Month: July 2020

“THE LONE WARRIOR!” YES!

This morning, CNN accused President Trump of “refusing to lead. Trouble is, that Trump is leading.

“Donald Trump refuses to lead as pandemic worsens and allies desert him on masks,” yells the headline.

Donald Trump has nothing to say and no answers to mitigate a calamity unfolding on his watch that he seems resolved to ignore,” wrote Stephen Collinson. “Trump is now pretty much the sole figure in authority in either party — including his major Republican allies — who refuse to wear or endorse face masks.”

And just in case you missed the point, “Refusing to lead” is repeated in bold letters farther down in the article.

“As the rest of the Western world presses ahead with careful reopening plans after governments suppressed their curves,” Collinson continues, “…Trump appears to have made a political calculation that the best approach is to refuse to lead.”

“Trump on Tuesday tweeted cryptically “THE LONE WARRIOR!” — apparently embracing his isolation from even political allies and the scientific approaches that have proven elsewhere to at least slow the spread of the coronavirus in the short term.” (Did you catch that? “In the short term.”)

I say a resounding “YES” to Trump’s tweet. Trump is indeed the “Lone Warrior” right now, and I admire him for that, because he is indeed leading.

Or maybe I should follow CNN’s method and put it in bold letters: Trump is leading.

Trump is leading

The number of Covid-19 cases may be “record-breaking,” but the fact is that far, far more people are now being tested than ever before (at Trump’s instigation), so of course the number of cases is rising. I’m sure President Trump knows that.

Another piece of good news is that a higher proportion of younger people — who have traditionally been less severely affected by Covid-19 — are the ones testing positive.

Why is that good news? Because the symptoms for many of those younger people are so benign that they don’t even know that they’ve had the virus. So what if they tested positive? No big deal. I’m sure President Trump knows that.

The number of deaths is going down

The CNN article failed to mention that even though the number of cases may be increasing, the number of deaths is going down. I’m sure President Trump knows that.

Number of cases artificially inflated

And finally, as to the number of cases increasing, lets not forget that those numbers are being artificially inflated. We’ve probably all heard of the automobile accident victim being classified as a Covid-19 death, or the suicide being classified as a Covid-19 death, or the person who died of cancer being classified as a Covid-19 death. But the false reporting may be even more egregious than that: An article just came out today asserting that the number of Covid-19 cases is being inflated by 15 times the actual rate. I’m sure President Trump knows that.

Three cheers for “The Lone Warrior”

Whatever the numbers; double the actual rate, ten times, fifteen times, I say three cheers for “The Lone Warrior.” Three cheers for President Trump.

We desperately need a warrior who will stand up to the would-be tyrants who would demolish our freedoms.

 

The post “THE LONE WARRIOR!” YES! appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now

https://ift.tt/31wYjS9

July 1, 2020 at 03:30PM

Canada Covid Wrap Up

The map shows that in Canada 8591 deaths have been attributed to Covid19, meaning people who died having tested positive for SARS CV2 virus.  This number accumulated over a period of 132 days starting January 31. The daily death rate reached a peak of 177 on May 6, 2020, and is down to 20 as of yesterday.  More details on this below, but first the summary picture.

Canada Pop Ann Deaths Daily Deaths Risk per
Person
2019 37600000 330880 907 0.8800%
Covid 2020 37600000 8591 65 0.0228%

Over the epidemic months, the average Covid daily death rate amounted to 7% of the All Causes death rate. During this time a Canadian had an average 1 in 5000 risk of dying with SARS CV2 versus a 1 in 114 chance of dying regardless of that infection. As shown below the risk varied greatly with age, much lower for younger, healthier people.

Background Updated from Previous Post

In reporting on Covid19 pandemic, governments have provided information intended to frighten the public into compliance with orders constraining freedom of movement and activity. For example, the above map of the Canadian experience is all cumulative, and the curve will continue upward as long as cases can be found and deaths attributed.  As shown below, we can work around this myopia by calculating the daily differentials, and then averaging newly reported cases and deaths by seven days to smooth out lumps in the data processing by institutions.

A second major deficiency is lack of reporting of recoveries, including people infected and not requiring hospitalization or, in many cases, without professional diagnosis or treatment. The only recoveries presently to be found are limited statistics on patients released from hospital. The only way to get at the scale of recoveries is to subtract deaths from cases, considering survivors to be in recovery or cured. Comparing such numbers involves the delay between infection, symptoms and death. Herein lies another issue of terminology: a positive test for the SARS CV2 virus is reported as a case of the disease COVID19. In fact, an unknown number of people have been infected without symptoms, and many with very mild discomfort.

For this discussion let’s assume that anyone reported as dying from COVD19 tested positive for the virus at some point prior. A recent article by Nic Lewis at Climate Etc. referred to evidence that the average time from infection to symptoms is 5.1 days, and from symptoms to death 18.8 days. A separate issue, of course, is that 95+% of those dying had one or more co-morbidities contributing to the patient’s demise. Setting aside the issue of dying with/from Covid19, it is reasonable to assume that 24 days after testing positive for the virus, survivors can be considered recoveries.

 

Recoveries are calculated as cases minus deaths with a lag of 24 days. Daily cases and deaths are averages of the seven days ending on the stated date. Recoveries are # of cases from 24 days earlier minus # of daily deaths on the stated date. Since both testing and reports of Covid deaths were sketchy in the beginning, this graph begins with daily deaths as of April 24, 2020 compared to cases reported on May 31, 2020. Another view of the data is shown below.

 

The scale of testing has increased and is now reached 40,000 a day, while positive tests (cases) are dwindling.  The shape of the recovery curve resembles the case curve lagged by 24 days, since death rates are a small portion of cases.  The recovery rate has grown from 83% to 98% steady over the last 5 days.  This approximation surely understates the number of those infected with SAR CV2 who are healthy afterwards, since antibody studies show infection rates multiples higher than confirmed positive tests. In absolute terms, cases are now down to 320 a day and deaths 20 a day, while estimates of recoveries are 804 a day.

Summary of Canada Covid Epidemic

It took a lot of work, but I was able to produce something akin to the Dutch advice to their citizens.

The media and governmental reports focus on total accumulated numbers which are big enough to scare people to do as they are told.  In the absence of contextual comparisons, citizens have difficulty answering the main (perhaps only) question on their minds:  What are my chances of catching Covid19 and dying from it?  The map shows a lot of cases, and the chart looks like an hockey stick, going upward on a straight line. So why do I say canadians are safer than it looks like from such images?

First let’s look at daily numbers to see where we are in this process.  All the statistics come from Canada Public Health Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Outbreak update.

 

By showing daily tests, new cases and reported deaths, we can see how the outbreak has built up, peaked and declined over the last 3 months.  The green line shows how testing steadily grew up to a daily rate of 40,000 (all numbers are smoothed with 7 day averages ending with the stated date.) Note that the curve is now descending after peaking at 1800 on April 22, now down to 320 new cases per day.  This lower rate of infections is despite the highest rate of testing since the outbreak began. Deaths have also peaked at 177 on May 6, down to 20 on June 30. The percentage of people testing positive is down to 3.8%, and deaths are 0.31% of the tests administered.

But it matters greatly where in Canada you live.  In the map at the top, Quebec is the dark blue province leading the nation in both cases and deaths.  Quebec has always celebrated being a distinct society, but not in this way. Below is the same chart for the Quebec epidemic from the same dataset. The province has about 23% of the national population and does about 26% of the tests.  But Quebec contributed 56% of the cases and 64% of the deaths, as of yesterday.  Here how the outbreak has gone in La Belle Province.

 

The Quebec graph is more lumpy showing cases peaking May 1-9, including several days inflated by data catchups. Cases have dropped off recently, from 1100 May 7 down to 82 yesterday.  Deaths are also slowing, declining from 110 on May 7 to 11 June 30. The animation below shows the epidemic in Canada with and without Quebec statistics.

 

But clearly everywhere else in Canada, people are much safer than those living in Quebec.  So what is going on?

To enlarge image, open in new tab.

The graph shows that people in Quebec are dying in group homes, the majority in CHSLD (long term medical care facilities) and also in PSR (private seniors’ residences).  The huge majority of Quebecers in other, more typical living arrangements have very little chance of dying from this disease. Not even prisoners are much at risk.

Of course the other dimension is years of age, since this disease has punished mostly people suffering from end-of-life frailties.  A previous post reported that the Netherlands parliament was provided with the type of guidance everyone wants to see.

For canadians, the most similar analysis is this one from the Daily Epidemiology Update: :

The table presents only those cases with a full clinical documentation, which included some 2194 deaths compared to the 5842 total reported.  The numbers show that under 60 years old, few adults and almost no children have anything to fear.

Update May 20, 2020

It is really quite difficult to find cases and deaths broken down by age groups.  For Canadian national statistics, I resorted to a report from Ontario to get the age distributions, since that province provides 69% of the cases outside of Quebec and 87% of the deaths.  Applying those proportions across Canada results in this table. For Canada as a whole nation:

Age  Risk of Test +  Risk of Death Population
per 1 CV death
<20 0.05% None NA
20-39 0.20% 0.000% 431817
40-59 0.25% 0.002% 42273
60-79 0.20% 0.020% 4984
80+ 0.76% 0.251% 398

In the worst case, if you are a Canadian aged more than 80 years, you have a 1 in 400 chance of dying from Covid19.  If you are 60 to 80 years old, your odds are 1 in 5000.  Younger than that, it’s only slightly higher than winning (or in this case, losing the lottery).

As noted above Quebec provides the bulk of cases and deaths in Canada, and also reports age distribution more precisely,  The numbers in the table below show risks for Quebecers.

Age  Risk of Test +  Risk of Death Population
per 1 CV death
0-9 yrs 0.13% 0 NA
10-19 yrs 0.21% 0 NA
20-29 yrs 0.50% 0.000% 289,647
30-39 0.51% 0.001% 152,009
40-49 years 0.63% 0.001% 73,342
50-59 years 0.53% 0.005% 21,087
60-69 years 0.37% 0.021% 4,778
70-79 years 0.52% 0.094% 1,069
80-89 1.78% 0.469% 213
90  + 5.19% 1.608% 62

While some of the risk factors are higher in the viral hotspot of Quebec, it is still the case that under 80 years of age, your chances of dying from Covid 19 are better than 1 in 1000, and much better the younger you are.

Mr. Trudeau, Take Down This Wall !

via Science Matters

https://ift.tt/3dPNVaw

July 1, 2020 at 02:22PM

EVen the UN is warning about the environmental damage Electric Vehicles will cause

Child Labor in Congo mining. Photo Julian Herneis

Welcome to the Clean Green Future. Demand for rechargeable car batteries is predicted to rise 700% in the next four years. But even at current levels, children are already dying in mines in the Congo, and farmers in Chile are being forced off their land.

The UN is now slightly “concerned” about a car battery boom which it helped create.

…a new report from UNCTAD, warns that the raw materials used in electric car batteries, are highly concentrated in a small number of countries, which raises a number of concerns.

…two-thirds of all cobalt production happens in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). According the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), about 20 per cent of cobalt supplied from the DRC comes from artisanal mines, where human rights abuses have been reported, and up to 40,000 children work in extremely dangerous conditions in the mines for meagre income.

And in Chile, lithium mining uses nearly 65% of the water in the country’s Salar de Atamaca region, one of the driest desert areas in the world, to pump out brines from drilled wells. This has forced local quinoa farmers […]

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

via JoNova

https://ift.tt/31vb93k

July 1, 2020 at 01:49PM

Boris Rejects Green New Deal

The BBC/Guardian’s coordinated campaign for a green deal seems to have run up against the buffers, and the Green Blob are spitting feathers!

image

Boris Johnson is to set out a “new deal” for jobs and infrastructure on Tuesday, painting himself as a “Rooseveltian” prime minister lifting Britain out of the biggest recession in centuries, and a pledge to use the coronavirus crisis to tackle unresolved challenges such as health, education and regional inequalities.

“To that end, we will build build build,” he is expected to say. “Build back better, build back greener, build back faster, and to do that at the pace that this moment requires.

However, his promise to “build back greener” was greeted with dismay by environmental experts, who were concerned that the climate crisis receives scant attention in what the government is revealing so far of its plans.

Most of the spending announcements will focus on the NHS, education and improvements for town centres. There will be £100m for roads and £10m for rail in Manchester, as well as £900m on unspecified “shovel-ready” local growth projects in England.

Tree-planting is set for a boost, with Johnson re-affirming plans to plant more than 75,000 acres a year by 2025, with £40m for local conservation projects creating 3,000 jobs and safeguarding 2,000.

Ed Matthew, of the Climate Coalition, said: “The only thing Rooseveltian about this plan is that it belongs in the fossil fuel age. There is very little announced today which will do anything to accelerate the transition to a zero carbon economy. The prime minister has to back up his rhetoric on a green recovery with action to prioritise green investment. Future generations will not forgive a government that fails to use this opportunity to build a safer climate for us all.”

Tanya Steele, chief executive of conservation group WWF, added: “We are in the midst of a climate and nature crisis, and these lukewarm plans address only part of our nation’s much-needed recovery. The prime minister is out of touch with the scale of the challenges.” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/30/environmental-experts-dismayed-by-details-of-johnsons-new-deal

I’m sure the general public, who rather outnumber what the Guardian calls “the thousands of people who are participating in the first ever virtual lobby of parliament on the day of this speech, calling for a green recovery”, would much rather see the money spent on the NHS, education and local projects, as the BBC describe:

image

This latest booster comes on top of the main National Infrastructure and Construction Procurement Pipeline, announced last month, which amounts to between £29 and £37 billion of procurements to be made this financial year. (Effectively this means contracts placed, rather than money spent).

BEIS show the analysis:

image
image

The £397 million for Energy projects covers three schemes:

* Nuclear decommissioning – £174 million

* A low carbon pilot depot – £10 million

* Construction of a manufacturing base/installation base on Teeside for the offshore wind market – £214 million

So there is nothing there either to satisfy the greenies’ demand for clean transport, nature restoration, and low-carbon buildings.

Neither is there going to be the demanded cut in the £20 billion allocated for transport.

According to the FT, we have Dominic Cummings to blame/ thank for this!

image

Financial Times

Full post

The post Boris Rejects Green New Deal appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

https://ift.tt/2D3cwMB

July 1, 2020 at 01:32PM