TexAgs91 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Iran

Quote:

---

"Frankly, the unwillingness of the Islamic Republic of Iran to restrict large-scale visits to these shrines is criminal in the case of this illness," said Amir A. Afkhami, a medical doctor and historian at George Washington University who has studied the Iranian response to previous epidemics.

"The government is putting religious prestige and public image ahead of public safety," he said of the leadership's overall response. "It is unprecedented even in the annals of the Islamic Republic."

---

---

---

JB!98 said:

---

Is there a TexAgs thread on Ebola, Zika, H1N1, etc., that I can compare this one to? Were we all going to die back then?

---

Quote:

---

The 19 firefighters who showed symptoms of "having a serious exposure to a confirmed COVID-19 patient" in King County, Washington, have been moved to isolation, according to Doug Stern, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters.

These 19 firefighters are part of the 25 CNN reported earlier were in quarantine after responding to calls at the Life Care Center nursing facility. All are firefighters with the Kirkland Fire Department.The remaining firefighters will remain in quarantine.

---

Quote:

---

What's remarkable about these exchanges is that Fauci has explained all of this in front of Trump and publicly. At a White House briefing on Thursday, Fauci laid out a detailed timetable for clinical testing and concluded, "So although this is the fastest we have ever gone from a sequence of a virus to a trial, it still would not be applicable to the epidemic unless we really wait about a year to a year and a half."

Trump on Monday eventually relented and set the goal posts at about a year from now. "So can you have it ready for next season, any of you?" he asked. "I mean, would you say, for the next season?"

Several CEOs said they hoped to, but Paul Stoffels, Johnson & Johnson's chief scientific officer, stepped in to clarify, saying: "Yeah. But, like many people said, we have to be very careful here. If you vaccinate several hundred million people "

"You've got to make sure it works," Trump said.

"Works and is safe," Stoffels said. "Yeah."

"And it doesn't hurt," Trump said. "Right."

Eventually, Trump turned to the efficacy of the potential vaccines, and again he seemed unfamiliar with how much is known at this point. He mentioned that seasonal flu vaccines are different every year, but that they are often somewhat ineffective.

"And yet, I hear numbers that are better than that with respect to corona," Trump said. "You think you can really knock it out and that's because you know specifically what it is, I suspect. So that's impressive."

Schleifer clarified that there's still so much that is unknown. And that's when Trump asked about whether they could just use the flu vaccine.

"But the same vaccine could not work?" he said. "You take a solid flu vaccine you don't think that would have an impact or much of an impact on corona?"

"No," Schleifer replied.

"Probably not," Fauci added.

Soon, Trump returned to his preferred months-long timetable. Asked by a reporter whether he's comfortable with this taking longer than that, Trump again sounded as though he hadn't heard everything the CEOs and experts had just told him.

"I don't think they know what the time will be," Trump said. "I've heard very quick numbers a matter of months and I've heard pretty much a year would be an outside number."


Again, Fauci had said a year to 18 months.

"But if you're talking about three to four months, in a couple of cases, and a year in other cases wouldn't you say, doctor, would that be about right?" Trump said.

When a reporter pressed on whether Trump really thought the months-long timetable was viable for a vaccine, Fauci cut in. And he actually asked that the president be educated on the timetable despite it having been told to him repeatedly.

"Would you make sure you get the president the information that a vaccine that you make and start testing in a year is not a vaccine that's deployable," Fauci said. "So he's asking the question, 'When is it going to be deployable?' And that is going to be, at the earliest, a year to a year and a half, no matter how fast you go."

Trump, though, was still skeptical.

"Do you think that's right?" he asked.

Azar emphasized that treatments but not vaccines could be available sooner, and Trump suddenly seemed more interested in that.

"Well, I think treatment, in many ways, might be more exciting," Trump said, adding: "So the treatment, I mean, just for the media so the treatment element of it goes faster than the vaccine element of it, which, in my opinion, in this case, would be better."

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

GarlandAg2012 said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Gimme a break. I guarantee you if you sat those guys down in a room and said - unlimited budget, fast-track on any regulator requirements, a big pair of shiny scissors to cut red tape - can you shorten the duration?

If they don't say yes they're the wrong person to be in charge.

A day, a week, a month. Every project has slack. Crash it, run multiple things in parallel, get started on items that aren't on the critical path just in case, add resources.

Y'all are acting like this is the Manhattan project or something.

---

I agree with you, but there are probably good reasons why things take time when it comes to drug development. If he's going order the deployment of a vaccine to millions of Americans shouldn't he be aware of the risks involved in rushing production of it? We just saw what happens when you try to rush the development of a test in the CDC...

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Virus is too small for a surgical mask to filter out, that much is true. Surgical masks are for keeping your sputum in.

---

unimboti nkum said:

---

I would recommend everyone read the rest of the article. You'll note that he's told the time tables multiple times, then when making statements later, appears as though he either didn't listen or forgot what he was told.

Quote:

---

What's remarkable about these exchanges is that Fauci has explained all of this in front of Trump and publicly. At a White House briefing on Thursday, Fauci laid out a detailed timetable for clinical testing and concluded, "So although this is the fastest we have ever gone from a sequence of a virus to a trial, it still would not be applicable to the epidemic unless we really wait about a year to a year and a half."

Trump on Monday eventually relented and set the goal posts at about a year from now. "So can you have it ready for next season, any of you?" he asked. "I mean, would you say, for the next season?"

Several CEOs said they hoped to, but Paul Stoffels, Johnson & Johnson's chief scientific officer, stepped in to clarify, saying: "Yeah. But, like many people said, we have to be very careful here. If you vaccinate several hundred million people "

"You've got to make sure it works," Trump said.

"Works and is safe," Stoffels said. "Yeah."

"And it doesn't hurt," Trump said. "Right."

Eventually, Trump turned to the efficacy of the potential vaccines, and again he seemed unfamiliar with how much is known at this point. He mentioned that seasonal flu vaccines are different every year, but that they are often somewhat ineffective.

"And yet, I hear numbers that are better than that with respect to corona," Trump said. "You think you can really knock it out and that's because you know specifically what it is, I suspect. So that's impressive."

Schleifer clarified that there's still so much that is unknown. And that's when Trump asked about whether they could just use the flu vaccine.

"But the same vaccine could not work?" he said. "You take a solid flu vaccine you don't think that would have an impact or much of an impact on corona?"

"No," Schleifer replied.

"Probably not," Fauci added.

Soon, Trump returned to his preferred months-long timetable. Asked by a reporter whether he's comfortable with this taking longer than that, Trump again sounded as though he hadn't heard everything the CEOs and experts had just told him.

"I don't think they know what the time will be," Trump said. "I've heard very quick numbers a matter of months and I've heard pretty much a year would be an outside number."


Again, Fauci had said a year to 18 months.

"But if you're talking about three to four months, in a couple of cases, and a year in other cases wouldn't you say, doctor, would that be about right?" Trump said.

When a reporter pressed on whether Trump really thought the months-long timetable was viable for a vaccine, Fauci cut in. And he actually asked that the president be educated on the timetable despite it having been told to him repeatedly.

"Would you make sure you get the president the information that a vaccine that you make and start testing in a year is not a vaccine that's deployable," Fauci said. "So he's asking the question, 'When is it going to be deployable?' And that is going to be, at the earliest, a year to a year and a half, no matter how fast you go."

Trump, though, was still skeptical.

"Do you think that's right?" he asked.

Azar emphasized that treatments but not vaccines could be available sooner, and Trump suddenly seemed more interested in that.

"Well, I think treatment, in many ways, might be more exciting," Trump said, adding: "So the treatment, I mean, just for the media so the treatment element of it goes faster than the vaccine element of it, which, in my opinion, in this case, would be better."

---

---

Rapier108 said:

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

The cruise ship seems like it was a safer place than that nursing home.

Thankfully all of the first responders who might have been exposed have been isolated for a while.

---

AG 2000' said:

---

As we've covered, CEO doing CEO things. He's pushing them to do better, to find out what they need from him to shorten the runway.

How many of the same lib shill talking head articles stating the same thing differently are you going to post? Don't politic this informative thread up please, take your Trump attacks elsewhere.

---

Emotional Support Cobra said:

---

I might get some of my social security after all!

---

cone said:

---

more info seems to be seeping out today:

- not airborne or not a major factor in spread

- fomite and droplet spread. and the thing that makes this so damn pesky is that it lasts longer on surfaces than you think

- this is good because it means hand washing and social distancing and mitigation practices can work and would not necessary crater the economy. i think demand will still go low out of paranoia and businesses will have to show that they are disinfecting their surfaces daily.

- it's not as infectious as we once thought (coming out of Wuhan). the R0 might be sub 2.0

- the attack on close contacts was much less in casual settings and only 10% in family settings over two weeks

- my read on this is that population density and mass transit and general hygiene without early mitigation actions is what drives this thing to outbreak

- large gatherings and events will absolutely need to be cancelled

i hope i'm not being too upbeat. effectively, this is like a cross between the stomach flu and the regular flu that is +10x more likely to kill you and +10x more likely to send you to the hospital for pneumonia

so it's still bad and we're going to spend a long time untangling this knot, but it's potentially less catastrophic if we treat it with respect.

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Emotional Support Cobra said:

---

I might get some of my social security after all!

---

That's morbid... but I did chuckle

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Just ate at a Thai place in Austin.

Totally empty. I asked the owner and said people are not eating at Asian restaurants as much during this virus.

Well my son and I had a wonderful dinner.

Go support your local restaurants and stop being a twit

---

Nuclear Scramjet said:

---

---

aggiepanic95 said:

---

Nuclear Scramjet said:

---

---

And that would be.......?

---

UncoverAg00 said:

---

I guess this is where I don't understand. I thought that the R0 was essentially a simple metric to measure the transmission rate and generally speaking a value close to or below 1 wouldn't be considered pandemic levels. Up until today, the CFR coupled with a R0 made this thing kinda scary. Now, I don't know. Obviously I'm misunderstanding, so I'very open to someone pointing me to a reference or simply explaining how critical this value is in the grand scheme of things. Up to this point I thought it was more important than what it appears now. Basically, given all the updated #'s, I'm now struggling to understand how this explains the quarantines and their necessity.

---