04-09-2020, 01:45 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-09-2020, 01:47 PM by BostonCard.)
The ABC report was updated to include the MSCI's comment:
I am inclined to believe the statement given the timeline. November 2019 was awfully early in the pandemic, probably before it was recognized. Even allowing for the CCP's delay in informing other entities, the likelihood that it was recognizable above normal influenza and pneumonia that early is pretty low.
But China notified the WHO on December 31, 2019, the first death was reported Jan. 11, the first cases outside of China occurred Jan. 20, and the first case was reported in the US on Jan. 21. You don't need to retcon that we should have known back in November to realize that impaired testing and not monitoring for community spread for a month was a failing.
BC
I agree with Teejers, and I would further compare the response to the outbreak in California (and Washington) to that in New York (so this isn't a partisan issue). Even more impressive is the contrast between the city of San Francisco and the city of New York. Getting on top of this early made a difference.
BC
Quote:"As a matter of practice the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists," the statement said.
I am inclined to believe the statement given the timeline. November 2019 was awfully early in the pandemic, probably before it was recognized. Even allowing for the CCP's delay in informing other entities, the likelihood that it was recognizable above normal influenza and pneumonia that early is pretty low.
But China notified the WHO on December 31, 2019, the first death was reported Jan. 11, the first cases outside of China occurred Jan. 20, and the first case was reported in the US on Jan. 21. You don't need to retcon that we should have known back in November to realize that impaired testing and not monitoring for community spread for a month was a failing.
BC
(04-09-2020, 01:22 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(04-09-2020, 12:11 PM)Genuine Realist Wrote: Trying to make campaign issues out of this stuff by either Party just isn't going to work. Through February, there was too much consensus on an overly optimistic scenario.
Could not disagree more. It will be THE campaign issue, and there will be spinning and arguments from both sides.
But to say there was too much uncertainty to act is incorrect. I'll give Newsom credit for acting quickly, and I believe things in CA will be under control on the front end relatively quickly. [The really hard part comes in next stage: navigating the grip on the reigns.]. Anyway, these actions in CA (and in other areas) can be compared and contrasted to federal actions. That is a completely legit campaign issue . . . but one that I hope awaits the actual campaign. (Burger, Outsider, and others are "jumping the gun" . . . but whatever, I'm no fan of direct censoring, "shame censoring" or whatever else. Their commentary is far from baseless).
BTW, the headline in today's Merc talked about # of jobs lost in Bay Area now and CA overall. It's not pretty.
I agree with Teejers, and I would further compare the response to the outbreak in California (and Washington) to that in New York (so this isn't a partisan issue). Even more impressive is the contrast between the city of San Francisco and the city of New York. Getting on top of this early made a difference.
BC