SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19)

they want to reproduce, like all life

 

agreed, i meant on the local level. they hould be shouting from the rooftops

 

this is interesting:

A New Government Agency Is Planning for the Mysterious 'Disease X'

will an additional government agency be more effective, or cause more conflict?

 

I'm big into palindrome, I hope not excessively though and I saw this as a good way to relate

would one less be any different?

 

“Maybe” more succinctly: the ones that reproduce are the ones that endure.

 

Fewer.

Though the overall idea is interesting... would there be a better health outcome if future disease prevention came commercially branded rather than left to government agencies?

(survival as a subscription anyone?)

 

All life forms want to reproduce.
None seem more tenacious than government agencies....especially 'exceptional' ones.

Sometimes bringing more meat to the party is beneficial.
Other times they're more interested in internacine battles than doing good work for their customers.

YMMV.

 

Big agencies of any kind just don't have the apparent ability to do small. I sometimes wonder if small as a concept is ever considered once an agency reaches a certain size. Big vs Small, More vs Less,
a conundrum of size.

 

It just data collected for (almost all) the 50 US states which could be one reason it's blocked to your location.
One of the dynamically illustrated maps is show data for west -lowest count per mL, midwest - hightest, northeast -little less than se, and southeast - little more than ne, quadrints and list variants per quad. Plus lots of other graphs. Besides Covid, they also track mpox / mpxv for CDC.

 

thank you. the graph shows an uptic in the country recently, and corresponds to reports in ma dept. of health.
the midwest is making the strongest increase to date.

we'll continue with our safety precautions, regardless of government or medical administrators

 

Worst color choices I've seen in a graph before. About as close to 'white on white' possible.







Bob Wilson

 

Well they do kind of. Most of the big gov't agencies realize if they have to tackle something very specific their generic capability to tackle generic issues would slow down and become an impediment to the "hot" issue that higher ups (read may be your elected officials) want answers to. So they carve off a group of experts and give them resources to pursue said problem to let them have greater autonomy in coming up with understanding the root issues and ideas to tackle the said hot issue. This has been my observation from working with the US Gov't for 39 years and has been like this probably before I ever started working. The main problem I've always observed is these "higher ups (almost always congressmen)" view of the issue is now greatly exceeded by the expertise thrown at it from the gov't agency. Then communications breaks down because there's "no transparency". It got to the point that CSPAN was one of my favorite comedy channels. Gov't agencies hire people to tackle problems not for their expertise to explain it to someone who only has a rudimentary non-connected view of said problem.

 

New director at the CDC, I hope she’s better than our locally grown Rachel Walenski

 

I had to smile:

Good thing corporations are immune to 'big gov't-itis'. . . I have worked for GE when Jack Welch practiced 'vulture capitalism' and later Boeing of 737 MAX fame and today, the failing Boeing Starliner.

Bob Wilson