I saw a headline in my research earlier today about the three main COVID-19 symptoms screeners observed when processing COVID-19 patients.
95% of all patients had a cough, breathing problems, and a fever. Almost half had all three. The most common symptom was a cough with 84% having it. 80% had a fever. However, hospitalized patients had shortness of breath 38% of the time compared to 82% of the patients that did not remain in a hospital.
I thought this would have been good information to share with my audience. However, the study covered 164 people in 16 states from January 14th to April 4th. Why is this newsworthy? 164 people is hardly a large study, especially spread over sixteen states.
Nearly four months is reasonable for a study like this one, but I would expect thousands of people to be observed. I would also expect the results to be posted much more quickly than this one.
This study was released in mid-July. The concluding paragraph of the article stated that the CDC hoped that the results of this study would provide guidance on clinical care and testing. I do not follow the logic.
At the end of January, the symptoms reported to the public were fever, cough, sore throat, and headaches. Severe cases had difficulty in breathing.
Over time, more symptoms were reported – remember the announcement about loss of smell and taste? By the middle of May, COVID-19 symptoms announced to the public were fever/chills, cough, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headaches, sore throat, diarrhea, vomiting, runny nose, congestion, and the newly reported loss of smell and taste.
When I see a headline about the three most common symptoms of this disease or another that is impacting the public, I expect more than the dribble I got from a six-month-old study based on 164 people.
Live Longer & Enjoy Life! – Red O’Laughlin – RedOLaughlin.com
Red, The sad fact is that this disease is a political football, and is detrimental to the political fortunes of current leadership. Our leadership is focused on Americans believing what they are told by said leadership. For year to be possible, leadership must control what the people are told and what information they receive. Over the past few months, CDC’S hands have been tied, the top infectious disease specialist in government has been off and on muzzled, ridicules, and harassed, The CDC publishes NOTHING that has not been approved politically by HHS or the White House.
Until 2027 the CDC operated, in fact, independently without regard to politics. It has never had any reason to “tip the scales” for political reason. That is no longer life as we know it. It’s job is no longer to vontrol the spread of infectious disease. Its job is to say what the White House WANTS it to say.
You may not trust “main stream media”. You don’t pay attention to it. That’s your call and your right.
I, on the other hand, was educated at the college level in radio/tv/film/journalism. I studied under two of the greatest behind the scenes journalist of all times. I worked in the TV business for 11 years in sales and as a sales manager. I was a consultant to tv stations for 8 years of my life. I know what motivates them behind the scenes, and I have a darn good idea of what the ethics are for the vast majority of them. I know what pressures they are under, how they react, and WHY they react the way they do in various situations. I know they make mistakes and usually why.
Unless snd until you have been on the inside, it is easy to assume things about what causes the work product to be what it is.
From the inside, it is very different from what information consumers think it is, what balls are being juggled and why. Certainly in legitimate media entity, there is pressure for eyeball and hearing attention. However, there is also pressure to get the sort and report it CORRECTLY and FACTUALY, but to be the FIRST to report it.
Do ABC, CBS, AND NBC have an “agenda”? Yep! Maximize revenue and profits while reporting the news fairly and truthfully. If you watch national network TV news at 5:30 on any of those 3 networks, you will find it difficult to spot bias in reporting. MSNBC? That is different. And they do not pretend to hide it. Truth? Yes. Viewpoint? Yes.
Newspapers? They run the spectrum. However, the wire services are not in the opinion business. The Associated Press and Reuters serve publishing clientele of every viewpoint. Their business is facts, and labeled analysis occassionally. Ask my retired friend Mark Lavie, who ran the Associated Press office in Jerusalem for many years.
Ask my friend Bob Rodenkirk, now retired, (airname Bob Roberts). Bob was with. WBBM NewsRadio 88/CBS News Chicago for many years. Also with WMAQ Radio (formerly NBC). Bob never “slanted a story” for money, political, or any other reason in his entire career. And no boss ever ASKED him to.
Some newspapers do have an agenda. And it is the reader’s right to believe it, not believe it, or even trash it.
One of the most telling stories of the anguish an editor and publisher face was the movie “The Post” about the Washington Post, owner and Publisher Katherine Graham, Editor Ben Bradlee, and the dilemma they faced regarding “The Pentagon Papers”, and later on, the Bernstein/Woodward Watergate reporting.
Sure, some local media, operating with low budget, fierce competition, less than highly trained talent, and dubious journalistic standards, totally veer off from the truth and journalistic standards.
I can tell you a story about a trusted unnamed friend at an unnamed major market radio station in an unnamed major market working for a huge radio broadcasting station group, who is told daily by management how to slant poltical and economic news stories. They are slanted to support Republican politicians and viewpoints. That is that broadcasting company’s right. The problem is the lack of truthfulness and no adherence to journalistic standards of presenting news as news and opinion as opinion.
My friend stays there because my friend needs the job and loves the broadcasting process. However, my friend is emotionally rattled by the dilemma. My friend is close to career end and will be retiring soon, walking away from the guilt.
I suppose the bottoming is to seek the truth and vet the sources VERY CAREFULLY and objectively.
The fact is, the only check on government under a constitution like ours,is a free press. That’s why Jefferson and MADISON pressed for it in the Bill of Rights.
Also, it is a fact that a President, in our democracy, cannot censor the press, at least not in the traditional way. You know. . .storm troopers shutting down printing presses and tv transmitters.
What a President CAN do is try to convince the public that 95% of what they hear or see or read is “fake news”.
No President has EVER had a terrific relationship with the Press. But no President, until now, has tried to totally snd completely undermine the credibility of the traditional media and so tightly control and manipulate information coming from the government.
That brings me back to the White House meddling in the business of the Center for Disease Control. The talent at the CDC knows what it is doing. They know diseases and they know medicine. The American people deserve to hear directly from the people at CDC whose salaries the pay, unfiltered by politicians.
Fox? Another story for another day.
Roy, another well thought out response. Thanks! Will post your minor edit next. I rejected two comments earlier today because they did not address the issue of the blog post. They were not controversial nor wrong, just self-serving wanting their website posted on my blogs. I welcome critique at all levels. I see things a certain way and others do not. State your case and it will be heard. I respect you and your views, even when there might be slight disagreements on time. I truly look forward to your next support or dissent. You do both very well!!! RED
correction to typo: until 2017.
Sorry Red. Fat finger on phone!