality rate of coronavirus .
What ’ s he basing his conclusions on ?
Oh , a ‘ hunch . '
” And this was Brian Stelter ’ s contribution to the conversation also on March 5th .
“ I hesitate to even print the United States president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re so at odds with what health experts are saying .
But the president ’ s statements to Sean Hannity are significant because millions of people were watching live.
” So will we hear anything from these three and all the others who were setting their hair on fire over Trump ’ s “ hunch ” at the beginning of the month ?
I wouldn ’ t hold my breath waiting for that to happen .
The accusations of Trump “ misleading ” the public went out in real-time and then dropped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the history of this pandemic and the White House response to it .
Welcome to our new media in the 21st century .

Watching the media response to President Trump’s handling of the pandemic has been an educational experience for anyone who has been paying attention. It seems no matter what actions the President takes or what comments and opinions he offers, somebody at the major cable networks and newspapers is standing by to jump all over him. Unfortunately, on several notable occasions, Trump has turned out to be right. And then comes the embarrassing moment when the media talking heads have to reluctantly deliver the same news.
One key example of this phenomenon popped up a few weeks ago when the President offered an opinion about the mortality rate for the novel coronavirus. At that time, Dr. Anthony Fauci was estimating it to be “around two percent.” Some other medical authorities had put the figure as high as 2.6%. Trump declared that he thought it was going to be considerably lower, “way lower than one percent,” specifying that this was just “a hunch” that he had.
That was all it took. The press was all over him. He was “misleading” the nation. He was “contradicting the medical community.” Trump was “at odds with what health experts are saying.” But yesterday, CNN found themselves describing the mortality rate for the virus in new terms. Oops.
How many people die after being infected with the novel coronavirus? Fewer than previously calculated, according to a study released Monday, but still more than die from the flu. The research, published in the medical journal The Lancet Infectious Diseases, estimated that about 0.66% of those infected with the virus will die. That coronavirus death rate, which is lower than earlier estimates, takes into account potentially milder cases that often go undiagnosed — but it’s still far higher than the 0.1% of people who are killed by the flu.
So that’s at least one bright spot of good news amidst an otherwise grim forecast for the virus. The linked report is a rather lengthy article with plenty of good information in it, including quotes from multiple medical authorities. It also includes a brief reference to the fact that the projected death rate is “lower than earlier estimates.” But do you know who isn’t quoted in that article? President Donald J. Trump. In fact, his name is never even mentioned. And, of course, there is no reference whatsoever to the CNN personalities who were excoriating the President when his “hunch” told him that it would wind up being “considerably lower” than the previous estimates and “way lower than one percent. 0.66% sure sounds “considerably lower” than 2.6% to me. In fact, it’s basically just a quarter of the old estimate. And it’s barely more than half of one percent.
Let’s take a walk down memory lane here and remember what some of the more high-profile talking heads on CNN had to say back then. Here’s Jim Sciutto on March 4th.
Trump has misled before. He has not until now done so during a health crisis. Will federal institutions, such as CDC, Congress & friendly media challenge him? Or will roughly half the country take his word over the facts and experts? https://t.co/c7Z29o4jHn — Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) March 5, 2020
“Trump has misled before. He has not until now done so during a health crisis. Will federal institutions, such as CDC, Congress & friendly media challenge him? Or will roughly half the country take his word over the facts and experts?”
“Here’s what Chris Cillizza had to offer the following day on March 5th.
“No big deal — just the President of the United States contradicting the medical community on the mortality rate of coronavirus. What’s he basing his conclusions on? Oh, a ‘hunch.'”
And this was Brian Stelter’s contribution to the conversation also on March 5th.
“I hesitate to even print the United States president’s words here, because they’re so at odds with what health experts are saying. But the president’s statements to Sean Hannity are significant because millions of people were watching live.”
So will we hear anything from these three and all the others who were setting their hair on fire over Trump’s “hunch” at the beginning of the month? I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen. The accusations of Trump “misleading” the public went out in real-time and then dropped down the memory hole as part of the history of this pandemic and the White House response to it. Welcome to our new media in the 21st century.


hotair--2020-04-01--Birx: Initial Western COVID-19 response handicapped by "missing a significant amount of the data" fr

Birx: Initial Western COVID-19 response handicapped by "missing a significant amount of the data" from China

Perhaps the most important moment of Donald Trump ’ s daily coronavirus crisis briefing yesterday came not from Trump but from Dr. Deborah Birx .
As in other briefings , reporters asked why the administration initially downplayed the potential severity of COVID-19 .
Birx made it very clear , albeit in a diplomatic fashion , that the official reports from China about the numbers and the spread in Wuhan and Hubei painted a picture of a very different disease .
“ I think the medical community made — interpreted the Chinese data as this was serious , but smaller than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ because probably we were missing a significant amount of the data ” from China : What data were we missing ?
The much-larger numbers on COVID-19 spread , for one .
China insisted as late as mid-January ( if not later ) that they were not seeing any signs of “ asymptomatic spread , ” meaning that casual contact would not propagate the disease .
This turned out to be spectacularly wrong , and China knew it .
In fact , they were suppressing doctors who tried to warn the outside world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and their initial success in tamping that information down led other countries — including the US — to assume this was a SARS variant with low risk for pandemic , as Birx explains .
When did China finally start being honest about asymptomatic spread ?
Today , and only maybe : A top Chinese health official said Wednesday that the government will begin counting coronavirus patients without symptoms in its official tally of cases of the virus , in what is a tacit acknowledgement that Beijing has underreported data on the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disclosed that the government is monitoring 1,541 people who have tested positive for coronavirus but have no symptoms .
Chang Jile , the head of the health agency , said at a press conference in Wuhan that the government will start reporting asymptomatic patient numbers Wednesday .
“ From April 1 , we will publish reports , outcomes and management of asymptomatic people in daily epidemic notifications , and respond to social concerns in a timely manner , ” Jile said , according to CCTV .
Jile ’ s statement is the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it has undercounted patients .
Yes , you read that correctly .
Three months or more after China knew asymptomatic carriers were a problem , and at least a month since other countries learned that the hard way , Beijing now says they ’ ll start providing that data .
It ’ s a little too late for that to do any good in terms of public policy , even if they start reporting that data honestly , which is far from certain even now .
Had we known that data when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we might have been able to arrest the spread early and save thousands of lives , if not hundreds of thousands of lives .
And yet , as my friend Jeryl Bier points out at The Dispatch , the American media keep treating China ’ s data as both reliable and remarkable : As the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 rises quickly in the United States and in many other countries around the world , the official number of new cases in China , the source of the pandemic , has fallen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , duplicity , and coverup by the Communist government of China , there is little cause to take those official figures at anything close to face value .
Nevertheless , Western media organizations , the World Health Organization , and the United Nations have taken to referring to China ’ s numbers as “ confirmed cases ” comparable to cases in other countries with more open societies and transparent governments , giving the impression that China has largely conquered the virus .
… Various media organizations have similarly relied on China ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On March 18 , the New York Times declared : “ China Hits a Coronavirus Milestone : No New Local Infections.
” While the article notes in passing that Chinese “ officials initially concealed and mismanaged the outbreak , ” it goes on to flatly assert that “ Beijing ’ s sledgehammer approach … worked to quickly lower the number of infections [ . ]
” Axios headlined a similar report “ No new coronavirus cases in Wuhan , China , where global pandemic began , ” while NPR went with ” China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Battles Coronavirus Imported From Abroad.
” Eight days later , the Times , again based on China ’ s “ confirmed ” numbers , told the world that , “ The U.S. Now Leads the World in Confirmed Coronavirus Cases.
” While the article says that “ The Times is engaged in a comprehensive effort to track the details of every confirmed case in the United States , collecting information from federal , state and local officials , ” apparently the Times applied considerably less rigor to acquire information on China .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China ’ s numbers have indeed been incomplete .
The Wall Street Journal reported that “ China said more than 1,500 people who were infected with the virus but haven ’ t shown symptoms weren ’ t included in its national tally of confirmed cases.
” That report finally prompted China ’ s rethink on reporting asymptomatic cases .
Their track record right up to today should have everyone highly skeptical that they will suddenly discover honesty and transparency .
At least ABC News shows signs of awakening : This is just the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unreliable source of data on COVID-19 , and pretty much anything else , for that matter .
They prioritize propaganda over everything else , including global health and lives at home and abroad .
Media outlets that keep talking about China ’ s “ model ” response based on nothing but Beijing ’ s self-reported numbers should be ashamed of themselves .
Their readers and consumers will remember how cheaply they sold their credibility for a very long time after this pandemic is over .

Perhaps the most important moment of Donald Trump’s daily coronavirus crisis briefing yesterday came not from Trump but from Dr. Deborah Birx. As in other briefings, reporters asked why the administration initially downplayed the potential severity of COVID-19. Birx made it very clear, albeit in a diplomatic fashion, that the official reports from China about the numbers and the spread in Wuhan and Hubei painted a picture of a very different disease.
“I think the medical community made — interpreted the Chinese data as this was serious, but smaller than anyone expected,” Birx explained, “because probably we were missing a significant amount of the data” from China:
Shorter Birx: China lied, people died pic.twitter.com/4ehGZbKF5R — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) March 31, 2020
What data were we missing? The much-larger numbers on COVID-19 spread, for one. China insisted as late as mid-January (if not later) that they were not seeing any signs of “asymptomatic spread,” meaning that casual contact would not propagate the disease. This turned out to be spectacularly wrong, and China knew it. In fact, they were suppressing doctors who tried to warn the outside world of the wildfire spread of this coronavirus, and their initial success in tamping that information down led other countries — including the US — to assume this was a SARS variant with low risk for pandemic, as Birx explains.
When did China finally start being honest about asymptomatic spread? Today, and only maybe:
A top Chinese health official said Wednesday that the government will begin counting coronavirus patients without symptoms in its official tally of cases of the virus, in what is a tacit acknowledgement that Beijing has underreported data on the pandemic. China’s National Health Commission disclosed that the government is monitoring 1,541 people who have tested positive for coronavirus but have no symptoms. Chang Jile, the head of the health agency, said at a press conference in Wuhan that the government will start reporting asymptomatic patient numbers Wednesday. “From April 1, we will publish reports, outcomes and management of asymptomatic people in daily epidemic notifications, and respond to social concerns in a timely manner,” Jile said, according to CCTV. Jile’s statement is the first time that the government has officially acknowledged that it has undercounted patients.
Yes, you read that correctly. Three months or more after China knew asymptomatic carriers were a problem, and at least a month since other countries learned that the hard way, Beijing now says they’ll start providing that data. It’s a little too late for that to do any good in terms of public policy, even if they start reporting that data honestly, which is far from certain even now. Had we known that data when China knew it and suppressed it, we might have been able to arrest the spread early and save thousands of lives, if not hundreds of thousands of lives.
And yet, as my friend Jeryl Bier points out at The Dispatch, the American media keep treating China’s data as both reliable and remarkable:
As the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 rises quickly in the United States and in many other countries around the world, the official number of new cases in China, the source of the pandemic, has fallen dramatically. Given the record of secrecy, duplicity, and coverup by the Communist government of China, there is little cause to take those official figures at anything close to face value. Nevertheless, Western media organizations, the World Health Organization, and the United Nations have taken to referring to China’s numbers as “confirmed cases” comparable to cases in other countries with more open societies and transparent governments, giving the impression that China has largely conquered the virus. … Various media organizations have similarly relied on China’s numbers for some pretty dramatic headlines. On March 18, the New York Times declared: “China Hits a Coronavirus Milestone: No New Local Infections.” While the article notes in passing that Chinese “officials initially concealed and mismanaged the outbreak,” it goes on to flatly assert that “Beijing’s sledgehammer approach … worked to quickly lower the number of infections[.]” Axios headlined a similar report “No new coronavirus cases in Wuhan, China, where global pandemic began,” while NPR went with ”China Reports No New Domestic Cases, But Battles Coronavirus Imported From Abroad.” Eight days later, the Times, again based on China’s “confirmed” numbers, told the world that, “The U.S. Now Leads the World in Confirmed Coronavirus Cases.” While the article says that “The Times is engaged in a comprehensive effort to track the details of every confirmed case in the United States, collecting information from federal, state and local officials,” apparently the Times applied considerably less rigor to acquire information on China. On Monday, however, came news that China’s numbers have indeed been incomplete. The Wall Street Journal reported that “China said more than 1,500 people who were infected with the virus but haven’t shown symptoms weren’t included in its national tally of confirmed cases.”
That report finally prompted China’s rethink on reporting asymptomatic cases. Their track record right up to today should have everyone highly skeptical that they will suddenly discover honesty and transparency.
At least ABC News shows signs of awakening:
Since mid-February, China has not included patients who have tested positive for COVID-19 but show no symptoms in its official count—leading to worry over whether China’s numbers reflected the magnitude of infections. https://t.co/0H09K6z6e1 — ABC News (@ABC) April 1, 2020
This is just the latest example of how China is an unreliable source of data on COVID-19, and pretty much anything else, for that matter. They prioritize propaganda over everything else, including global health and lives at home and abroad. Media outlets that keep talking about China’s “model” response based on nothing but Beijing’s self-reported numbers should be ashamed of themselves. Their readers and consumers will remember how cheaply they sold their credibility for a very long time after this pandemic is over.


hotair--2020-04-01--Take it from a birdfarm sailor: Get our squids off the Roosevelt

Last night , Allahpundit wrote about the dire conditions onboard the aircraft carrier USS Roosevelt , currently docked in Guam and facing an outbreak of COVID-19 .
There are an undetermined number of sailors infected onboard and the ship ’ s captain is sounding the alarm , asking permission to get everyone ashore and into isolation .
Speaking as a former sailor who spent five years serving on an aircraft carrier ( three of them , actually ) , I wanted to share some of the realities of shipboard life that make this extraordinary situation one which calls for immediate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tape the Pentagon tends to generate when a decision is required .
But first , a brief update from CNN that makes it sound as if we might be getting a relatively speedy resolution .
Asked about the letter , Secretary of Defense Mark Esper told CBS Tuesday , “ Well , I have not had a chance to read that letter , read it in detail .
Again I ’ m going to rely on the Navy chain of command to go out there to assess the situation and make sure they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the support they need to get the sailors healthy and the ship back at sea.
” … Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly told CNN ’ s John King Tuesday that he was aware of the letter and that the Navy was working to get the sailors off the ship .
“ I heard about the letter from Capt .
Crozier this morning , I know that our command organization has been aware of this for about 24 hours and we have been working actually the last seven days to move those sailors off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Guam .
The concerns being expressed further up the chain of command would be completely understandable in more normal times .
Effectively emptying an aircraft carrier of her entire crew in the middle of a WestPac deployment is unheard of and removes one of the key pieces in our naval portfolio from the field of play .
But these are not ordinary times and the sailors onboard the Roosevelt are in more danger than pretty much anyone reading this who isn ’ t working in a New York City ICU without a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the USS Constellation in the 70s and 80s , with additional TAD assignments to both the Kittyhawk and the Ranger .
Trust me , I ’ ve spent a lot of time living in the cramped , hectic and frequently dangerous conditions on a birdfarm .
And while Allahpundit brought up some of the crowding issues , that really doesn ’ t paint a full picture of what ’ s going on , particularly in two specific aspects of shipboard life .
While carriers are huge – and they have to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are frequently as cramped as any you ’ ll find anywhere other than on a submarine .
( The bubbleheads have it even worse . )
The corridors are cramped and you can rarely pass anyone going in the other direction without physically brushing up against them .
The berthing quarters for the enlisted sailors are mostly long , narrow rooms with rows of racks ( bunks ) stacked three high and only a couple of feet apart .
The only large , wide-open space inside the hull is the hanger bay , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of potentially dangerous activity restricted to the airedales who tend to the jets and choppers .
The ladders that you need to traverse to go up or down between decks are narrow and steep , requiring you to grab on to the handrails to navigate them .
Hatches and doorways almost always need to be secured while underway , so you ’ re constantly grabbing the various knobs and handles to open them and dog them down after passing through .
Trying to keep all of those surfaces sterilized to the level required @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impossible .
The air is recirculated through the interior constantly without any sort of micro-filtering taking place .
Oh , and did I mention that there are literally more than four thousand souls onboard when the air wings are present ?
The other factor to consider is the lack of medical facilities .
Yes , there is a sickbay and the doctors and medical corpsmen are skilled professionals who know how to care for the health of the sailors .
But first of all , the number of actual hospital beds is ridiculously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We talking less than fifty , at least back in my day .
And they are set up to handle accidents , physical injuries and the occasional case of STDs .
The carrier ’ s sickbay is in no way , shape or form designed to deal with an epidemic of respiratory illnesses requiring lengthy periods of bed rest and care .
Asking the doctors onboard the Roosevelt to handle this outbreak with the resources they have available on the ship would essentially be the equivalent of issuing a death sentence for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s going to be hard enough to find enough beds for all of the infected once they go ashore in Guam .
( Yes , I ’ ve been there at least half a dozen times .
Beautiful place , but the facilities are not expansive . )
The sailors need to be separated and put somewhere where they can keep plenty of distance between them so those who are not yet infected can stay that way and those who ’ ve already contracted COVID-19 can have a chance at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it needs to be happening right now .
Again , I realize that asking the Pentagon to empty an aircraft carrier that ’ s deployed near a tense part of the world is beyond anything they ’ re used to dealing with .
The good news is that the vast majority of the sailors are young or middle-aged and in generally better health than most of the population .
That means that the majority of them will survive the virus if they get infected , provided they have a reasonable level of care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will .
And the cost of doing nothing is too great to delay a decision in this matter .

Last night, Allahpundit wrote about the dire conditions onboard the aircraft carrier USS Roosevelt, currently docked in Guam and facing an outbreak of COVID-19. There are an undetermined number of sailors infected onboard and the ship’s captain is sounding the alarm, asking permission to get everyone ashore and into isolation. Speaking as a former sailor who spent five years serving on an aircraft carrier (three of them, actually), I wanted to share some of the realities of shipboard life that make this extraordinary situation one which calls for immediate action without the usual blizzard of red tape the Pentagon tends to generate when a decision is required. But first, a brief update from CNN that makes it sound as if we might be getting a relatively speedy resolution.
Asked about the letter, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper told CBS Tuesday, “Well, I have not had a chance to read that letter, read it in detail. Again I’m going to rely on the Navy chain of command to go out there to assess the situation and make sure they provide the captain and the crew all the support they need to get the sailors healthy and the ship back at sea.” … Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly told CNN’s John King Tuesday that he was aware of the letter and that the Navy was working to get the sailors off the ship. “I heard about the letter from Capt. Crozier this morning, I know that our command organization has been aware of this for about 24 hours and we have been working actually the last seven days to move those sailors off the ship and get them into accommodations in Guam.
The concerns being expressed further up the chain of command would be completely understandable in more normal times. Effectively emptying an aircraft carrier of her entire crew in the middle of a WestPac deployment is unheard of and removes one of the key pieces in our naval portfolio from the field of play. But these are not ordinary times and the sailors onboard the Roosevelt are in more danger than pretty much anyone reading this who isn’t working in a New York City ICU without a facemask.
I served four Pacific deployments on the USS Constellation in the 70s and 80s, with additional TAD assignments to both the Kittyhawk and the Ranger. Trust me, I’ve spent a lot of time living in the cramped, hectic and frequently dangerous conditions on a birdfarm. And while Allahpundit brought up some of the crowding issues, that really doesn’t paint a full picture of what’s going on, particularly in two specific aspects of shipboard life.
While carriers are huge – and they have to be given their mission – the inner spaces are frequently as cramped as any you’ll find anywhere other than on a submarine. (The bubbleheads have it even worse.) The corridors are cramped and you can rarely pass anyone going in the other direction without physically brushing up against them. The berthing quarters for the enlisted sailors are mostly long, narrow rooms with rows of racks (bunks) stacked three high and only a couple of feet apart. The only large, wide-open space inside the hull is the hanger bay, but that’s generally a beehive of potentially dangerous activity restricted to the airedales who tend to the jets and choppers.
The ladders that you need to traverse to go up or down between decks are narrow and steep, requiring you to grab on to the handrails to navigate them. Hatches and doorways almost always need to be secured while underway, so you’re constantly grabbing the various knobs and handles to open them and dog them down after passing through. Trying to keep all of those surfaces sterilized to the level required to combat the virus would be simply impossible. The air is recirculated through the interior constantly without any sort of micro-filtering taking place. Oh, and did I mention that there are literally more than four thousand souls onboard when the air wings are present?
The other factor to consider is the lack of medical facilities. Yes, there is a sickbay and the doctors and medical corpsmen are skilled professionals who know how to care for the health of the sailors. But first of all, the number of actual hospital beds is ridiculously low for a population of that size. We talking less than fifty, at least back in my day. And they are set up to handle accidents, physical injuries and the occasional case of STDs. The carrier’s sickbay is in no way, shape or form designed to deal with an epidemic of respiratory illnesses requiring lengthy periods of bed rest and care.
Asking the doctors onboard the Roosevelt to handle this outbreak with the resources they have available on the ship would essentially be the equivalent of issuing a death sentence for a potentially sizable portion of the crew. It’s going to be hard enough to find enough beds for all of the infected once they go ashore in Guam. (Yes, I’ve been there at least half a dozen times. Beautiful place, but the facilities are not expansive.) The sailors need to be separated and put somewhere where they can keep plenty of distance between them so those who are not yet infected can stay that way and those who’ve already contracted COVID-19 can have a chance at getting the best care possible. And it needs to be happening right now.
Again, I realize that asking the Pentagon to empty an aircraft carrier that’s deployed near a tense part of the world is beyond anything they’re used to dealing with. The good news is that the vast majority of the sailors are young or middle-aged and in generally better health than most of the population. That means that the majority of them will survive the virus if they get infected, provided they have a reasonable level of care available. But not all of them will. And the cost of doing nothing is too great to delay a decision in this matter.