Covering up massive COVID being spread from protests-8/8 update below
20 responses | 0 likes
Started by metmike - July 30, 2020, 7:28 p.m.

There are 3 main factors causing the rates to go higher.

  1. Increase in tests
  2. Opening up
  3. Protesting

Some states have most of the new cases coming from opening up. Some states from the protesting. Impossible to tell in many states exactly what % is from each one. But with some states/counties we do know  with high confidence which one is the main contributor from the data.  For sure, some Southern states and many counties in other states are mostly from opening up based on there not being much protesting there and new cases going much higher.  This is PROOF that opening up is causing a big increase in new cases there.   But we also have PROOF, using the exact same criteria/variables that protesting is causing a big increase in rates in places with heavy protesting.

And its based entirely on the data/science.  


This is why California is the quintessential example for us. It's the state that opened up the least and also the state with the most protests.  This is going to be as good as it gets, since they are instructing contact tracers to NOT ask if people were at protests(you don't find that odd?)  .Note the included graph............new daily case rate for California, went from 3,000 or less until a couple of weeks after the protesting to almost 4 times that in July and most of the increase has been in the places with protesting......that have not opened up as much as most places in the country. There is no way to attribute the majority of new cases to opening up.


The biggest increase in rates is happening with the exact same age group as those protesting but this is also the case with places from opening up(because young people party). However, the rates of blacks has also went up the most since the protesting started. Impossible to explain that one without using the protests.



The state of GA, that I showed earlier this month shows the same powerful link to protesting causing the higher rates and not opening up. Their COVID rates did NOT go up for 6 weeks after starting to open (which was before everybody else) but sky rocketed, exactly  2 weeks after the Rayshard Brooks protests started.........that were mostly confined to the state of GA.


Graphics to look at with the data/information. Below the graph of the rate for California, is a map showing California having the MOST protests. Below that, an article discussing why California is the most restrictive state. Below that, a report on how young adults and blacks are having the fastest rising new cases.



  


List of George Floyd protests in the United States-California has the most

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_George_Floyd_protests_in_the_United_States


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Map_of_George_Floyd_protests_in_North_America.png

                                    



California is most restrictive state when it comes to coronavirus rules, report shows


https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article244065197.html




 New reports: COVID-19 cases rising fastest among minorities, young people

https://komonews.com/news/local/new-reports-covid-19-cases-rising-fastest-among-minorities-young-people


Comments
By metmike - July 30, 2020, 7:35 p.m.
Like Reply

This is the most important issue of our lives.....COVID, not protesting. Why is there no data from people testing positive.......millions about whether they went to a protest?

There were millions of people at thousands of protests, more than any other activity. 

We know all about whether they went to a party, or bar or church or restaurant, why nothing about whether they went to a protest?


NYC's contact tracers have been told not to ask people if they've attended a protest

https://www.businessinsider.com/nyc-contact-tracers-not-asking-people-attend-george-floyd-protest-2020-6


COVID-19 patients aren’t asked whether they participated in protests, doctor says


https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2020/06/30/covid-19-patients-arent-asked-whether-they-participated-in-protests-doctor-says/





NYC’s COVID-19 contact tracing will ask about outdoor dining, not protests

https://nypost.com/2020/07/19/nyc-contact-tracers-will-ask-about-dining-not-protests/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=push-notification&utm_campaign=nyc-contact-tracers-will-ask-about-dining-not-protests





By WxFollower - July 30, 2020, 7:38 p.m.
Like Reply

Mike,

 I complained here early on about the MSM's and libs' double standard (DS) regarding being ok with protests (including Mayor DeBlasio of NYC who just days before criticized people walking in parks as well as praying outside) and even rioting in Don Lemon's case. Terrible DS...one of worst ever!

By metmike - July 30, 2020, 7:42 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks Larry!

Yes, you were the first to bring it up.


And have been rock solid consistent on that position since early June.


    Double standard of liberals between COVID and riots            

                            26 responses |         

                Started by WxFollower - June 2, 2020, 1:56 p.m.            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/53203/



By metmike - July 30, 2020, 8:17 p.m.
Like Reply

NYC’s COVID-19 contact tracing will ask about outdoor dining, not protests

https://nypost.com/2020/07/19/nyc-contact-tracers-will-ask-about-dining-not-protests/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=push-notification&utm_campaign=nyc-contact-tracers-will-ask-about-dining-not-protests


Dr. S. Patrick Kachur, a professor at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, defended the city’s position about leaving demonstrations out of tracing questions.

“Asking about protests might alienate some people — and it might not generate that much useful information.

“When we can’t explain the uptick in our fair city’s COVID-19 infection rates among the 20-29 age group — and we aren’t asking if they’ve attended a Black Lives Matter protest, that’s called hypocrisy too. Wake up, Your honor. Closing your eyes and covering your ears won’t change the facts,” Pitts said.

Dr. Jake Deutsch, co-founder of Cure Urgent Care that’s tested over 5,000 patients for COVID-19, agreed that the tracing corps should ask about protests.

     

“The purpose of contact tracing is you’re trying to identify sources of where the infections are occurring, so I think you ask about gatherings whether it’s bars, protests, schools, churches. The question shouldn’t just stop with, ‘Were you in a restaurant?’ You’d have to be much inclusive. And trying to predict that [bars are] the source of the problem I think that’s a pretty impossible presumption given the fact that it’s a highly contagious virus,” Deutsch said.

He believes the higher proportion of twenty-somethings testing positive for COVID-19 is due to increased testing for all New Yorkers — not just the elderly and vulnerable.

“I’ve seen more young people be tested than we’d seen for months ago for instance so I think you’re going to see a spike when you see more testing,” Deutsch said."


metmike: Quintessential example of how to design a study so that it gives you the results you want. The anti scientific subjective/biased reasoning here is mind boggling/staggering. The study already shows that new cases CAN'T be from the protests before they even start it because they are treating that potential factor,  like asking the participants if they had recently been to the planet Mars. 

And it has to be 100% intentional. The designers are clearly in touch with all these factors. They KNOW that there is a large segment of people claiming the protests are a cause for all the protest aged people to be testing positive(and the black rate going higher too).

Why not PROVE their position that its not from protests by asking that question? That would be science.

Not asking that question but instead TELLING US before the study that it's NOT from the protests and they won't test is 100% politics. 

This study, is just another one that is evidence of this, below:


Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

By metmike - July 30, 2020, 8:40 p.m.
Like Reply

It's possible to likely that  over 100,000 people will get COVID at a protest. Remember, that is less than 2 days worth of new cases, so cases from  protests over a more than 2 month period will add up to some big numbers. 


Most of them are young adults and probably less than 1% of them will die.

However, those people will spread it to others in the communities they go back to, some of them older and more vulnerable.

With that being the case, it seems likely that numerous thousands of people will end up dying because of the spread of COVID at the protests.


How many lives are being saved by these protests????

By metmike - July 30, 2020, 8:42 p.m.
Like Reply

                COVID data/graphs #5 July 30th            

                            35 responses |          

                Started by metmike - July 3, 2020, 11:42 p.m.            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55092/



https://www.vox.com/21333964/covid-19-coronavirus-trump-briefing-today



My interpretation:

1. New tests are 4 times what they were less than 3 months ago. This is contributing to the new cases(detected).

2. New cases were going down thru May, the suddenly in the 2nd week of June, reversed and have accelerated higher.......now 3 times higher.......than what they were before the protesting. Yes, we were opening stuff up which is increasing rates but states NOT opening much that have lots of protesting, like CA are having some of the biggest increases. OR's rate is 6 times higher than the early June rate. New cases are double the peak in April!! Protest aged people and blacks have been the most affected.

3. Hospitalizations are a key number. They dropped to half the peak by mid June, then have spiked back up to the peak right now.  So hospitalizations per case are about half of what they were in the Spring. Part of this is because many are minor cases that were not tested before and a big part of that  is these are younger people.........the age of protesters that don't get as sick.

4. Deaths had dropped to something like 25% of those reported during the Spring peak. Those bottomed at the start of July and are slowly turning higher. So far, not showing the same huge increase higher that the other metrics have shown for weeks. This is likely because its more young people and we are finding effective treatments. 

                                    



By wglassfo - July 31, 2020, 11:49 a.m.
Like Reply

Maybe we should just let protestors protest and then suffer from the high risk of CV to themselves and their families

Why do we worry about CV and protestors being highly likely to contact an active CV spreader

Let then destroy them selves with CV

 

By metmike - July 31, 2020, 12:42 p.m.
Like Reply

Wayne,

When somebody gets COVID they potentially spread it to innocent people......a lot of people.....because every new person infected is an additional spreader.


Also, most of these people at protests are good people and peaceful.......I was one of them in early June wearing an N-95 mask.....that won’t happen again.


Cloth masks protect mainly other people from you.....but not complete protection. It still spreads, just much less. N95 masks also protect the person wearing them.becxause they capture/filter out particles as small as the virus.....cloths masks don’t do that. ....the virus particles still get thru but the velocity and distance of them leaving your mouth is reduced greatly.

Tif the air outside of your cloth mask has COVID virus, it will get thru your mask and you will breath it in.

They are being totally misled about the risk of getting COVID and being encoured to protest because we are all told that there is no evidence that it’s being spread at rally’s.

By metmike - July 31, 2020, 12:48 p.m.
Like Reply

Dr. Birx has been advising that people avoid groups larger than 10.....even outside and with social distancing.

The total disconnect between that solid adviice and protesting being ok is stunning.

By mcfarm - July 31, 2020, 1:46 p.m.
Like Reply

boy did fauci step in it today. Got in front of one of the best congressman we have {Jordon form Ohio} took Jordon 3 questions to get fauci to finally admit that large gatherings spread covid. Jordon say what about protests? Uhhhh I don't know says the world'greatest expert. What do mean Jordon? We have protest of 500,000 people and you give use advice on schools, work places,sporting events, even church and yet you will not say protests spread covid?  Does anybody else here smell  rat???????  Or a hypocrite? Or somebody who thinks they have their hand on the scale of a national election?

By wglassfo - July 31, 2020, 1:49 p.m.
Like Reply

Jim Jordan in yesterdays congressional investigation of which Dr Fauci was the star witness:

Was asked by Jordan if mass protest spread CV

Dr Fauci answered that "large crowds" are a danger

Jordon wanted Fauci to admit "protests" are dangerous but Fauci insisted on using the term "large crowds"

Jordan could have turned the natn'l conversation to large crowds of people that Fauci used and thus demonstrations would be frowned upon as large crowds which Fauci said was dangerous

Jordon blew any chance of having Fauci tell the USA large crowds were dangerous and thus demonstrations, which are "large crowds" are a danger to spread CV

This would have got headlines as Fauci always gets headlines

By mcfarm - July 31, 2020, 1:59 p.m.
Like Reply

Jordon blew it???? wtf??? who else had the gonads to even ask the questions that have to be asked? Why is it Jordons fault that fauci just lied at a congressional hearing? Is that not a felony for an ordinary low life like a farmer?

By metmike - Aug. 1, 2020, 12:20 p.m.
Like Reply

In this current political climate, you can have your reputation obliterated by saying the wrong thing about certain subjects.

The protests for racial justice are one of them.

If you come out against them, it will be used to make you look like a racist.

You know its true.

By metmike - Aug. 1, 2020, 12:51 p.m.
Like Reply

With regards to Dr Fauci on this.

I have complimented him and defended him countless time here when he was criticized, I have always been a fan of his because of his knowledge and gifted ability to communicate it. 

Sadly, as an objective scientist that is not as smart as him but is more objective, I see biased political bs in his intentionally not telling us the truth about the protests.

There is absolutely no other way to explain him totally ignoring the realities described above.............unless he is part of the cover up.


Potentially the same thing on the drug HCQ but I will give his intentions the benefit of the doubt because he clings to SOME clinical trials which show no benefits.


However, he completely ignores thousands of medical doctors that understand how and why HCQ really does work and IS helping some COVID patients with certainty.  One thing that it does with 100% certainty......It helps modulate the immune systems of people who's immune systems go beserk with cytokine storms(this is how it decreases inflammation in Lupus and other authoimmune disorders).

With hundreds of millions of people using it for decades, it already has been conclusively proven to be safe.........we don't need clinical trials for that, especially like the bogus one that supposedly showed it was killing people.

I am losing my "benefit of the doubt" faith in him on this as the evidence mounts that HCQ works and he clings to evidence that it does not work.

HCQ  is NOT a cure. It just helps SOME patients..........those afflicted with the inflammation in the lungs as a result of cytokine storms the most.


Actually, that is misleading because taking it BEFORE hand, will LESSEN that reaction......(which often turns deadly) a great deal and waiting until the cyctokine storms are happening is often too late.




By GunterK - Aug. 1, 2020, 1:28 p.m.
Like Reply

my fellow forum members,

please be politically correct. When writing about "protests". the term "peaceful protests" should be used at all times, even when  rocks are being thrown or shots are fired. 

When someone is killed, it is still to be called a "peaceful protest", when the victim is a protester, killed by an outsider (even when the protester pointed an assault rifle at the outstder ). When the victim is an outsider, shot by a protester, you may drop the term "peaceful", but only under extreme circumstances.

By metmike - Aug. 8, 2020, 12:05 p.m.
Like Reply

National numbers looked like they peaked late last month, in tandem with the protesting winding down.


California, that led the nation in protesting during June,  while also being the most shut down looks like it peaked.


It's not all about protesting though as I mentioned.


A couple of exceptions are OR, where the numbers have not dropped yet(and the protesting continues) and MI, especially the Detroit area ................gee, I wonder if the dynamic below, encouraging protesting in Detroit is a factor?  

Do we have other data to support this?

No, because they won't ask positive cases if they were at a protest.


However, this data continues to be very consistent and supportive of the data I sent last month, pointing to the protesting being a major contributor to the cases soaring higher in June/July in many states.

Yet, we are still being told that the protesting didn't have anything to do with it.


Again, showing data from a state that had rates go higher from opening up, is not proof that other states did not have rates going higher from protesting. .................and we have no brainer logic, over a million people, some not wearing masks smashed together WILL spread the virus big time under any objective, scientific/medial scenario that a person could conjure up.


It's the political description of this scenario/dynamic that intentionally distorts it so that it supposedly does not spread COVID and amazingly..............peoples cognitive bias causes them to believe that unbelievable version.....even some really smart people.  


The gatekeepers of information have effectively manufactured the definition of protesting for everybody based entirely on politics and contradicting science.  

PROTESTING=GOOD..........No exceptions to that, other than some mentions of violence.


Anything that gets in the way of protesting=BAD

Whether its the cops, Federal troops, Trump or COVID.  It can't stop the protesting which MUST go on, no matter what because the altruistic cause trumps everything else combined. Just like the fake climate crisis. The save the (greening up) planet and altruistic cause trumps the realities of the best weather/climate in the last 1,000 years for life.


https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2020/08/01/rashida-tlaib-joins-protesters-pushing-back-against-federal-officers-detroit/5563160002/


U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib joins protesters pushing back against federal officers in Detroit
Tlaib joins Detroit protesters: 'Federal agents, you messed with the wrong district' Tlaib joined protesters denouncing the deployment of federal agents to Detroit by President Trump's orders to ...
www.detroitnews.com

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/national-international/portland-protests-persist-as-some-bring-flashes-of-violence/2341187/


Portland Protests Persist as Some Bring Flashes of Violence – NBC4 Washington
The crowd was dispersed because items including rocks, frozen or hard-boiled eggs and commercial-grade fireworks had been thrown or launched toward officers, police said in a statement.
www.nbcbayarea.com


Data below comes from:  https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en

National number below:


Florida below:


California below:



Oregon below:


Michigan below:

By metmike - Aug. 8, 2020, 12:07 p.m.
Like Reply

                COVID data/graphs #5 August 8            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55092/

By metmike - Aug. 8, 2020, 1:33 p.m.
Like Reply

This is why our social scientists are intentionally, NOT asking positive cases if they were at a rally........ they have decided to (NOT) find the correlation.

In this political climate, this is absolutely intentional. The  majority of social scientists are liberal and many are far left liberal.

 I've observed this for 2 decades.


We aren't supposed to meet in groups of 20+, even with social distancing and wearing masks, yet 1,000 people, none social distancing and some not wearing masks are not a major spread?


From Scientific American.

Is Social Science Politically Biased?

Political bias troubles the academy

"The asymmetry is much worse in the social sciences. A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican. The problem is most relevant to the study of areas “related to the political concerns of the Left—areas such as race, gender, stereotyping, environmentalism, power, and inequality.” The very things these students are protesting."


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-social-science-politically-biased/





https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124


Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Published research findings are sometimes refuted by subsequent evidence, with ensuing confusion and disappointment. Refutation and controversy is seen across the range of research designs, from clinical trials and traditional epidemiological studies [] to the most modern molecular research [4,5].There is increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may be the majority or even ...
journals.plos.org
By metmike - Aug. 8, 2020, 1:41 p.m.
Like Reply

Previous discussions here on this:

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/42610/

At colleges, where many of these studies come from, it's amazing.


The problem with all those liberal professors

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-professors-liberal-teaching-students-colleges-universities-0925-story.html

In recent years, concern has grown over what many people see as a left-of-center political bias at colleges and universities. A few months ago, Mitchell Langbert, an associate professor of business at Brooklyn College, published a study of the political affiliations of faculty members at 51 of the 66 liberal-arts colleges ranked highest by U.S. News in 2017. The findings are eye-popping (even if they do not come as a great surprise to many people in academia).

     

Democrats dominate most fields. In religion, Langbert’s survey found that the ratio of Democrats to Republicans is 70 to 1. In music, it is 33 to 1. In biology, it is 21 to 1. In philosophy, history and psychology, it is 17 to 1. In political science, it is 8 to 1.

   

The gap is narrower in science and engineering. In physics, economics and mathematics, the ratio is about 6 to 1. In chemistry, it is 5 to 1, and in engineering, it is just 1.6 to 1. Still, Lambert found no field in which Republicans are more numerous than Democrats.


metmike: Our college campuses have become the perfect environment for indoctrination into far left ideologies via biased mentors that represent their 1 sided views only.   This study quantifies the disparity with evidence in the form of actual numbers. WOW!

With the exception of engineering, they are mind boggling. Some teach in areas and ways that their political affiliation would never be a factor. However, sometimes it is and it's almost always pushing an extreme left agenda.

It's no surprise that those with a college education are twice as likely to be progressive activists.


Here are the results of that study below.

Homogenous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty


https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/31/2/homogenous_the_political_affiliations_of_elite_liberal_arts_college_faculty

Figure 2gives a picture of how the broad liberal arts fields compare with respect to political affiliation. The professional field has the least extreme (but still unbalanced) D:R ratio while ideologically rooted interdisciplinary studies has the most extreme. The hard sciences are more balanced than the social sciences and the humanities.

Indeed, faculty political affiliations at 39 percent of the colleges in my sample are Republican free—having zero Republicans. The political registration in most of the remaining 61 percent, with a few important exceptions, is slightly more than zero percent but nevertheless absurdly skewed against Republican affiliation and in favor of Democratic affiliation. Thus, 78.2 percent of the academic departments in my sample have either zero Republicans, or so few as to make no difference.



By metmike - Aug. 8, 2020, 1:42 p.m.
Like Reply

Welcome to the real world!


Progressive Activists

https://hiddentribes.us/profiles/progressive-activists

Main concerns

Climate Change, Inequality, Poverty


Compared to the average American:

  • More than twice as likely to list politics as a hobby (73 percent v. 35 percent)
  • Almost three times more likely to be “ashamed to be an American” (69 percent v. 24 percent)
  • Twice as likely to have completed college (59 percent v. 29 percent)
  • They have an outsized role in public debates, even though they comprise a small portion of the total population, about one in 12 Americans

It's estimated that 50% or more of the mainstream media are progressive activists, 6+ times higher than the general population. This makes sense. It's an ideal profession that allows them to accomplish their "change the world" objectives.  Thanks to "freedom of the press" they are able to communicate their ideologies and impose their belief system on others with impunity, even when they go from reporting to distorting the news for political agenda.


Previous discussion on this:

                HiddenTribes: America’s Polarized Landscape            

                            12 responses |            

                Started by metmike - Sept. 27, 2019, 7 p.m.            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39903/