Posts published in “COVID”

‘Social Distancing’ Will Stop the Coronavirus and Save Lives

‘Social Distancing’ Will Stop the Coronavirus and Save Lives

By John R Guardiano on March 13, 2020

‘Social Distancing’ is said to be the key to combating and containing the coronavirus. What does it mean and why is it important? Well, consider the experience of northern Italy.

“Two weeks ago,” reports Yascha Mounk in The Atlantic,

Italy had 322 confirmed cases of the coronavirus… One week ago, Italy had 2,502 cases of the virus… Today, Italy has 10,149 cases of the coronavirus.

There are now simply too many patients for each one of them to receive adequate care. Doctors and nurses are unable to tend to everybody. They lack machines to ventilate all those gasping for air.

Tragically, because Italian hospitals and medical facilities are overwhelmed, with many more coronavirus-infected patients than they can handle, they must make heart-wrenching decisions about whom to care for and whom to let die. They literally have no other choice.

Social Distancing. “But if Italy is in an impossible position, the obligation facing the United States is very clear,” Mounk writes:

To arrest the crisis before the impossible becomes necessary. This means that our political leaders, the heads of business and private associations, and every one of us need to work together to accomplish two things:

Radically expand the capacity of the country’s intensive-care units. And start engaging in extreme forms of social distancing.

Cancel everything. Now.

This is fast occurring. Maryland, for instance, has closed its public schools and banned public gatherings of 250 or more people because of the coronavirus. Michigan, likewise, is literally shuttering its public schools until April 6.

Moreover, according to CBS Sports:

The National Basketball Association (NBA) has suspended regular season play, indefinitely.
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has canceled the 2020 Division 1 men’s and women’s basketball tournaments. No “March Madness,” not this year.
The National Hockey League has put a halt to all of its games.
“Major League Baseball has canceled the remainder of spring training and is pushing back the start of the regular season by at least two weeks.”
“Michigan, Notre Dame and Ohio State have all canceled their spring football games.”

The indefinite suspension of these treasured sporting traditions is, of course, sad and disappointing. But as Mounk points out, “Only one measure has been effective against the coronavirus: extreme social distancing.” So we really have no choice.

Canceling these large indoor gatherings, explain Scott Gottlieb and Caitlin M. Rivers in the Washington Post, “will help mitigate the spread of [the virus], slowing it down and allowing medical facilities to deal with the sickest among us without being overwhelmed.”

To be sure, this will cause significant economic pain and dislocation—look, for instance, at the dramatic collapse in the U.S. stock market—but that is a temporary and short-term phenomenon.

What is most important is averting the calamitous and heart-wrenching tragedy that we see unfolding in northern Italy. And we all have a role to play in that.

Scrupulously avoid large public gatherings, especially those that are indoors or in enclosed environments; try to telework if you can; and remain inside your home—or out in the countryside—away from others to the greatest extent possible.

Most of all: keep your distance. Keep your “social distance.”

Feature photo credit: FlattenTheCurve.com via Jackson Hole News and Guide.

Obesity Is a Much More Dangerous Public Health Problem Than the Coronavirus

Obesity Is a Much More Dangerous Public Health Problem Than the Coronavirus

By John R Guardiano on March 10, 2020

The coronavirus is dominating the headlines. This is understandable, given that it is a new and potentially fatal virus that we don’t well understand, and for which there is not yet a vaccine.

Still, as Anthony S. Fauci, M.D, acknowledges, the risks of serious ailments from the coronavirus are “overwhelmingly weighted toward people with underlying [medical] conditions and the elderly.” Fauci is Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Relative Risk. So, if you’re not a senior citizen and you don’t have an underlying medical condition, then it is exceedingly unlikely that you will die or suffer a serious problem if you contract the coronavirus.

Yet, a far more dangerous and deadly public health problem, which affects many more Americans, young and old, gets relatively little media and political attention. I refer, of course, to obesity.

“Some 42.4 percent of U.S. adults,” reports the Washington Post’s Linda Searing,

now qualify as obese, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], with no real difference in prevalence between men and women…

Both obesity and severe obesity are most common among middle-aged adults (those ages 40 to 59), according to the CDC.

Data show that since the start of the 21st century, obesity has become increasingly common, rising from about 30 percent to more than 40 percent of adults, while the prevalence of severe obesity has increased from about 5 percent to just over 9 percent in that time…

Obesity also has been linked to an increased risk for numerous diseases and medical issues, including diabetes, heart disease and some cancers, as well as depression, asthma, obstructive sleep apnea, osteoarthritis and back pain.

Health experts say that losing just 5 to 10 percent of body weight can help obese people rein in their health risks.

Adds the New York Times’ Jane E. Brody:

A prestigious team of medical scientists has projected that by 2030, nearly one in two adults will be obese, and nearly one in four will be severely obese…

In as many as 29 states, the prevalence of obesity will exceed 50 percent, with no state having less than 35 percent of residents who are obese, they predicted…

Given the role obesity plays in fostering many chronic, disabling and often fatal diseases, these are dire predictions indeed. Yet… the powers that be in this country are doing very little to head off the potentially disastrous results of expanding obesity, obesity specialists say…

Americans weren’t always this fat; since 1990, the prevalence of obesity in this country has doubled.

People who choose to blame genetics are fooling no one but themselves… Our genetics haven’t changed in the last 30 years. Rather, what has changed is the environment in which our genes now function.

As we’ve observed here at ResCon1, the obesity epidemic is a national disgrace, and it is largely preventable.

Simply put, we Americans eat too much bad food too often, with little or no regard for necessary limits on our daily caloric intake and the need for proper proportions of macro nutrients—i.e., fat, protein, and carbohydrates.

The problem starts early in life, during childhood and adolescence, as some 18.5 percent of the youth population in America is obese, according to the CDC.

Public Policy. The politicians and the media could do more to focus attention on this problem and educate the public. There also are concrete public policy actions that could be taken.

For example, federal nutritional guidelines that recommend we consume an inordinate and unhealthy amounts of carbohydrates should be revised, and the demonization of fat needs to be reconsidered in light of the best and most recent scientific research.

This may be less alluring than obsessing over a new virus that has induced a public panic (or at least a media panic), but it would be far more effective and desirable from a public health perspective.

Feature photo credit: CDC via Stat News (map of obesity rates by state).

Democratic Political Opportunism Confuses and Distorts the Coronavirus Debate

Democratic Political Opportunism Confuses and Distorts the Coronavirus Debate

By John R Guardiano on March 1, 2020

This is the second in a three-part series on the coronavirus. In our first post, we assessed the coronavirus as a public health problem. Here we assess the virus as a domestic political dispute.

Is the federal government doing enough to stop the coronavirus? Is Trump handling the problem well? What about Congress? Have they appropriated enough money to combat this latest public health menace?

These are all fair questions, of course. In a representative democracy, we should vigorously debate important matters of public health and public policy.

What confuses and distorts that debate, though, is political opportunism, especially in an election year, when politicians try to exploit the crisis for rank political gain.

Unfortunately, we’ve seen such opportunism from Democratic politicians and their media allies.

Partisan Attacks. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, for instance, lambasted President Trump for what he called “a premature travel ban to and from China.” The travel ban, Schumer tweeted Feb. 5, 2020, is part of Trump’s “ongoing war against immigrants.”

Trump signed an executive order Jan. 31, 2020, that banned all foreign nationals who had been in China from entering the United States. This was a reasonable preventative measure given that the coronavirus originated in China; and that more than 91 percent of the reported cases thus far are in mainland China.

Indeed, Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told MSBC’s Chris Matthews (Friday, Feb. 28, 2020) that the Chinese travel ban “was a very good idea” because it helped to stop the spread of the virus.

Schumer himself seems to have come around to this understandings because, notes Dinesh D’Souza, he has since deleted his tweet.

Still, Schumer’s eagerness to use the coronavirus as a political cudgel with which to beat Trump and the GOP is emblematic of how political considerations are confusing and distorting the public dialogue and debate. As we observed here at ResCon1:

Much of the alarmist commentary that we’re hearing about the coronavirus… is attributable to politicians trying to win votes and media outlets trying to draw in readers and viewers.

That many journalists and media outlets are politically partisan and unabashedly anti-Trump further compounds this problem.

Political Distortion. For example, a reporter at yesterday’s White House press briefing asked Trump if he regretted using the word “hoax” when discussing the coronavirus at a political rally in North Charleston, South Carolina.

“Somebody [in the United States] is now dead from this [virus]. Do you regret using that kind of talk” the reporter solemnly intoned.

Trump explained that he obviously was not using the word hoax to refer to the coronavirus. Instead, he was describing Democratic attacks on him and his administration as a “hoax.”

Democrats have charged Trump with not doing enough to stop the spread of the virus, and Trump said that this is their new “hoax.”

What Trump meant was apparent to anyone who listened to Trump’s remarks. Yet, some journalists, such as CNBC’s Thomas Franck, parroted the Democrats’ charge and reported that Trump was suggesting that the coronavirus itself is a “hoax.”

Democratic presidential candidates, likewise, have charged Trump with “defunding” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Michael Bloomberg) and “wiping out” its budget and the budget of the National Institutes of Health (Joe Biden).

But as the Lauran Neergaard and Calvin Woodward point out in the Associated Press (AP), it’s “wrong to say [that these] agencies have seen their money cut.” It is true that “CDC grant program for state and local public health emergency preparedness” have been cut.

However, they note, that funding decline was “set in motion by a congressional budget measure that predates Trump.”

President Trump. In truth, the president appears to be doing a good job handling the coronavirus. He’s requested additional funding from Congress to address the problem, and has said that if Congress wants to provide more money, he’ll take it.

Moreover, with top public health officials in tow, he held two press conferences in three days last week to inform the American people about what, specifically, he and his administration are doing to stop the spread of the virus.

The travel restrictions to and from China have been the most consequential and decisive actions that Trump has taken thus far.

He’s also had American returning from high-risk areas overseas quarantined and monitored by public health officials; declared a public health emergency; and established a White House Coronavirus Task Force now headed by Vice President Mike Pence.

All in all, not bad. What is bad is the shameless and counterproductive politicizing of a problem that should be a nonpartisan or bipartisan concern: public health and the safety and well-being of the American people.

In a democracy, disagreement and debate are perfectly fine. But that disagreement and debate should be factually based and made in good faith. Unfortunately, that too often has not been the case with respect to the coronavirus.

We can and must do better.

Feature photo credit: CNN.

The Coronavirus Is a Public Health Problem, But It is Not a Death Sentence

The Coronavirus Is a Public Health Problem, But It is Not a Death Sentence

By John R Guardiano on February 29, 2020

The coronavirus has dominated the news, but with more heat than light, I’m afraid. That’s because it really is three stories in one—or one story with three interrelated subplots or angles.

There’s the public health angle, the political angle, and the economic angle. All three of these subplots or angles shape and affect media coverage of the virus and thus need to be explained.

Otherwise, we cannot understand the virus’ true significance—and we will be unable to distinguish between fair and legitimate points or arguments on the one hand and political spin and propaganda on the other hand.

In this post, we’ll address the public health angle or subplot to the coronavirus. Subsequent posts will address the political and economic angles to the story.

Public Health. The coronavirus is, most importantly, a public health problem. It is a new respiratory virus that, according to John Hopkins University’s Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE), has infected nearly 87,000 people worldwide, mostly in mainland China. Nearly 3,000 people have died as a result.

In the United States, 71 people have contracted the virus and one person has died as a result. Public health officials and epidemiologists say these numbers will increase, both domestically and internationally. However, they do not know how widespread and pervasive the virus will become.

We do know that, for most people, the coronavirus is not a death sentence.

Indeed, most who contra c t the virus suffer only mild symptoms and quickly recover. Fatalities typically occur among the frail and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and people with other complicating medical conditions and ailments.

Thus the first and only person in the United States so far to die from the coronavirus was a man in his 50s with underlying health conditions.

We also know that the coronavirus is similar to the influenza virus or flu, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates has caused 12,000 to 61,000 deaths annually since 2010. Yet, despite the surprisingly high number of flu-induced deaths or fatalities, there is no widespread fear or panic over the influenza virus.

In part, that is because the flu has been with us for some time and thus is well understood. It also is because we have flu vaccines.

There is not yet a vaccine for the coronavirus. The United States is working to develop such a vaccine, but it won’t be available for an estimated 12-18 moths at the earliest, says Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Still, we know that basic commonsense precautionary measures which prevent transmission of the influenza virus are also highly effective in preventing transmission of the coronavirus.

The coronavirus is “a respiratory virus,” explains the CDC’s Principal Deputy Director, Anne Schuchat, M.D.:

It’s spread in a similar way to the common cold or to influenza. It’s spread through coughs and sneezes.

And so, those everyday sensible measures that we tell people to do every year with the flu are important here: covering your cough; staying home when you’re sick; and washing your hands.

[These are] tried and true ([albeit] not very exciting) [preventative] measures, [and] really important ways that you can prevent the spread of respiratory viruses.

The bottom line, according to the CDC: “for the general American public, who are unlikely to be exposed to this virus at this time, the immediate health risk from COVID-19, [aka the coronavirus], is considered low.”

But because the coronavirus is spreading internationally, there will be more cases here in the United States. We cannot, after all, entirely seal ourselves off from the rest of the world.

However, these incidents should be, for the most part, quite manageable and will not result in widespread death, at least when compared to the similar influenza virus.

Politics. Because the coronavirus is a public health problem, it is also necessarily a political story. Governments, after all, have a duty to take reasonable and effective preventative measures to stop a pandemic from occurring and arresting its development should a pandemic occur.

We’ll address that subplot or angle in a subsequent post.

Feature photo credit: John Hopkins University’s Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE).