CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

marsh

On TB every waking moment
No arrests in Philly for stealing cars, prostitution, retail theft, drugs, vandalism, more.
Posted by: Leah Anaya|March 18, 2020 |CategoriesEditorial, Featured, Homeland Security, Law and Legal, News, Patrol

PHILADELPHIA, PA– With the ever-growing fears surrounding the COVID-19 virus, the Philadelphia Police Department has completely (and, hopefully, temporarily) changed policing as we know it.

Under the guidance of Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw, Law Enforcement Today is told a number of different “non-violent” crimes will become non-jailable offenses and instead will be “effectuated via arrest warrant.”

Police will be able to detain the offender for enough time to positively identify them and collect evidence for their case. After that, the offenders will be released.

Reports will be completed per normal, and then submitted to the district attorney’s office. At that point, DA Larry Krasner will get to decide whether an arrest warrant will be issued for the offender’s arrest, which would likely occur once the COVID-19 is no longer a looming threat.

I’m going to go ahead and guess that there will be close to zero arrests made at the behest of Krasner. But that’s a whole different story (one which you can find plenty of information about on Law Enforcement Today).

Included in the Commissioner’s list of nonviolent crimes are: All narcotic offenses; theft from persons; retail theft; theft from auto; burglary; vandalism; all bench warrants; stolen auto; economic crimes (bad checks, fraud); and prostitution.

Steve Keeley

@KeeleyFox29

· Mar 17, 2020

BREAKING: @phillypolice officers instructed to stop making arrests for following list of what are consider non-violent crimes. Here is the email sent to city police officers telling them to just obtain arrest warrants for now. @FOX29philly
View image on Twitter View image on Twitter
Commissioner Outlaw did leave room for extenuating circumstances, stating:
“If an officer believes that releasing the offender would pose a threat to public safety, the officer will notify a supervisor, who will review the totality of the circumstances and utilize discretion, in the interest of public safety, in determining the appropriate course of action.”

In a statement to the public, Commissioner Outlaw said:

“Our mission is to protect and promote the health and safety of our officers and the community we serve to the best of our ability while continuing to discharge every aspect of our core duties.”

The Commissioner released the new temporary arrest policy the day after Krasner called for a reduction in low-level crime arrests.

Philadelphia Tribune@PhillyTrib

https://twitter.com/PhillyTrib/status/1240036438957109248

Krasner said that he had urged Philadelphia Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw to shift the focus of the police force toward “serious offenses” in the interest of public health.http://bit.ly/3b40hLj

 

Freeholder

This too shall pass.

As COVID-19 Drives People Into Isolation, Wall Street's New 'Virtual Workplace' May Become The Norm

Sat, 03/21/2020 - 22:35

As governments take drastic measures to slow the spread of the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic, Wall Street - much like a plethora of other industries - has embraced the virtual workplace, according to Bloomberg.



And according to the report, virtual finance may outlast the coronavirus - assuming a treatment is eventually found. Bloomberg notes that there are "early signs that some of the emergency measures Wall Street is rolling out to keep employees safe in a pandemic will become a lasting practice in an industry that’s long mythologized the handshake."

Early reports of tele-banking success came from Asia, forcing bankers to hunker down as COVID-19 began spreading like wildfire. Many predict their colleagues in other countries will easily adapt to the changes as well - beginning with sales and trading.

"The outbreak has created the urgency to try out new ideas," says Morgan Stanley's head of Asia institutional equity distribution, Mehdee Reza, who oversees the firm's annual investor summit in Hong Kong next week. After the event moved online, reservations jumped 50% - topping estimated participation by more than 400%.

Morgan has moved other events online as well, with one focusing on Indian financial companies seeing a surge in registrants.

UBS, meanwhile, saw travel costs for Asia plunge 90% in February after the outbreak curtailed movement, according to one person familiar with the situation. Now, the financial firm is considering a long-term shift toward remote meetings for bankers who cover the region.



At UBS's Zurich headquarters, meanwhile, wealth management officials are considering a significant reduction in travel - though executives will still fly to meet clients who prefer it, or for types of business which must be conducted in person.

Traders and salespeople in New York and London are setting up shop in their dens and kitchens for the long haul - though some are grumbling about lack of access to the full array of resources in the office. Others are parents who have been arguing for years that it's easy to handle transactions remotely.

LA hedge fund investor Michael Rosen says he's enjoying the efficiency that telecommuting brings. Instead of traveling to meetings, he uses video-conferencing programs such as Zoom to hold meetings - though he does admit that lack of face-to-face interaction makes it harder to do gut-checks before handing millions of dollars to a fund manager.

"We will return, one day, to in-person meetings, but video technology is here to stay and will only grow in importance," said Rosen. "I suspect it is now a core feature of how we will work in the future."





According to Morgan Stanley co-chief CEO of Asia-Pacific and co-head of global equities, "There will be a change, there’s no question."

"I don’t know that we’re going to go all the way back to where we were. I think we will end up somewhere in the middle."

Yup. Just like I suspected, people are going to see some big advantages from doing business (and school) on-line wherever possible. Even when this is over, things aren’t going back to the way that were.

Kathleen
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

The upcoming job losses will be unlike anything the US has ever seen

PUBLISHED FRI, MAR 20 20207:13 AM EDTUPDATED FRI, MAR 20 202011:10 AM EDT
Jeff Cox

The coronavirus crisis is likely to result in layoffs on a scale that the U.S. has never seen before.
  • Economists expect April to be the first reporting month when the damage starts to show up.
  • Forecasts for that month range from 500,000 to 5 million.
  • The worst month during the financial crisis saw nonfarm payrolls decrease by 800,000.
  • Weekly jobless claims numbers are expected to be so bad that the White House has reportedly asked state officials to delay releasing precise counts.
  • US job market already seeing a hit from coronavirus layoffs—Four experts on where the economy is headed
  • When the damage the coronavirus inflicts on the U.S. jobs market becomes clearer, it could be unlike anything the country has ever seen.
  • Judging by numerous forecasts from economists, the avalanche of furloughs will easily break the record for most in a single month.
Upcoming weekly jobless claims will shatter the standards set even during the worst points of the financial crisis and the early-1980s recession, with Bank of America forecasting a total of 3 million when the number is released Thursday. Those figures are expected to be so bad, in fact, that the Trump administration, according to several media reports, has asked state officials to delay releasing precise counts.

While the headline unemployment rate is highly unlikely to approach the 24.9% during the Great Depression, it very well could be the highest in almost 40 years, something unthinkable for a jobs market that had been on fire as recently as February.

Jobs losses recession recoveries

Job losses will be counted not in the thousands or even hundreds of thousands, but rather in the millions. Although it’s uncertain whether the total count from this recession ends up breaking previous records, it’s a good bet that April’s number will outpace by a large margin any single month in U.S. history for a drop in nonfarm payrolls.

5 million in April alone?

The worst month for job losses during the financial crisis was 800,00 in March 2009.

Some forecasts see April quintupling that or worse. Forecasts for that month range from 500,000 to 5 million.

“There’s just so much that we don’t know about how long the disruption to economic activity related to the containment of the virus will be. That does make forecasting these things very difficult,” said Jeremy Lawson, chief economist at Aberdeen Standard Investments. “By the time you get to the April payroll number, which may be right at the deepest level of contraction, yes, those numbers are plausible certainly.”

Weekly jobless claims up by 70,000 to 281,000 as coronavirus hits economy
Because of the way the Labor Department conducts its sampling, the March nonfarm payrolls report probably won’t reflect the worst of the layoffs. Where those numbers will show up is in weekly jobless claims figures.

Looking further ahead to April, Lawson said a drop of 500,000 for the month “is not an unreasonable starting point.” Other forecasters, though, see a far gloomier picture.

Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, sees the possibility of 5 million job losses in that month alone.

“We never imagined we’d write anything like this,” Sheperdson said in a note. “The shock will be so great that it will leave policymakers with no choice but to pass much more stimulus than is currently under discussion.”

When all is said and done, the unemployment rate will be 10.6%, and there will be 17.9 million Americans on the unemployment line, or about 12 million more than in February, according to a projection from Steven Blitz, chief U.S. economist at TS Lombard. The current jobless rate is 3.5%, the lowest in more than 50 years.

If Blitz is right, that would put unemployment at its highest percent level since December 1982.

Restaurant industry estimates $225 billion in coronavirus-related losses
Elsewhere, the Economic Policy Institute projects 3 million job losses during the summer, while Citigroup economist Veronica Clark said the rise in jobless filings “is just the start of a period of a rapid increase in claims over the next few weeks.”

“If there is not a normalization of activity by mid-April (which looks increasingly unlikely), we would not be surprised to see job losses in the multi-millions next month,” Clark wrote.

One survey released Thursday painted a far gloomier mosaic: SurveyUSA indicated that 14 million people already have experienced temporary layoffs, while 2% of the workers have lost their jobs outright. A bright side: A Towers Watson survey said 52% of employers who experience a shutdown will continue to pay employees.

A call for even more stimulus
The big layoff numbers are not likely to show up until the April data is released in early May. The March report could be somewhere around flat as the sample period the Labor Department will use for its estimate is the week ended March 14, before some of the worst news came about companies cutting workers.

How to stay financially sound during the coronavirus pandemic
Since then, Marriott International has announced it will cut thousands of workers, and similar moves are expected to be executed throughout the hospitality and food and beverage industries.

One upside to the coronavirus scenario is that most economists still expect the downturn to be brief compared to other recessions, with the worst news front-loaded.

“As socialization returns and shuttered businesses reopen, the economy will take on the look of a more typical recession,” Blitz wrote. “With a ‘regular’ recession in place, made less severe by the planned [$1 trillion] of fiscal spending, the unemployment rate will fall into mild recession territory, probably 6% by year-end. This will be the odd cycle, where the highest unemployment rate comes at the beginning.”

Still, those kinds of numbers could push policymakers into even more stimulus than currently contemplated.

“If this response includes enough fiscal stimulus that is well-targeted and sustained so long as the economy remains weak, job loss will be substantially reduced relative to any scenario where policymakers drag their feet,” wrote Josh Bivens, director of research at the Economic Policy Institute. “Even with moderate fiscal stimulus, we’re likely to see 3 million jobs lost by summertime. Keeping this number down and allowing any job loss to be quickly recouped after the crisis ends should spur policymakers to act.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Distilleries Take Action To Help Americans In COVID-19 Crisis; Trump Cheers
By James Barrett
DailyWire.com

Two metal storage vats containing beer at microbrewery, Cape Town, South Africa. (Photo by: Edwin Remsberg/VW PICS/UIG via Getty Image)
Edwin Remsberg/VW PICS/UIG via Getty Images

A growing number of local distilleries are finding a creative way to help Americans — and their employees — amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Distilleries in Pennsylvania, Vermont and North Carolina are temporarily converting their operations to produce a much-needed product amid the plague of panic-buying: hand sanitizer.

In a report promoted by President Trump on Thursday, NBC News tells the story of multiple local distillery owners responding to the exploding demand for hand sanitizer, which has largely disappeared from shelves and is one of the more price-gouged items during the crisis.

“America’s Private Sector is stepping up to help us be STRONG!” Trump tweeted Thursday in reference to NBC’s report. “Many of the Nation’s distillers, large and small, are producing and donating hand sanitizer to help fight [COVID-19]. THANK YOU!”

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1240765945968234496

America’s Private Sector is stepping up to help us be STRONG! Many of the Nation’s distillers, large and small, are producing and donating hand sanitizer to help fight #COVID19. THANK YOU!


“A Pennsylvania distillery owner who grew increasingly angry as he saw the skyrocketing price of hand sanitizer has decided to do something about it: He’s temporarily converting his operation into a production line for the suddenly hard-to-find, gooey, alcohol-based disinfectant,” NBC reported this week.

“Eight Oaks Farm Distillery filled its first 20 bottles on Monday, a batch destined for charitable groups that need hand sanitizer but haven’t been able to get it due to the coronavirus pandemic,” the outlet reports. “The family-owned distillery plans to dramatically boost production this week and distribute the bottles to charities as well as offer them at farmers’ markets where it sells its spirits and through its website. The price: whatever people decide to donate.”

The goal, the brewery’s founder Chad Butters told NBC, is to “flood the valley with hand sanitizer and drive that price right down.”

Other distilleries are taking similar action, among them Vermont’s Green Mountain Distillers and Smugglers’ Notch Distillery and North Carolina’s Durham Distillery. The way the distilleries are handling payment varies, including whatever people choose to donate and donating a portion of proceeds to coronavirus response efforts.

Some of the motivation to convert the distilleries to hand sanitizer production is to find ways to be able to pay employees amid widespread mandated shutdowns of bars and restaurants.

“I know I have a unique opportunity to help out a little bit and keep my staff employed,” said Smugglers’ Notch Distillery co-owner Jeremy Elliott. Some 40% of the distillery’s business comes from bars and restaurants, NBC reports.
The hand sanitizer initiative is rapidly gaining traction. The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States has been in contact with Trump’s coronavirus task force and regulatory agencies to help cut through the red tape. Chief Executive Officer Chris Swonger told NBC that so far the government has been quite receptive to their efforts.

Trump has been making a point of publicly celebrating the private sector’s response to the crisis. As The Daily Wire noted earlier this week, Trump took a moment Wednesday to praise retail giant Target’s efforts to continue to provide crucial supplies to Americans and care for their employees during the pandemic.
“The hospitality industry is going to be decimated by this and they are our primary clients. We’re looking for ways to help in the response to this, but also to find other ways to look for revenue streams,” Trump tweeted in response to Target CEO Brian Cornell, one of the CEOs who joined the president in a press conference last Friday, outlining new measures his company was taking.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1240303426254372864
 

Troke

On TB every waking moment
The following is why the above is hysterical to me.

Pissing i n the wind as the coffins pile up in 3-5 weeks.

Remember, we're seeing the EFFECTS of what happened TWO WEEKS AGO, and won't see the "ground truth" of TODAY until April 6
At about whhich time all y'all are gonna be axing "WHERE THE F%$& DID ALL THESE PATIENTS COME FROM" and I'll point you to The Double Black Diamond explanation.

The CRUX of why the educated and aware of us are freaking...or considering that this is a HUGE issue:

Nota bene*:














*{Don't believe me. As Casey Stengel said, "You could look it up." It's not like you're going to work or anything, right? You can look up most of those numbers per country here or here. On the WHO site, look "by country" and pull the slider bar down to the last couple of lines. Note that they don't precisely agree. Round it off. The SK number was courtesy of CNN. Wikipedia puts them at 12.3, not 22. Caveat emptor.}

Source links at site:



Links in the graph above which is the last graph.

The rest is just more fear-mongering explanations of the math involved for hospitals and personnel.



Here is the Double Black Diamond explanation:
Glennb, we stand about 10 meters down a half-kilometer ski slope and you are trying to tell us that it doesn't deserve the Double Black Diamond rating. NONE of us have actually skied or walked the trail so we don't PERSONALLY know what gives it the dire Double BD rating but better men and women than we have skied it and have agreed.

What relevance does this have?

Go ahead and run the checker board and rice grains calculations out to the whole second row, 16 squares, which comes to about 300,000 IIRC. Now go back to Day 2, which is back 14 days. That is how many infections we can see on day 16 because it take 14 days to appear. We can SEE 4 cases with 300,000 out there. THIS is the problem. We can NEVER see how many cases are out there until the VERY END day (plus 14 days) because they take up to 14 days to show up.

The figures you are referring to are at BEST 14 days out. BACK FROM TODAY, with a full 14 days ahead to find out where we are TODAY.

Which means that the figures you so lovingly cling to as "The Facts" are demonstrably worth about a boot full of warm piss.
Nobody shows up at the ER until the 14th day after exposure? They are in perfect health for 13 days and then on the 14th day?????????????

Seems to me you would have a clue that an avalanche is coming well before 14 days.

I would be curious to see a graph of symptoms by day, after exposure. I bet there is a peak day in there well before day 14.
 

Hfcomms

EN66iq
Typical of the media blaming Trump now for an overdose that happened on the other side of the world.

I checked into Chloroquine after I read that and it is a nasty, nasty drug. Do not take this as a prophylactic unless you know the dangers involved. I did a separate thread on it;

 

jward

passin' thru

Troke

On TB every waking moment
I caught a reporter in Italy earlier this evening saying doctors are saying that most of those dying are not dying from the virus. They are dying with the virus and have multiple underlying conditions. IOW, they are very ill from other things to the point the virus pushes them over the edge. Not a disease for the old/ill to catch.
deleted
 

Terrwyn

Veteran Member
You charge everything and then pay off the charge with an electronic check. That is if you don't have online banking.
I should have also said you can do your banking over the phone. And there are simple instructions on the internet for doing so. You can make deposits into your checking from savings etc. Be prepared to be treated like a scam artist though and have your password etc. handy.
 

TorahTips

Membership Revoked
3. Well I would say about 100k to 1,000k dead in China would be a subtle clue it started there. The absolute source is patient zero based on the previous sentence is likely a or was a resident of Wuhan. So there is some waddling and some quacking...
OK. I wasn't clear enough. Yes, it is clear that it not only started in China but in Wuhan and not just in Wuhan but in the general proximity of the market. I guess my real question would be: who manufactured it and delivered it to the market? US? Canada? China itself? Deep State? Trump? Nephalim? Who made and delivered the package?
 

Trivium Pursuit

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Well, seems like we're about to go into the lockdown phase. Australia hit the unlucky 1,000 mark and it looks like it's prompted several states to jump off the federal bandwagon and make their own rules. South Australia along with the Territory are joining Tassie in requiring everyone entering from interstate to quarantine themselves for a fortnight, and we've just had advance notice that NSW and Vic are going to announce more severe social distancing measures tonight, including closing non-essential businesses and potentially schools too. No advice yet on whether my job is going to be considered essential, but I've plenty of vacation time saved up anyway. :shr:
It's a good thing that Aussies are tough. I hate to see this happening to all right after those nasty fires.
 

raven

TB Fanatic
U of M Research
@UMNresearch


#UMN's Michael Osterholm coauthored this
@washingtonpost
piece: There is no black-or-white option here. We will have to figure out what shade of gray we can accept & apply. We will get through this, but hard & painful choices are inescapable.
@CIDRAP

View: https://twitter.com/UMNresearch/status/1241486092777316352?s=20
understand that when they say "hard and painful choices" they mean choices will be made that result in someone dying unnecessarily
 
Last edited:

Mixin

Veteran Member
Justice Department Reportedly Asks Congress for Indefinite Detention Powers To Fight Coronavirus
Congress should loudly and unanimously reject this insanity.
ERIC BOEHM | 3.21.2020 4:03 PM

polspphotos659868

(Michael Brochstein/Polaris/Newscom)

The Justice Department is using the COVID-19 outbreak to press for sweeping new powers that include being able to detain Americans indefinitely without a trial, Politico reports.

The department is asking Congress to allow the U.S. attorney general to ask courts to suspend court proceedings. These include "any statutes or rules of procedure otherwise affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, pre-trial, trial, and post-trial procedures in criminal and juvenile proceedings and all civil process and proceedings," reports Betsy Woodruff Swan, citing DOJ documents presented to Congress.
In other words, the Justice Department would be able to postpone trials, hearings, and other procedural steps that follow arrest. That represents a potentially huge violation of the constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Those powers would apply "whenever the district court is fully or partially closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency situation," Woodruff Swan writes, and would remain in place for "one year following the end of the national emergency."

715 people are talking about this
Perhaps the Justice Department is attempting to find out whether there are any libertarians in a pandemic. The right to see a judge and seek release from detention after an arrest—known in legal lingo as habeas corpus—is one of the fundamental building blocks of a democratic society, one in which the state cannot deprive individuals of their freedom without due process. The times in American history when that right has been suspended or circumvented are some of the darkest. We should not be seeking to repeat them.

"The DOJ proposal is deeply troubling and would raise a whole host of constitutional concerns," says Scott Bullock, president and general counsel for the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm. "History demonstrates again and again that governments use a crisis to expand power and violate vital constitutional principles. And when the supposed emergency is over, the expanded powers often become permanent."

Clark Neily, vice president for criminal justice at the Cato Institute, says the Justice Department should not be trusted with more expansive powers.
"If history is any indication, it's a near certainty that these powers will be abused and that DOJ will try to hide those abuses when they occur," says Neily. "This is simply not an agency that has earned the kind of trust implied by these requests for increased authority and discretion."
It's also unclear how allowing indefinite detention would help fight the coronavirus outbreak. It seems more likely that the DOJ is learning from members of Congress and the president that the crisis provides a convenient excuse to ask for things it already wanted in the first place.

"Congress must loudly reply 'NO,'" wrote Rep. Justin Amash on Twitter.
I didn't read the doc. that Politico wrote about but I believe we're in for a mess when this virus sweeps through the prison/court systems. I've been following a couple of murder trials up in Elkhart Co., IN and it appears that all IN courts have asked for temporary changes for 30 +/- days in procedures, which will be reviewed prior to that time. I have been in that court system and absolutely would not want to have to go there during a pandemic. I'm not sure the accused will want to be there, either. It's a very busy, crowded place; one jury trial I've been watching has been pushed out 2 months due to court time constraints.

Elkhart courts say:
7. The most recent information available identifies those over the age of 60 as the population most susceptible to serious complications from the COVlD-19 virus.
8. A review of jury summons to be issued this week reveals the over 60 population constituted 20% of the jury pool.
9. Ordering susceptible population to appear for Jury Service in pandemic would be irresponsible.
10. Elkhart County does not possess adequate hygiene stations or supplies for the dozens ofjurors required for the selection of jury in civil and criminal cases.
11. In addition, the ordering of individuals to convene in group setting at this time, given the WHO, CDC and Federal government recommendation’s would create an unnecessarily stressful situation for summoned jurors. Jurors should not have to weigh compliance with juror summons against possible contraction of COVlD-19.

For anyone interested, here's what the Indiana courts have requested and what the Indiana SC has granted:
 

2DEES

Inactive

BIG PHARMA PREPARES TO PROFIT FROM THE CORONAVIRUS
Sharon Lerner
March 13 2020, 11:46 a.m.

AS THE NEW CORONAVIRUS spreads illness, death, and catastrophe around the world, virtually no economic sector has been spared from harm. Yet amid the mayhem from the global pandemic, one industry is not only surviving, it is profiting handsomely.

“Pharmaceutical companies view Covid-19 as a once-in-a-lifetime business opportunity,” said Gerald Posner, author of “Pharma: Greed, Lies, and the Poisoning of America.” The world needs pharmaceutical products, of course. For the new coronavirus outbreak, in particular, we need treatments and vaccines and, in the U.S., tests. Dozens of companies are now vying to make them.

“They’re all in that race,” said Posner, who described the potential payoffs for winning the race as huge. The global crisis “will potentially be a blockbuster for the industry in terms of sales and profits,” he said, adding that “the worse the pandemic gets, the higher their eventual profit.”
Join The Intercept’s Newsletter
The ability to make money off of pharmaceuticals is already uniquely large in the U.S., which lacks the basic price controls other countries have, giving drug companies more freedom over setting prices for their products than anywhere else in the world. During the current crisis, pharmaceutical makers may have even more leeway than usual because of language industry lobbyists inserted into an $8.3 billion coronavirus spending package, passed last week, to maximize their profits from the pandemic.

Initially, some lawmakers had tried to ensure that the federal government would limit how much pharmaceutical companies could reap from vaccines and treatments for the new coronavirus that they developed with the use of public funding. In February, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and other House members wrote to Trump pleading that he “ensure that any vaccine or treatment developed with U.S. taxpayer dollars be accessible, available and affordable,” a goal they said couldn’t be met “if pharmaceutical corporations are given authority to set prices and determine distribution, putting profit-making interests ahead of health priorities.”

The Coronavirus Crisis

When the coronavirus funding was being negotiated, Schakowsky tried again, writing to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar on March 2 that it would be “unacceptable if the rights to produce and market that vaccine were subsequently handed over to a pharmaceutical manufacturer through an exclusive license with no conditions on pricing or access, allowing the company to charge whatever it would like and essentially selling the vaccine back to the public who paid for its development.”

But many Republicans opposed adding language to the bill that would restrict the industry’s ability to profit, arguing that it would stifle research and innovation. And although Azar, who served as the top lobbyist and head of U.S. operations for the pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly before joining the Trump administration, assured Schakowsky that he shared her concerns, the bill went on to enshrine drug companies’ ability to set potentially exorbitant prices for vaccines and drugs they develop with taxpayer dollars.

The final aid package not only omitted language that would have limited drug makers’ intellectual property rights, it also left out language that had been in an earlier draft that would have allowed the federal government to take any action if it has concerns that the treatments or vaccines developed with public funds are priced too high.

“Those lobbyists deserve a medal from their pharma clients because they killed that intellectual property provision,” said Posner, who added that the omission of language allowing the government to respond to price gouging was even worse. “To allow them to have this power during a pandemic is outrageous.”


The truth is that profiting off public investment is also business as usual for the pharmaceutical industry. Since the 1930s, the National Institutes of Health has put some $900 billion into research that drug companies then used to patent brand-name medications, according to Posner’s calculations. Every single drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration between 2010 and 2016 involved science funded with tax dollars through the NIH, according to the advocacy group Patients for Affordable Drugs. Taxpayers spent more than $100 billion on that research.

Among the drugs that were developed with some public funding and went on to be huge earners for private companies are the HIV drug AZT and the cancer treatment Kymriah, which Novartis now sells for $475,000.

In his book “Pharma,” Posner points to another example of private companies making exorbitant profits from drugs produced with public funding. The antiviral drug sofosbuvir, which is used to treat hepatitis C, stemmed from key research funded by the National Institutes of Health. That drug is now owned by Gilead Sciences, which charges $1,000 per pill — more than many people with hepatitis C can afford; Gilead earned $44 billion from the drug during its first three years on the market.

“Wouldn’t it be great to have some of the profits from those drugs go back into public research at the NIH?” asked Posner.

Instead, the profits have funded huge bonuses for drug company executives and aggressive marketing of drugs to consumers. They have also been used to further boost the profitability of the pharmaceutical sector. According to calculations by Axios, drug companies make 63 percent of total health care profits in the U.S. That’s in part because of the success of their lobbying efforts. In 2019, the pharmaceutical industry spent $295 million on lobbying, far more than any other sector in the U.S. That’s almost twice as much as the next biggest spender — the electronics, manufacturing, and equipment sector — and well more than double what oil and gas companies spent on lobbying. The industry also spends lavishly on campaign contributions to both Democratic and Republican lawmakers. Throughout the Democratic primary, Joe Biden has led the pack among recipients of contributions from the health care and pharmaceutical industries.

The Coronavirus Crisis

Big Pharma’s spending has positioned the industry well for the current pandemic. While stock markets have plummeted in reaction to the Trump administration’s bungling of the crisis, more than 20 companies working on a vaccine and other products related to the new SARS-CoV-2 virus have largely been spared. Stock prices for the biotech company Moderna, which began recruiting participants for a clinical trial of its new candidate for a coronavirus vaccine two weeks ago, have shot up during that time.

On Thursday, a day of general carnage in the stock markets, Eli Lilly’s stock also enjoyed a boost after the company announced that it, too, is joining the effort to come up with a therapy for the new coronavirus. And Gilead Sciences, which is at work on a potential treatment as well, is also thriving. Gilead’s stock price was already up since news that its antiviral drug remdesivir, which was created to treat Ebola, was being given to Covid-19 patients. Today, after Wall Street Journal reported that the drug had a positive effect on a small number of infected cruise ship passengers, the price went up further.

Several companies, including Johnson & Johnson, DiaSorin Molecular, and QIAGEN have made it clear that they are receiving funding from the Department of Health and Human Services for efforts related to the pandemic, but it is unclear whether Eli Lilly and Gilead Sciences are using government money for their work on the virus. To date, HHS has not issued a list of grant recipients. And according to Reuters, the Trump administration has told top health officials to treat their coronavirus discussions as classified and excluded staffers without security clearances from discussions about the virus.

Former top lobbyists of both Eli Lilly and Gilead now serve on the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Azar served as director of U.S. operations for Eli Lilly and lobbied for the company, while Joe Grogan, now serving as director of the Domestic Policy Council, was the top lobbyist for Gilead Sciences.

Looks like the money changers are at it again. It's all about money!
 

forpetesake

Senior Member
They aren't even "experimental". Both hydrochloriquine and Azithromycin have been in constant use for years, if not decades. And any doctor can prescribe for "off label" use, no official or FDA permission required.

Summerthyme
I was responding to unfounded complaints that Trump isn't allowing use of chloroquine. He discussed compassionate use in the context of this drug being used off label for coronavirus. Chloroquine has been around a long time.
 

Jubilee on Earth

Veteran Member

Shuttering Farmers Markets Over COVID-19 Is Stupid, Dangerous, and Counterproductive

Especially during pandemic, Americans need access to healthy food.

BAYLEN LINNEKIN | 3.21.2020 8:30 AM

FarmersMarketQuarantine

(TERRY SCHMITT/UPI/Newscom)
Farmers markets, a vital link in the food chain for many U.S. consumers and small farmers, are under threat across the country as lawmakers and regulators scramble to restrict public gatherings in the face of COVID-19.

Seattle, where I live, last week ordered city markets closed until April 15. An in Virginia, a bill would temporarily close markets throughout the state.

"Seattle—where the spread of coronavirus began earlier and is further along than in most other parts of the U.S.—[recently] announced that all farmers markets would close for at least a month," Greenaway wrote this week in a must-read piece in Civil Eats. "Seattle suspended all large gatherings and the markets have been lumped together with parades and public parties."
Lumped though they were, several farmers who normally vend at the Sunday market in Ballard, a vibrant Seattle neighborhood filled with breweries, restaurants, bars, clubs, and funky shops located near my home, showed up to sell their food despite the city ban. Some argued the markets are safer than grocery stores.

"And honestly, if you're gonna go buy produce, would you rather go into a really crowded [grocery store] right now, or would you come into an open-air market where everyone's actually observing social distancing and keeping everyone apart?" one Ballard market vendor told local NPR affiliate KUOW this week.
In Ballard, consumers were there to meet the farmers.

"I'm here today to support both the community and the farmers and to make a statement to the City of Seattle that we need to be supporting local farmers and that the farmers market should not be shut down," Ballard market customer Mary Purdy told KUOW.

While Seattle's markets are closed, markets elsewhere are open—including, for example, in Philadelphia, Portland, Oregon, and the Bay Area.

Indeed, California declared the state's farmers markets "essential to the functioning of our state" and said they "must continue," along with other activities such as allowing grocers and charitable food pantries to remain open. Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut have issued similar declarations.

The Farmers Market Coalition (FMC), a nonprofit that seeks to strengthen farmers markets around the country, thinks markets should have the choice to remain open. And it's outlined several steps to accomplish that goal while addressing farmer and consumer safety—including eliminating food sampling, requiring vendors who handle money to wear gloves, and promoting social distancing recommendations.
If lawmakers don't allow farmers markets to remain open, the impact on many small farm businesses will be swift, severe, and in many cases fatal.
As Greenaway notes in her Civil Eats piece, timing alone could spell doom for countless small farmers.

"[G]rowers are in the midst of buying and planting seeds, and planning for their busy time of year," she writes. "Losing the opportunity to sell at farmers' markets, on top of loss of sales to restaurants and institutions like schools, could be a devastating blow."

Many others are sounding the alarm.

"The fragility of our food system is evident right now, and it should be a time when society recognizes and supports the small farmers providing food for their local communities more than ever," says Judith McGeary, head of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance (and, alongside me, a Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund board member), in an email to me this week. "If farmers markets are closed, though, not only will individuals have an even harder time finding food for their families, but many small farmers will go out of business—making the food system even more fragile as we get through this crisis."

Others agree.

"It is more vital than ever that small producers be able to provide fresh foods direct to consumers," says Alexia Kulwiec, executive director of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund. "Losing the ability to provide food through the farmers' market could also be the last straw for small farms struggling to make ends meet in an agricultural economy already controlled by large corporate supported farms."
FTCLDF sent out an action alert to Virginia members this week, urging them to contact lawmakers in the state about the proposal to shutter farmers markets there.

"[F]armers markets are an essential service that tens of thousands of farmers and millions of consumers rely on them for their livelihood and their food access," said Ben Feldman, executive director of the FMC, in an email to me this week. "As most farmers markets are flexible, open-air environments they already offer advantages for shoppers and across the country are taking steps to implement best practices on social distancing to prevent the spread of COVID19."

Brian Coppom, who's both president of the FMC board and executive director of the Boulder County Farmers Markets in Colorado, told me this week that lawmakers should recognize that farmers markets are an essential service and must be allowed to operate safely.

Coppom's own Boulder County markets are among those forced by lawmakers to close temporarily.

"Our opening has been delayed 30 days due to limits on events, leaving almost 50 farmers without an outlet for crops that need to be harvested," Coppom tells me. "In addition to our general customers, we also have 1,100 low-income families every week that rely on the markets to put healthy food on the table and who no longer have access to that food."

It's easy to see how, as Coppom explains, shuttering farmers markets "exacerbates hardships across the board."

These small farmers aren't asking for a handout. All they want is to serve their hungry customers—to do business to stay in business—just like a grocer or a take-away restaurant.
I support most temporary restrictions on public gatherings in the face of COVID-19. Government mandating the temporary closure of places people normally congregate closely—from playgrounds to libraries, churches, bars, and dine-in restaurants—is a proper action that will help save lives. But farmers markets—just like grocers, pharmacies, and hardware stores—provide a necessary and valuable service.

Hence, farmers markets can and should still be free to operate provided they act to limit contact between and among consumers and vendors. If a farmers market manager, working with farmer vendors, determines a vendor or a market can't operate safely, then, by all means, the market should close until it can safely reopen—as has happened in Honolulu and New Orleans. If a regulator witnesses unsafe practices at a farmers market, that regulator should act swiftly to address the problem.

But closing farmers markets indiscriminately doesn't make Americans safer. And it harms the small farmers—some irreparably so—that many of us rely on to provide us with fresh, healthy, and tasty food. If this is the worst time in memory—and it is—then some lawmakers and regulators are targeting farmers, consumers, and the very institution of farmers markets at the worst possible time.

While I do understand how important farm foods are to people who need food, the farmers markets I’ve always shopped at have been packed full of people. There were four markets I rotated, and each one was full of crowds. On busy holiday weekends, sometimes it’s shoulder to shoulder. The only safe way to allow farmers markets is to limit the number of people who can be in there.
 

2DEES

Inactive
I read a report a few weeks ago saying that this would be around for 5 to 7 years. Second wave this coming fall and winter. Only time will tell. Personally I HOPE it peters out, but we will have to wait and see. If we survive we can talk about it then.
 

bluelady

Veteran Member
While I do understand how important farm foods are to people who need food, the farmers markets I’ve always shopped at have been packed full of people. There were four markets I rotated, and each one was full of crowds. On busy holiday weekends, sometimes it’s shoulder to shoulder. The only safe way to allow farmers markets is to limit the number of people who can be in there.
And to spread the booths much farther apart.
 

naturallysweet

Has No Life - Lives on TB
While I do understand how important farm foods are to people who need food, the farmers markets I’ve always shopped at have been packed full of people. There were four markets I rotated, and each one was full of crowds. On busy holiday weekends, sometimes it’s shoulder to shoulder. The only safe way to allow farmers markets is to limit the number of people who can be in there.
Most of the boothe in some farmers markets don't sell food. They could allow only food sellers, ban any music, and make sure the vendors are nor close together.

That said, I'm Normally a vendor in 2 markers. I backed out of both. Right now I'm doing self service sales of plants..Will Do the same with self service, but supervised from a distance you pick, when the food starts .

My mother has a lot of health issues. This is my only option right now. People are also desperate for food and plants.
 

Hurricanehic

Veteran Member



March 22, 2020
FDA Must Approve Hydroxychloroquine Now
By Andrew Longman
You are being lied to about the drugs that heal COVID19.
America's FDA, and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, are dragging their feet on approving a drug that provides very strong positive effect on COVID19.
Fauci, speaking from the White House, said on the matter of approving Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin:
"It's it's essentially what I said multiple times from this podium. Is that when you have, first of all, we're trying to develop de novodrugs that are not yet out there, not that approved, that ultimately will be effective. And the way you prove that is to do a randomized controlled trial to prove safety and efficacy. Uh, I am not a totally sure what the the President was referring to, but I believe he's referring to a report that used both Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin together uh to have some uh possibility of being an effect. Many of the things that you hear out there are are what I had called anecdotal reports. They may be true. But they’re anecdotal."

Please notice that Dr. Fauci just called the effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin against COVID19 anecdotal. That will be very important in a moment.
Fauci continued, "So the only thing that I was saying is that if you really want to definitively know if something works that you've gotta do the kind of trial that you get the good information," by which he dismissed the body of scientific work that supports the use of Hydroxychloroquine.
Fauci went on,
"The President is talking about hope for people and it's not an unreasonable thing to hope for people so when you have approved drugs that physicians have the option and a decision between the physician and the patient are you gonna use the drug that someone says from an anecdotal standpoint not completely proven but might have some effect..."
Which is utterly gobbledygook divergent from the facts about the two drugs in discussion. It is not true that the evidence supporting these two drugs is anecdotal. These two drugs have been shown in scientific studies and peer-reviewed publications to have strong positive effects against COVID19. Period.
But Fauci's words have hidden the truth from you.
Fauci rambled,
"...there are those who lean to the point of giving hope and saying give that person the option of having access to that drug and then you have the other group which is my job as scientist to say my job is to ultimately prove without a doubt that a drug is not only safe but that it actually works."
No. The standard of evidence he is requiring is not his job as a scientist. It is a wildly inappropriate exaggeration utterly unsuited to the situation, and his description of the facts is utterly misleading. Not to mention it's a word-salad.
In one month's time, there will be hundreds of thousands of cases of COVID19. There will be many thousands of deaths. And Fauci is taking the position that he and the US government should not approve Hydroxychloroquine because it might not be safe and might not be effective, based on his smear of high-quality science as mere anecdote.
Fauci said these fantastically vague, wrong, and misleading things from the podium at the White House Coronavirus Task Force briefing with the Vice President standing behind him.


Are the studies supporting Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin really anecdotal evidence?
Definition of "anecdotal evidence" from Merriam-Webster:
evidence in the form of stories that people tell about what has happened to them.
Example: His conclusions are not supported by data; they are based only on anecdotal evidence.
Is that what the following is?
Gautret et al. (2020) writing Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID‐19: results of an open‐label non‐randomized clinical trial. state:
"We therefore recommend that COVID-19 patients be treated with Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to cure their infection and to limit the transmission of the virus to other people in order to curb the spread of COVID-19 in the world." - Gautret et al, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents – In Press 17 March 2020 – DOI : 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105949
The words "clinical trial" in the title actually mean "clinical trial". That's, like, different, than "anecdotal", Tony?
Then we hear from Wang, M., Cao, R., Zhang, L. et al. in Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro. Cell Res 30, 269–271 (2020).
Wang et al writes,
"Our findings reveal that remdesivir and chloroquine are highly effective in the control of 2019-nCoV infection in vitro. Since these compounds have been used in human patients with a safety track record and shown to be effective against various ailments, we suggest that they should be assessed in human patients suffering from the novel coronavirus disease."
That's scientific evidence was published in Nature Cell Research - probably the most prestigious scientific journal in that field in the world. Nature is "anecdotal evidence" to Dr. Tony "lost the fastball" Fauci.
But perhaps I do not know how to interpret this scientific result properly - right? I am a scientist. Yet, maybe I'm a rube? A deplorable perhaps? I am definitely not Medal of Freedom winner! So maybe the plain English "clinical trial" doesn't mean "clinical trial." So we'd better not take my word for it.
Let's take Belgium's word for it, instead.
Belgium has issued official guidelines calling for use of Hydroxychloroquine as a first-line treatment for COVID19. See page 3 and 4 of link below.
One stated reason:
"Results of Gautret’ study have been just released and confirm that viral positivity in respiratory secretions (measured by PCR) is significantly decreased at day 6 in Hydroxychloroquine-treated COVID-19 patients (n=26) versus those with supportive care (n=16 controls): 30% positivity versus 87.5%, p<0.001). This observation strongly supports the current choice of Hydroxychloroquine as first-line treatment; we suggest to keep the current recommended dosage (see Table), which is pharmacologically very close to that used in Gautret’s study. "
That "Guatret study" that Belgium references is a scientific one! Not a ramble told while drunk on the job in D.C.! The nation of Belgium stating emphatically that the "current choice of Hydroxychloroquine as first-line treatment" is justified because of its review of the science... is irrelevant to the Fauci poo-poo. But his name was not on the paper so it didn't matter? The official position of an entire European country offering official guidance to every doctor in the land during a 100-year epidemic is...just an anecdote.
That is, it's an anecdote to a preening narcissist bureaucrat in Washington D.C. for whom no evidence is sufficient...unless HE says so with cameras on him! I'm sure the Belgians are impressed.
But again don't take my word. Take China's.
China includes chloroquine in the recommendations regarding the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia, so reported in International Journal of Microbial Agents:
If you get COVID19 in China, the official guidance to doctors says to give you Hydroxychloroquine.
"The drug is recommended to be included in the next version of the Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Pneumonia Caused by COVID-19 issued by the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China for treatment of COVID-19 infection in larger populations in the future."
You may read more about the official Chinese national guidance to all doctors in the scientific journal Bioscience Trends. A journal apparently considered to be a twitter feed by the blathering Fauci.
Why do you think China has had such a radical improvement in its caseload? There are a collection of papers online in broken English, written by excited Chinese medical doctors, telling the world they are using Chloroquine and it's very effective.
China may be a lot of things. But they are not dumb. Politically, the government there is glad enough to look like heroes for issuing orders to give everyone chloroquine, because it will save the lives of ten million Chinese. You have to be a lifetime American bureaucrat to not figure this out.
Official government guidance to doctors! From the world's most populous nation! With the largest COVID19 infection! Which has shown the largest drop in caseload! This is "anecdotal evidence" to Dr. Fauci and America's FDA. These imbeciles are so busy making the paperwork go faster for you (while America plunges into the grave, and the fix is on the shelf at Walmart?) that they are incapable of noticing anything that happens outside the beltway. But don't you feel better that he has a Medal of Freedom? And that a month from now, he'll get back to you about that pill-thing?
Two national governments, multiple peer reviewed studies, a clinical trial, the most prestigious journals - these are not high-enough for Mr. Medal Dr. MD-PhD Fauci. He's above all that. Maybe the type of the research - performed by your beltway buddies - dismissing the work of the French, the Chinese, and the Belgians - is more important than ten thousand innocent lives plunging into the mass-grave dug with a back-hoe? After all, you're big MF, MD-PhD, on TV! The standards must be impossibly high.
So high the little people can't meet them.
While thousands of Americans lie dying, the citizens of Belgium and France and China are given Hydroxychloroquine and are recovering. Having gotten off their butts and done the research those nations, while Fauci and FDA was strutting around wondering how to fill out paperwork faster, deserve credit for publishing actionable scientific conclusions.
But maybe Fauci and FDA will get back to you in the "record time" of one month? You know, when there's a million cases and two hundred thousand in the hospital, a hundred thousand in ICU and twenty thousand dead. The very careful, very safe Lost the Fastball Fauci, for whom no scientific evidence is anything but anecdotal, will let you die, because there's not evidence rising to his august level, to give you a pill that has been shown by science to heal you.
Demand Fauci's resignation.
Demand FDA Director Hahn's resignation.

Because it sounds to me like these two elitist snobs would rather let you die than give you the most studied prescription-medication in the history of mankind.
FDA must approve Hydroxychloroquine NOW for COVID19.
Not just "off label".
Not just "compassionate use only"
Not just "limited clinical trial".
Full FDA approval, NOW.
That simple approval will change the number of people getting the medicine from hundreds to hundreds of thousands.
Why should we do this? Because of anecdote and emotion?
No.
Because the scientific, peer reviewed, journal articles and clinical trial provide concrete evidence of efficacy.
And?
Because chloroquine is the single most studied prescription in the history of the Earth, having proven its safety via tens of millions of patients in hundreds of millions of doses over seven decades, in every country in the world, by tens of thousands of doctors. There are hundreds of scientific journal articles on the safety of chloroquine. There are tens of thousands of papers on its properties. There is more evidence for the safe-use applications of chloroquine than for any other prescribed drug in the history of man. To question whether it's safe isn't just to insult the intelligence of America - it is an obtuse insult the entire body of published medicine.
And why today and not in a month?
Because in about one month, every one of the 924,107 staffed hospital beds (American Hospital Association) in the United States of America will be filled with the sick and the dying.
Fauci lied, people died. Get him and Hahn outta here.
 

Squid

Veteran Member
The speed of information is leading to pieces of information being reported but without context. The media especially is cherry picking facts and crafting stories not to inform but to create an emotional reaction.
They also use these information pieces to present yes or no questions to get a desired headline or soundbite. This is why the Whitehouse press events are so dreadfully cringeworthy.

An example is the virus spread during summer. Historically virus and specifically the flu has seasonality that spreads around cold weather. Corona has only been around 3 1/2 months we don’t have a complete year of exposure to know seasonalities impact, but it is not unreasonable to expect some seasonality may lesson the spread as long as you factor this is unproven and it may be different. It is certainly acceptable to hope for a summer break to provide time to prepare for the possible return as the weather turns it is also acceptable to point out summer may have no effect or because of its high rate of transmission it is only lessoned. Today all 3 are correct in my most humbly submitted opinion.

People or news organizations who speak in absolutes are either being childishly simplistic or are trying to manipulate you.

This is a moving target that at this time has more knowns but still has many known-unknowns and unknown-unknowns.

Remember we are all clowns in this bus. Be wary of absolutes, they can just as easily be absolutely wrong. Now back to go watch the sun rotate around the earth.
 

PJM

Contributing Member
I read a report a few weeks ago saying that this would be around for 5 to 7 years. Second wave this coming fall and winter. Only time will tell. Personally I HOPE it peters out, but we will have to wait and see. If we survive we can talk about it then.
Brave New World with that time frame. Although, it doesn’t seem that impossible anymore.
 
Top