Covid Hospitalisation May Affect Thinking Similar To 20 Years of Ageing, Study Says (theguardian.com) 146
People who have been hospitalised with Covid may be left with difficulties in thinking comparable in magnitude to ageing 20 years, research suggests. From a report: As the pandemic swept the world it became apparent that coronavirus could not only cause immediate health problems but also leave some people with often debilitating symptoms -- a condition known as long Covid. According to one UK study, about a third of patients who experienced symptoms after being hospitalised felt fully recovered a year later, with little improvement for most patients in areas including physical function and cognitive impairment. Now experts have revealed that some patients were left with, on average, a lingering cognitive decline.
David Menon, a professor at Cambridge University and senior author of the study, said the degree of impairment was linked to the severity of illness. "[Covid] does cause problems with a variety of organs in the body, including the brain and our cognitive function and our psychological health," he said. "If you can have a vaccine, and all your doses, you will have less severe illness. So all of these problems are going to be less." Writing in the eClinicalMedicine journal, Menon and colleagues report how they examined the results of cognitive tests performed by 46 patients, on average six months after they were admitted to Addenbrooke's hospital in Cambridge between March and July 2020. Of this group, 16 received mechanical ventilation.
David Menon, a professor at Cambridge University and senior author of the study, said the degree of impairment was linked to the severity of illness. "[Covid] does cause problems with a variety of organs in the body, including the brain and our cognitive function and our psychological health," he said. "If you can have a vaccine, and all your doses, you will have less severe illness. So all of these problems are going to be less." Writing in the eClinicalMedicine journal, Menon and colleagues report how they examined the results of cognitive tests performed by 46 patients, on average six months after they were admitted to Addenbrooke's hospital in Cambridge between March and July 2020. Of this group, 16 received mechanical ventilation.
Two questions (Score:1)
I thought it attacked mostly the lungs because spewing itself into the air is how it spreads itself. How does it screw up the brain?
And how often do other flu viruses do similar? I've had nasty flu's in the past that made me feel sluggish for a few weeks after recovery, like every day was Monday. The feeling gradually went away.
Re:Two questions (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
For those of you questioning this statement, it would be an accurate summary of exactly how the last pandemic ("Spanish" Flu) came to solidify itself into history.
Pathetically, you still didn't learn.
Re:Two questions (Score:5, Informative)
As difficult as it may seem to believe, the human body is not a closed system. Blood circulates everywhere and wherever blood goes, so do all the viruses and bacteria. Covid is affecting the gray matter of the brain [nbcnews.com] which in turn leads to decline.
Re: (Score:1)
Is this the case with most infectious viruses (flu's etc.), or does Covid have a different pattern that makes it more brain-unfriendly?
Re:Two questions (Score:4, Interesting)
Most viruses cannot get through the blood brain barrier. Covid is an exception, this has been known since the end of 2020 and one of the many reasons people kept calling it the novel coronavirus. It is a nasty virus. [sciencedaily.com] that has all sorts of impacts depending on your body chemistry.
Ace2 present in the lungs for everybody but also present in other organs has been directly linked to the spike protein leading to organ failure/damage in the infected. Children have fewer Ace-2 receptors which is one of the theories why it doesn't hurt them as bad. The science is still ongoing of course. [frontiersin.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know exactly what percentage of viruses can cross the blood-brain barrier, but I wouldn't call SARS CoV-2 an exception. [nih.gov]
Viral encephalitis is a potentially deadly sequela of viral infection for which there are few treatment options. It is frequently associated with blood-brain barrier (BBB; see Glossary) disruption, enabling entry of virus, inflammatory cells, and deleterious molecules into the brain parenchyma. Members of at least 11 virus families, including DNA viruses, retroviruses, and RNA viruses, cause encephalitis with significant morbidity and mortality
Also, it appears that it was not really well known in late 2000 that the Covid virus itself could cross the blood-brain barrier [nature.com]
It is unclear whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, which causes coronavirus disease 2019, can enter the brain.
Re: (Score:2)
I've had nasty flu's in the past that made me feel sluggish for a few weeks after recovery, like every day was Monday. The feeling gradually went away.
Trying to encapsulate and define illness as a "Monday", is something the overwhelming majority of medical professionals, will dismiss.
"Monday", is where other professionals in mental health tend to infect your wallet. Be careful as to how assume you define progress. It can get expensive, but not necessarily fruitful.
Re: (Score:2)
Analogies is where I defined professions and profit streams in the 21st century, you moron. As I said, be careful of your wallet. Morons tend to have them emptied quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
That the effect happens with COVID is quite well known. What isn't known (or wasn't) is whether it's persistent. Lots of people say things based on a short study, which don't hold up on the longer term. Since this is the Guardian, I don't feel like trusting it as a report on new research. (I.e., I didn't follow the link.)
All that said, many viral infections can cause temporary brain-fog, and COVID is well known to be worse than most in that respect. It's thought that this may be do to the immune system
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
From what I have read there is no definitive answer yet to how COVID related brain damages happens, but there appears to be three possible routes: (1) direct infection, (2) vascular damage and (3) acute hypoxia. This is still all very new, but if I had to put my money on one route being implicated in long term neurological complications it'd be vascular damage. The brain is a very energy hungry organ.
To answer your second question, influenza can have serious neurological complications, but it's much rarer
Re: (Score:2)
It's sometimes useful to compare COVID19 to other viruses, but there are some significant limits to the comparison of outcomes due to differences in the way it affected human society and the way human society reacted.
For example, COVID19 was a virus no one had been exposed to previously, yet was contagious enough to spread around the world in a few weeks to months. This means the entire world was obsessed with it, its spread, its symptoms, its effects. Billions in funding have been poured into research and
Re: (Score:2)
Also heart, liver, and kidneys IIRC. There is concern for other things as well; this isn't the first study on cognition issues.
Other serious illnesses can have similar impacts, but the flu isn't really considered to be in that category beyond potential for lung damage-- we are talking things like cancer.
Re:Two questions (Score:5, Informative)
There's a lot of evidence that Covid isn't really a respiratory disease, but that it's a vascular disease. Covid can do damage anywhere there's blood. It tends to start in the lungs because that's where it enters the body, but it's not restricted to the lungs.
Re: (Score:2)
Covid targets a receptor called ACE2 as a conduit to shuttling hostile RNA into target cells. This is a particularly nasty little trick because ACE2 is used all over the body and has some ugly implications.
The biggest one is that ACE2 regulates circulation and as a result seems to lead to extensive blood clotting, something I would consider to be Covids signature symptom. This blood clotting happens all over the body and leads to multi organ damage all over the body.
It gets weirder from there. ACE2 is all o
Correction [Re:Two questions] (Score:1)
My apologies, I should have said, "like other infectious viruses that cause flu and flu-like symptoms."
Re: (Score:2)
The pandemic of 1889, likely a Covid virus, similarly attacked the heart and brain as well as the lungs, killing old people instead of very young and old like the flu and left a legacy of what is now known as long Covid.
Covid is not just a respiratory disease like the flu.
Quick overview, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] unluckily I can't find the other more informative article I was reading some time back.
My 30yo neighbour used to be a teacher... (Score:2)
...now all she does is sleep, eat or sit on the sofa blankly staring into the distance like an 80yo with dementia.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
But all gals you boink end up that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Shhhh. We're in public here.
Re: (Score:3)
We don't have a president, mate. We've got a Queen and a PM.
Re: (Score:1)
Go Fox yourself!
Re: (Score:2)
The solitary cause for inflation in the US at this point is excessive profit taking by retailers, they're racking up about three times their normal amount of profit. Take away the gouging of customers and inflation goes back to normal levels.
Compared to what? (Score:2, Interesting)
About 5 years ago I spent a couple of months in the hospital (including several surgeries and almost an organ transplant), and it certainly affected my cognitive ability for some time afterwards.
How much is COVID, and how much is everything else they do to patients in the hospital?
Re: (Score:2)
That and the affects of other respiratory sever enough to hospitalize disease adjusted for age and other health factors.
One main things that determined IF you should go to the hospital for covid-19 was if your blood oxygen level dropped significantly. It stands to reason a prolonged hypoxemia probably isnt great for your brain. I am curious if covid-19 is really very unique here.
Re: (Score:2)
I am curious if covid-19 is really very unique here.
At the point where it became the leading cause of death, that question become rather redundant.
As COVID as morphed into something less virulent, your question became less redundant.
Re: (Score:2)
One main things that determined IF you should go to the hospital for covid-19 was if your blood oxygen level dropped significantly.
It's a little more complicated than that, unfortunately. Blood oxygen was one of the main things that determined hospital admissions, and severe deficit on admission was a good predictor of outcome, but it is unclear how accurate the data is.
In the early days, there were a lot of people who seemed entirely normal while supposedly having ridiculously low blood oxygen levels (talking on the phone like nothing was wrong when they should have been barely conscious). I believe that this was caused by overuse o
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that this was caused by overuse of arterial blood gas analysis to determine blood oxygen level. When people have abnormally high white blood cell counts (as is often the case with COVID), if it takes too long to process the samples and you don't adequately cool the blood samples, the WBCs can consume all the oxygen in the blood. The medical term for this is pseudohypoxemia [nih.gov].
Ehm? Blood oxygen is usually not measured by sending blood samples to the lab, but rather with a real-time non-invasive pulse oximeter, as started by the paper that you cite.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
That said, p.o. indeed tends to give low values under certain conditions, though mainly if the oxygen saturation is critically low anyway (based on a quick look at this paper:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov] )
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that this was caused by overuse of arterial blood gas analysis to determine blood oxygen level. When people have abnormally high white blood cell counts (as is often the case with COVID), if it takes too long to process the samples and you don't adequately cool the blood samples, the WBCs can consume all the oxygen in the blood. The medical term for this is pseudohypoxemia [nih.gov].
Ehm? Blood oxygen is usually not measured by sending blood samples to the lab, but rather with a real-time non-invasive pulse oximeter, as started by the paper that you cite. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Yes, I'm well aware of what a pulse oximeter is. That article was talking about the difference between SAO2 (arterial blood gas, which comes from a blood test) and SPO2 (pulse oximetry, which comes from the meter that you put on your finger).
That said, I should have linked to an article that actually has full text available. :-)
Here's an article about pseudohypoxemia in leukemia patients [nih.gov]. The same basic principle applies in any situation where you have an excessive WBC count.
That said, p.o. indeed tends to give low values under certain conditions, though mainly if the oxygen saturation is critically low anyway (based on a quick look at this paper:
There were a number of recorde
Re: (Score:2)
This is probably a good idea, and probably also something that will be looked into statistically. When I worked at a hospital, as part of a push ti get everyone to wash their hands freque
Re:Compared to what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Over 1 million people dead in two years. Let us know when the flu gets close to this.
The nurses and doctors are all about to walk out and are pissed off, tired, and hate you.
When people refuse to follow simple, basic steps to protect themselves which then leads to hospitals being at or over capacity for years on end and the staff unable to get a break, yes, they will hate you because they are tired of the stupid bullshit these people caused.
"You'll likely die. We don't know anything about it. You should have worn your mask. It's your fault.
See above. Also, note the number of those who said this was a hoax or wasn't a big deal who did not take simple steps to protect themselves who ended up in a hospital dying. So yes, they were likely to and did eventually die, doing us all a great favor in the process.
(Because no other disease on planet earth has long lasting effects. ->eye roll-)"
So knowing other diseaes have long term effects, people went out of their way to not take basic, simple steps to protect themselves, got infected, and are now complaining it's the fault of the medical profession. Got it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You're a bit heavy on the blaming. Many of those who took reasonable precautions ended up very sick or dying. One of the reasons is the huge number of people who were asymptomatically contagious. Another is that it keeps changing the way it spreads. So far I don't know any way except social isolation that's know to contain the omicron variant, and there are variants on *that* variant that seem to mean the immunity you get after catching the first one is no longer protective. (The claim is that the vacc
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't say it's "heavy" on blame, but I get your point. However, I would argue that if the best knowledge at the moment is that masks work, and someone chooses not to wear one in some abstract misapplication of the word "freedom", then the fact that masks ultimately are found to be ineffectual doesn't mitigate the fact that that person was a non-participatory, non-helpful fuckwit willing to put themselves and others in danger over something that ultimately costs them pennies or nothing, and in no way ca
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but... Yes, but...
The thing is, masks aren't fully protective. Even clinical isolation gear isn't totally protective. (I've only heard of one case where it failed, but it *did* fail. Didn't hear why.) And (unless someone volunteers the information) you don't know whether, or how often, they wore a mask. I usually do, but just this last weekend I didn't when in a family visit with two sisters and a nephew. That could have been enough. (I won't know for a few days.)
OTOH, if they continue to ref
Re:Compared to what? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're a bit heavy on the blaming. Many of those who took reasonable precautions ended up very sick or dying. One of the reasons is the huge number of people who were asymptomatically contagious.
I think you read the GP post incorrectly. The way I read it, it didn't say that all of the people who died necessarily died because *they* refused to take reasonable precautions, but rather because *people* refused to take reasonable precautions.
Some people died because they refused to take reasonable precautions themselves. Other people died because they caught COVID from someone who refused to take reasonable precautions. Still more died because they caught COVID from someone who caught COVID from someone who refused to take reasonable precautions.
Depending on how many levels of indirection you allow, a relatively large percentage of the deaths and hospitalizations were caused by people refusing to take reasonable precautions. So I would argue that the GP poster was absolutely correct in placing the blame at their feet. But one should not interpret that to mean that most of the victims were to blame; most of them were victims of other people's lack of empathy.
Another is that it keeps changing the way it spreads.
Not really. It still spreads in pretty much the same way it always did. It has gotten *better* at spreading, but the actual mechanism is still very much the same.
So far I don't know any way except social isolation that's know to contain the omicron variant ...
The same approach that worked before still works now. N95 masks will do just fine against omicron. KN95 masks with a foam nose bridge work just fine. Other KN95 masks work somewhat.
Cloth masks work only when you look a them in aggregate, and only because of a limited reduction in your ability to spread the virus to others. We need to stop using and distributing both cloth masks and surgical masks (which don't seal well enough to do all that much better than cloth masks) and focus on mass distribution of fitted masks in preparation for this winter's wave.
Spending more time outdoors and less time indoors works, too — and particularly moving dining outdoors, as long as you don't let people cheat the system by building tents for their restaurants and calling that "outdoors" (which it isn't).
Improving building ventilation also helps, but that's not the sort of thing most people notice.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure. Omicron definitely prefers a different site of initial infection (higher in the throat), but it may also have started spreading on surfaces. There's *some* reason it's so much more infectious.
And when you say "improving building ventilation", it depends a lot on what you mean. Increasing horizontal air flow might well make COVID *more* infectious. Increasing vertical air flow would decrease it. (And I think this is the explanation of why moving outside reduces COVID infectiousness.) In t
Re:Compared to what? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure. Omicron definitely prefers a different site of initial infection (higher in the throat), but it may also have started spreading on surfaces. There's *some* reason it's so much more infectious.
It is probably a combination of several factors. The fact that it binds better to the upper airways makes its concentration in aerosols higher, which greatly increases its spread. And its ability to evade immunity to prior strains while simultaneously creating immunity to prior strains made it rapidly out-compete the existing strains and starve them for hosts. Also, later variants had a significantly higher rate of infection among young people. That, coupled with higher aerosolization, made it more likely for young people with smaller lung capacity to spread the virus to others. Basically, it finished adapting to human physiology
Secondarily, we got tired of fighting it. COVID fatigue resulted in relaxation of mask laws, lifting of indoor dining restrictions, elimination or reduction of school closures, return to in-person work, etc., despite no actual evidence that transmission rates had gone down enough for that to make sense.
So the combination of those factors likely made the difference.
BTW, COVID could always spread on surfaces, and I'm pretty sure nobody (knowledgeable) actually said that it couldn't. What the CDC and others said was that surface contact isn't the main way of spreading it (and it still isn't). That's because the virus is airborne, which means by the time you could catch the virus from a surface, unless you're wearing an N95 mask, odds are you've caught it a thousand times over from breathing the air above that surface.
And when you say "improving building ventilation", it depends a lot on what you mean. Increasing horizontal air flow might well make COVID *more* infectious. Increasing vertical air flow would decrease it.
What I mostly meant was increasing the amount of fresh air blended into the air handlers and increasing filtration efficiency. And yes, you're correct on both points, at least up to a point. At some point, increasing even horizontal airflow would start to reduce the odds of transmission because of dilution, but turning offices and restaurants into wind tunnels is probably not a good idea. :-)
Increasing vertical airflow is good, of course, but requires massive expensive upgrades (new air handler). Changing the air blending percentage just lowers the efficiency a bit, and can be done in minutes. Adding HEPA filtration and/or UV sterilization takes more time and effort, but still orders of magnitude less time and effort than re-ducting and increasing the size of your air handler.
(And I think this is the explanation of why moving outside reduces COVID infectiousness.)
Moving outside reduces COVID infectiousness for two reasons. The first is air volume. Your exhalation rapidly diffuses through the available air. With the ability to move almost infinitely in almost every direction (except down, obviously), coupled with air flow from wind, your exhalation is being mixed into a much larger volume of air, so the amount that reaches another person is likely to be greatly diminished.
The second is UV radiation. Ultraviolet radiation is sterilizing. Higher levels of UV reduce the percentage of viable viruses in aerosols. This appears to have a statistically significant effect on the spread of COVID [pnas.org].
In the original "Chinese restaurant case" back before COVID was recognized as being in the US, there was a strong horizontal air flow, but the contagion still happened. (IIRC it spread two tables away in the direction of air flow.)
Yes, and this is a good reason to sit as close as possible to outgoing air ducts, and as far as possible from intake ducts. Of course, in an ideal world, you would have f
Re: (Score:2)
Becoming sick or dying despite taking reasonable precautions is far different than doing nothing. There were people who went out of their way to get fake vaccine cards, went to covid parties to deliberately get infected, who refused to do anything which might inconvenience them in the absolute slightest INCLUDING some businesses which outright stated you were not permitted to wear a mask [theguardian.com] while
Re: (Score:2)
There are different kinds of mask, and many of the more effective ones are difficult to breathe through, especially for people who already have breathing problems. The place where I live required people to wear masks, but so many wore them on their chin because they had problems breathing through them (some legitimately, others just didn't like the bother) that they finally cancelled the rule after nearly everyone was vaccinated. Every once in awhile we go on lockdown for a couple of weeks after a new cas
Re: (Score:2)
There are different kinds of mask, and many of the more effective ones are difficult to breathe through, especially for people who already have breathing problems.
Irrelevant to the point made about the mask mandates working. We knew the mandates worked back when everyone was wearing cloth masks. (Some of us still are, I get claustrophobic enough in a cloth mask, a paper mask really fucks me up.) Well, some of us knew, anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I’d love to see a cull of all the sock puppet accounts.
It has clearly affected spelling. (Score:1)
Seems the ./ editors can't be bothered to spell "Aging" correctly. Must be Covid by proxy.
When I was in college, the college newspaper would misspell headlines. I thought this was just youthful inexperience, but little did I know it was a harbinger of the coming idiocracy.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
If someone is spelling it incorrectly, it's you, mate.
Re: (Score:2)
Ageing?! Really? It's fucking painful to look at.
It defies all syntactic rules!
I'm playing though. I'm involved in a partnership with a British company right now, and we constantly make fun of each other for our stupid spellings.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you know what 'Enry 'Iggins said: "English? The Americans haven't used it for years."
Re: (Score:2)
Either should be considered valid spellings, because both languages become more unrecognizable every 100 years back you look- that is to say orthography evolves quickly in English.
Shakespeare would have written, "The hauty ghests were detters", and he wouldn't have been wrong either.
It's natural that English evolution diverged between us after 1775.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha, gotta love it when some twit with a stick up their butt claims societal decline over some one accidentally using the British version of aging which any spell check will allow through.
There's an Up-Side (Score:1)
Maybe Gen-Z will collectively and instantly age out of itself!
Wisdom (Score:2)
In other news (Score:2)
Thanks you, I'll be here all night, try your waitress and tip the veal.
Damage is damage (Score:4, Interesting)
(President Wilson catches influenza) '...Irwin Hoover recalled several new and very strange ideas that Wilson suddenly believed, including one that his home was filled with French spies: "Nothing we could say could disabuse his mind of his thought. About this time he also acquired a peculiar notion he was personally responsible for all the property in the furnished place he was occupying... Coming from the President, whom we all knew so well, these were very funny things, and we could but surmise that something queer was happening in his mind. One thing was certain: he was never the same after this little spell of sickness."'
Wilson got sick while negotiating the peace treaties of WWI. He almost completely changed his treaty terms right after he got ill, allowing the victors to economically crush Germany. One can see that because Germany was left so poor and desperate, a dictator could rise up and lead them into WWII. If accurate, it's amazing how one man's illness may have changed the course of world history. Perhaps that's what's happening with Putin too.
Brain damage is brain damage, I guess. And bear in mind that COVID can can psychosis/suicide, [dailyiowan.com] too. Sadly, I think I'm witnessing this in a vaccinated friend who changed after being exposed.
Re: Damage is damage (Score:4, Interesting)
This is something that is underestimated. So the guy in question may just have been severely exhausted.
Personally I think this explains a lot of the irrationality regarding COVID vaccines. People are stressed out so much by daily life that they can no longer think clearly.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably. At least your claim makes a lot of sense to me. Personally, I work the other way round, but I have observed this effect countless times in others.
Re: (Score:2)
He almost completely changed his treaty terms right after he got ill, allowing the victors to economically crush Germany.
is speculation, and not a realistic one.
The US was not in a strong bargaining position regarding the sanctions against Germany, and the French wouldn't have given one shit what US opinion was.
The governments in control of the 18 million troops of the non-US component of the Entente weren't terrible concerned about what the government of the 2 million US troops wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The negotiations between the allies took as long as they did because both Britain and the US wanted to limit how badly France fucked Germany. Ultimately, in the end, France got their way more or less after intense negotiations. They bargained, because the US and Britain offered them things they wanted.
Britain offered a mutual defense treaty with France in case Germany became powerful again
Re: (Score:2)
I found a link to the related information [history.com] if you're so inclined. I can't argue because I only know what I read in that book, echoed by this web page.
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't think it's realistic to think he could have continued to prevent the French from getting their way forever. I think ultimately, he would have caved anyway. The US just wasn't in that strong of a position to dictate terms at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Great (Score:2)
Norghum (Score:3)
Hmm... As far as I can tell, 20 years of aging improves thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a few more decades ;-)
On the other hand, there is some truth to that. Until you really get into reduced brain function in old age, at least smart people learn to understand things better with more experience. The dumb do not profit though, they just stay dumb and get better at telling themselves they are the ones really in possession of the truth. That makes them dumber, obviously.
May be the other way round.... (Score:2)
Remember, those in hospital with Covid are usually non-vaccinated and are usually careless in addition, so generally people that have reduced mental capabilities. If you see something that much more affects idiots, you could come to the wrong conclusion that it made them idiots.
Not saying this is the case here, but has anybody looked at the paper and checked that they corrected for this effect?
They didn't have much to start with... (Score:2)
Anti-vaxxers are not that bright to start with. 20+ years of cognitive decline puts them at the mental level of a baked potato.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
You can take comfort in the fact that hundreds of thousands of people who didn't have the good sense to get vaccinated and stay masked and socially distanced, will never vote again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Herman Cain approves.
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't want to be an ass saying this, but sometimes aging 20 years means you are dead. If you are 70 and unvaccinated COVID can very well be a death sentance.
Re:Trumptards (Score:5, Interesting)
There hadn't been a single riot in Philadelphia since the 80s. Forty years. Forty!!!
Suddenly Trump is in office and we have riots all over the country.
It's almost like having a President that tells an entire segment of the population that it's okay for cops to kill them during a traffic stop might make them a little upset.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
We're on to your context-edited and doctored videos. Take your fake news elsewhere, TrollBreath!
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps you could link to a video of his alleged senility, every time i tune in to a speech or something he sounds perfectly fine.
Re: Trumptards (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You seem to be projecting the orange person.
Re: (Score:2)
He's been the same since the 1990s, if he were senile 25 years ago then there would be a noticeable change for the worse. There hasn't been.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, some people didn't like Hillary, similar to how many people didn't like Trump.
Is there a point you're trying to make?
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like how Trump is an evil piece of shit who needs to be summarily executed in the most horrific way possible?
No, I'm not even talking about him on a moral basis at this time, I'm referring to stuff like not knowing who he's endorsing [theguardian.com] — this is just today's example, there are many more like it but this one is oh-so-current. If people want to look down on Biden because he's confused sometimes, then they need to examine Trump through the same lens. Anything else is hypocritical horseshit. But swap the names around, and same thing.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Trumptards (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not a trivial thing to determine how a nation with several hundred million people would have fared under president A who won or under president B if he had won instead. In addition, it is very hard to determine how whatever has happened in the first year or two of a presidency is solely the fault of the new administration and what is spillover from the previous administration. That is true at any transition of power. It gets easier toward the end of a two term administration, but even then, the executive is frequently limited by what the legislative branch will do and that branch has been pretty much stalemated the last few administrations. If the Republicans take control in 2022, you can be assured that it will be another mess for at least 2 years as all their anger and stupidity flows freely.
Add to that the whole COVID-19 mess, and it's just about impossible for any rational person to list something that is particularly worse under President Biden that wouldn't have also happened to a large degree under President Trump. Lack of raw materials, coming out of shutdown, greater demand for goods, harder to transport, more people working, goods scarcer, inflation... Normal economic cycle exacerbated by a dovish Fed for many years under both Obama and Trump in trying to recover from the last great Recession. Not really much of anything you can lay at Biden's feet.
That said, the main reason we (even as Republicans like myself) voted for Biden over Trump was we were tired of the lying of Trump. Not saying all presidents don't make a mistake or lie at times, sometimes for national security. But most will agree with the truth once they are shown the facts. Not so with Trump. He took lying to a whole new level - and still does.
We were tired of the name calling Trump did. My kids were better trained by kindergarten. We were tired of waking up every day to wonder what world leader or country he had pissed off in the middle of the night with a stupid tweet. We were tired of people sucking up to Trump to a much higher degree than most any other recent president because if you didn't you were dead to him. We were tired of the scandals in his administration. His "draining the swamp" was laughable and he brought his own swamp with him. We were tired of the cover ups. We were tired of the nepotism. We were tired of all the golfing (25% of his time in office by some estimates), of all the charges the government was accruing at his resorts for himself and his protection detail, all the money the Trump resorts were taking from foreign sources also trying to curry favor. We're still tired of it even as he's retired, but can't do much about it. I think Biden's golfing trips stands at 9 the last I saw over a year in.
We were tired of a government run based on what the TV talking heads were saying should be done by a president who wouldn't read the real intelligence information or bills or evidently much of anything to form his own reasoned opinions. You may joke about Biden's supposed "senility", but I don't see it. Trump wasn't senile - he just didn't care enough to put in the work the American people were paying him for. We were tired of the temper tantrums in the Oval. We were tired of the stupid tariffs that just cost the consumer more money. We were tired of the ignorance over science - let's just bleach the COVID right out - reverse everything we can about pollution controls and don't worry about climate change. We were tired of all the stupid things the Congress critters did just to stay in his favor. The whole checks and balances was truly broken under his presidency.
It's nice to not have a president doing things he should be impeached for. It's nice to have a president who is for NATO with what Russia is doing. It is nice to have a president who isn't Putin's buddy with what Russia is doing. It is nice to have a president who isn't at odds with much of Europe while there is a crisis going on. It's nice to have a president who doesn't suggest painting Chinese flags on our own aircraft
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Which leads to the question that I can't get past. Why of all of the millions of eligible potential candidates in this country do we wind up with such a horrible pool to actually vote for? I'd take a random barista at Starbucks or the guy who built my deck over most of the candidates we've had for years.
Why not someone else? Hell, anyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
There hasn't been a presidential candidate that I could vote *for* since 1980, every single election since the only choice has been who I'm voting *against*.
Re: (Score:2)
Your point is valid. But let me ask you this... do you want the job? I certainly don't. Most other people someone might think would be good don't want it either. They're too busy running companies or doing good work. The direct pay just isn't that great for how clawed up you get herding cats.
There is something to be said for having a set standard of requirements (beyond the age and citizenship requirements that exist) and applying that to the entire country, picking randomly, and filling the entire electe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When did the Ukraine become an ally? All of the sudden a country that was ranked as one of the highest corrupt countries in the planet is suddenly an ally that we need to go to war over.
That's corruption perception index. It's based on the perception of reality, not reality. And foreign involvement in this war isn't foremost about helping Ukraine, it's about preventing Russia from becoming more dangerous. Talking about the humanitarian issues is, for most nations, just a way to justify what they're up to.
But what they're up to is keeping Russia from reforming the USSR, which is a good thing.
You did not know anything about Ukraine previously but all of the sudden we need to start sending them billions of dollars and probably will eventually send people to die over there.
We're trying real hard not to send any people, and so far we're succeeding in supporting Ukraine to
Re: Trumptards (Score:5, Interesting)
Largest drop in stock market history. Thousands of people dying every day because the con artist didn't want to look bad. Millions of people lost their jobs. Businesses going bankrupt. An attempted overthrow of the government.
Yeah, things were so much better under the con artist compared to President Biden who has recovered almost all the lost jobs, a soaring stock market, businesses having record profits.
It is an indisputable fact the economy and stock market perform far better under Democrats than Republicans almost without exception. And so far, this is holding true.
Re: (Score:2)
Donald trump agrees [youtube.com].
It wasn't that Trump didn't want us to look bad (Score:2)
That's also why Biden is looking into Student Loan forgiveness. It's not for the mid terms, it's to put a shot in the arm of the economy so he doesn't lose in 2024.
But the point is, Trump was ready to let millions die for 4 more years. And he knew he was doing it, Fauci would have told him that repeatedly, at least until he stopped listen
Re: (Score:1)
We were better off under Trump than Biden.
Largest drop in stock market history. [...] It is an indisputable fact the economy and stock market perform far better under Democrats than Republicans almost without exception. And so far, this is holding true.
c'mon, dont try to act like the stock market was crap under trump; most people's memory isnt that bad... it's only been a year or so.
my 401k was getting 20%+ returns year after year under trump.
here's stock market performance for a bunch of presidents [marketwatch.com].
trump is among the best performers, while Ds have outperformed Rs overall (though stock market performance is a very incomplete way to gauge a president's economic impact/competence).
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, things were so much better under the con artist compared to President Biden who has recovered almost all the lost jobs, a soaring stock market, businesses having record profits.
The angry orange can fuck right off, but the lost jobs being recovered is a myth (once you drop off of UI you also drop off of the U-2 unemployment rate) just like it is under all presidents — the U-2 rate is the reported rate and it is a dirty lie, even the U-6 undercounts people, and if you're lucky they report the U-3 which is somewhere in the middle.
Also, the stock market is soaring due to those record profits, but those record profits are due to price gouging. Corporations having record profits o
Re: (Score:2)
I agree he's a con artist, but economic performance in the short-term (and 2-4 years is short-term) is not assignable to a particular president.
Re: Trumptards (Score:4, Insightful)
It is improper to look at the price range of any broad group of stocks to say you were better under Trump or under Biden. Stocks move in cycles. By the time Biden came to power, the stocks had been going up for a long period as you said, but if Trump had been reelected, they still would have naturally turned down. Just as they have turned down now, they will turn up. Who is in power has very little to do with the stock market. Legislative tax policy impacts the market. Tariffs impact the market. War impacts the market. Most of those have not changed one iota under Biden vs. Trump. Inflation is higher, but again, not really in any way caused by Biden's policies. He's just the one who will get blamed because he won the election.
As far as the war Russia launched with the Ukraine, it is likely that was helped by the impression that Putin got from Trump that NATO was no longer something the US was really interested in supporting. That is not the only reason, but is more likely than anything you can blame on Biden.
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough.
What is your suggestion of a means of influencing Putin and his associates to stop attacking the Ukraine and pay reparations for the destruction they've caused? Do you think we should let them roll back history until half of Germany is swallowed up again? Russia's attack, of all the things you blame Biden for in the high price of gas, is the only one that really matters much. And I for one am willing to pay higher gas prices (and absorb the additional cost passed on in all other goods and servi
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Enough of this BS (Score:5, Insightful)