Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
znModeratorThe Rams were the only team in the NFL with four players that had at least $45M guaranteed in their current contract.
Rams Most Guaranteed Money – Prior to Releasing Todd Gurley II
Jared Goff $110M
Aaron Donald $86.9M
Brandin Cooks $50.5M
Todd Gurley II $45M— trey wingo (@wingoz) March 30, 2020
znModeratorBT, that’s awful. Hang in there…I hope you get better news on this and sooner not later.
znModeratorTeams can have plenty of pre-draft communication with prospects
Although Pro Day workouts and private workouts and visits to team facilities can’t happen prior to the 2020 draft, teams can still spend plenty of time talking to prospects.
According to the NFL, teams may contact an unlimited number of incoming rookies up to three times per week, for up to one hour at a time. The communications may be in the form of phone calls or videoconferences, and the only requirement is that the not conflict with a player’s school work.
Given that most players are no longer in school and given that most schools have switched to online learning, few if any communications would potentially conflict with classwork.
While hardly a perfect replacement for meeting players in person, a lot can be learned by talking to them for up to three hours per week in advance of the draft — including whether and to what extent they are reliable or punctual when the time comes to make or receive a phone call.
znModeratorRavens lose DT Brockers, who returns to Rams for 3-year deal
Updated 2:50 pm CDT, Friday, March 27, 2020
https://www.theintelligencer.com/sports/article/Ravens-lose-DT-Brockers-leaving-void-in-15161239.php
OWINGS MILLS, Md. (AP) — The Baltimore Ravens won’t have Michael Brockers on their retooled defensive line after all, and now he’s headed back to Los Angeles.
Baltimore reached agreement on a three-year contract with the Rams free agent last week. But the deal was never sealed in part because Brockers could not take a physical at the team’s training facility due to restrictions by the NFL regarding the coronavirus.
The Ravens had concerns over a lingering ankle sprain Brockers sustained last season. Brockers’ agent, Scott Casterline, had two independent doctors — including Dallas Cowboys head physician Dr. Dan Cooper — examine the eight-year veteran.
Casterline reported that both doctors found arthritis in the ankle but insisted that Brockers “can play with it.”
That evidently wasn’t good enough for Baltimore. Unable to verify the extent of the injury through an examination by their own doctors, the Ravens sought to amend the proposed contract.
“I didn’t know why Baltimore took a hard stance on that,” Casterline told The Associated Press on Friday. “I think the coronavirus, not allowing their doctors to get their hands on Michael, was the key thing. But I had good resources to objectively look at him.”
No settlement could be reached, and early Friday morning the Ravens wrote on Twitter: “The Ravens will not sign Michael Brockers as previously reported after being unable to come to an agreement on terms of a contract.”
Casterline’s view was that the Ravens asked for too much of a concession for an injury that really should not have been that big an issue.
“They came back and tried to restructure what we agreed to, to really eliminate all risk,” Casterline said, “and I just didn’t feel like that was fair, especially when we had other people saying he would be fine.”
Shortly after the Ravens shut down the deal, Brockers agreed upon a contract with the Rams that Casterline described as “very close to what the Ravens initially offered.”
Brockers quoted rapper Biggie Smalls on Instagram: “I’m going, going back, back to Cali, Cali.”
“If he couldn’t play in L.A., he wanted to play in Baltimore,” Casterline said. “He originally wanted to be in L.A., but at the beginning of free agency it didn’t look like they could get where we thought his market value was or close to it. That changed, so he’s happy to go back to L.A. “
The 6-foot-5, 305-pound Brockers made the move from St. Louis to Los Angeles with the Rams in 2016, and he has started at least 14 games in seven consecutive seasons while playing all along their defensive line. Only long snapper Jake McQuaide has been the with the Rams longer than Brockers among their active players.
The likable locker room leader was a key run stopper in the Rams’ 3-4 defense for the past three seasons alongside Aaron Donald, doing much of the line’s dirty work while Donald racked up accolades.
Brockers will team with Donald and returning starter Sebastian Joseph-Day on the line in new defensive coordinator Brandon Staley’s scheme alongside newcomer A’Shawn Robinson, who joined the Rams in free agency from Detroit.
Losing Brockers is a blow to the Ravens, who envisioned the eight-year veteran as part of a defensive line with Brandon Williams and newcomer Calais Campbell, obtained in a trade with Jacksonville.
After reaching an agreement with Brockers, the Ravens gave up on retaining free agent Michael Pierce, who signed with the Vikings, and traded Chris Wormley to Pittsburgh. That leaves a sizable void that Baltimore thought had been filled by Brockers, who last year had a career-high 63 tackles.
znModeratorYou’re right, it was wrong to overlook that.
Belatedly, let me say, hope you’re doing better.
And don’t go away–it’s your community and you’re needed. Where else can a leftist discuss the Rams and everything else–among friends at that–at the same time!
znModeratorYou were asking for trouble if you didn’t roll a safety over top of #81 @BigGame81. At this point it’s just a race to the ball! Torry Holt scores 6 from @MarcBulger10 against Seattle in 2005 pic.twitter.com/4VnztQpnvG
— RAMS ON FILM (@RamsOnFilm) March 29, 2020
znModeratorMA received 17% of requested medical supplies from the Trump admin. ME: 5%. CO: 1 day's worth.
FL got everything they requested. + an identical shipment the next week. oh, and a 3rd is on the way.https://t.co/4AmYkn70Jm pic.twitter.com/ZUCGF2NsfX
— Jesse Lehrich (@JesseLehrich) March 29, 2020
znModeratorAn ironworker on the construction site of SoFi Stadium, the future home of the Chargers and Rams, has tested positive for COVID-19, according to a source. The development clouds the immediate future of the project.https://t.co/LQWTH0D8sN
— Jason B. Hirschhorn (@by_JBH) March 28, 2020
—
Opinion: Rams have become experts at disaster response, are drawing on experience to face coronavirus crisis https://t.co/k1CjFjERsQ
— Joe Curley (@vcsjoecurley) March 29, 2020
—
Rams announce refund policy if games are canceled due to coronavirus https://t.co/NhpVDfm7KL
— Rams Wire (@TheRamsWire) March 29, 2020
znModeratorRams have lost several key players, say that was part of the plan https://t.co/YD3YH0YFFK
— ProFootballTalk (@ProFootballTalk) March 29, 2020
znModeratorThe Lost Month: How a Failure to Test Blinded the U.S. to Covid-19
Aggressive screening might have helped contain the coronavirus in the United States. But technical flaws, regulatory hurdles and lapses in leadership let it spread undetected for weeks.link https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/us/testing-coronavirus-pandemic.html
WASHINGTON — Early on, the dozen federal officials charged with defending America against the coronavirus gathered day after day in the White House Situation Room, consumed by crises. They grappled with how to evacuate the United States consulate in Wuhan, China, ban Chinese travelers and extract Americans from the Diamond Princess and other cruise ships.
The members of the coronavirus task force typically devoted only five or 10 minutes, often at the end of contentious meetings, to talk about testing, several participants recalled. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, its leaders assured the others, had developed a diagnostic model that would be rolled out quickly as a first step.
But as the deadly virus from China spread with ferocity across the United States between late January and early March, large-scale testing of people who might have been infected did not happen — because of technical flaws, regulatory hurdles, business-as-usual bureaucracies and lack of leadership at multiple levels, according to interviews with more than 50 current and former public health officials, administration officials, senior scientists and company executives.
The result was a lost month, when the world’s richest country — armed with some of the most highly trained scientists and infectious disease specialists — squandered its best chance of containing the virus’s spread. Instead, Americans were left largely blind to the scale of a looming public health catastrophe.
The absence of robust screening until it was “far too late” revealed failures across the government, said Dr. Thomas Frieden, the former C.D.C. director. Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins, said the Trump administration had “incredibly limited” views of the pathogen’s potential impact. Dr. Margaret Hamburg, the former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, said the lapse enabled “exponential growth of cases.”
And Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, a top government scientist involved in the fight against the virus, told members of Congress that the early inability to test was “a failing” of the administration’s response to a deadly, global pandemic. “Why,” he asked later in a magazine interview, “were we not able to mobilize on a broader scale?”
Across the government, they said, three agencies responsible for detecting and combating threats like the coronavirus failed to prepare quickly enough. Even as scientists looked at China and sounded alarms, none of the agencies’ directors conveyed the urgency required to spur a no-holds-barred defense.
Dr. Robert R. Redfield, 68, a former military doctor and prominent AIDS researcher who directs the C.D.C., trusted his veteran scientists to create the world’s most precise test for the coronavirus and share it with state laboratories. When flaws in the test became apparent in February, he promised a quick fix, though it took weeks to settle on a solution.
The C.D.C. also tightly restricted who could get tested and was slow to conduct “community-based surveillance,” a standard screening practice to detect the virus’s reach. Had the United States been able to track its earliest movements and identify hidden hot spots, local quarantines might have confined the disease.
Dr. Stephen Hahn, 60, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, enforced regulations that paradoxically made it tougher for hospitals, private clinics and companies to deploy diagnostic tests in an emergency. Other countries that had mobilized businesses were performing tens of thousands of tests daily, compared with fewer than 100 on average in the United States, frustrating local health officials, lawmakers and desperate Americans.
Alex M. Azar II, who led the Department of Health and Human Services, oversaw the two other agencies and coordinated the government’s public health response to the pandemic. While he grew frustrated as public criticism over the testing issues intensified, he was unable to push either agency to speed up or change course.
Mr. Azar, 52, who chaired the coronavirus task force until late February, when Vice President Mike Pence took charge, had been at odds for months with the White House over other issues. The task force’s chief liaison to the president was Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, who was being forced out by Mr. Trump. Without high-level interest — or demands for action — the testing issue festered.
At the start of that crucial lost month, when his government could have rallied, the president was distracted by impeachment and dismissive of the threat to the public’s health or the nation’s economy. By the end of the month, Mr. Trump claimed the virus was about to dissipate in the United States, saying: “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.”
By early March, after federal officials finally announced changes to expand testing, it was too late. With the early lapses, containment was no longer an option. The tool kit of epidemiology would shift — lockdowns, social disruption, intensive medical treatment — in hopes of mitigating the harm.
Now, the United States has more than 100,000 coronavirus cases, the most of any country in the world. Deaths are rising, cities are shuttered, the economy is sputtering and everyday life is upended. And still, many Americans sickened by the virus cannot get tested.
In a statement, Judd Deere, a White House spokesman, said that “any suggestion that President Trump did not take the threat of Covid-19 seriously or that the United States was not prepared is false.” He added that at Mr. Trump’s direction, the administration had “expanded testing capacities.”
Dr. Bruce Aylward, a senior adviser at the World Health Organization, led an expert team to China last month to research the mysterious new virus. Testing, he said, was “absolutely vital” for understanding how to defeat a disease — what distinguishes it from others, the spectrum of illness and, most important, its path through populations.
“You want to know whether or not you have it,” Dr. Aylward said. “You want to know whether the people around you have it. Because you know what? Then you could stop it.”
“You can’t stop it,” he warned, “if you can’t see it.”
A Startling Setback
The first time Dr. Robert Redfield heard about the severity of the virus from his Chinese counterparts was around New Year’s Day, when he was on vacation with his family. He spent so much time on the phone that they barely saw him. And what he heard rattled him; in one grim conversation about the virus days later, George F. Gao, the director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, burst into tears.
Dr. Redfield, a longtime AIDS researcher, had never run a government agency before his appointment to lead the C.D.C. in 2018. Until then, his biggest priorities had been fighting the opioid epidemic and the spread of H.I.V. Suddenly, a man who preferred treating patients in Haiti or Africa to being in the public glare was facing a new pandemic threat.
At first, Dr. Redfield’s agency moved quickly.
On Jan. 7, the C.D.C. created an “incident management system” for the coronavirus and advised travelers to Wuhan to take precautions. By Jan. 20, just two weeks after Chinese scientists shared the genetic sequence of the virus, the C.D.C. had developed its own test, as usual, and deployed it to detect the country’s first coronavirus case.
“That’s our prime mission,” Dr. Redfield said later in an interview, “to get eyes on this thing.”
Assessing the virus would prove challenging. It was so new that scientists had little information to work with. China provided limited data, and rebuffed an early attempt by Mr. Azar and Dr. Redfield to send C.D.C. experts there to learn more. That the virus could cause no symptoms and still spread — something not initially known — made it all the more difficult to understand.
To identify the virus, the C.D.C. test used three small genetic sequences to match up with portions of a virus’s genome extracted from a swab. A German-developed test that the W.H.O. was distributing to other countries used just two, potentially making it less precise.
But soon after the F.D.A. cleared the C.D.C. to share its test kits with state health department labs, some discovered a problem. The third sequence, or “probe,” gave inconclusive results. While the C.D.C. explored the cause — contamination or a design issue — it told those state labs to stop testing.
The startling setback stalled the C.D.C.’s efforts to track the virus when it mattered most. By mid-February, the nation was testing only about 100 samples per day, according to the C.D.C.’s website.
Dr. Redfield played down the problem in task force meetings and conversations with Mr. Azar, assuring him it would be fixed quickly, several administration officials said.
With capacity so limited, the C.D.C.’s criteria for who was tested remained extremely narrow for weeks to come: only people who had recently traveled to China or had been in contact with someone who had the virus.
A string of critical errors.
The lack of tests in the states also meant local public health officials could not use another essential epidemiological tool: surveillance testing. To see where the virus might be hiding, nasal swab samples from people screened for the common flu would also be checked for the coronavirus.
The C.D.C. announced a plan on Feb. 14 to perform the screening in five high-risk cities: New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle. An agency official said it could provide “an early warning signal to trigger a change in our response strategy.” But most of the cities could not carry it out.
“Had we had done more testing from the very beginning and caught cases earlier,” said Dr. Nuzzo, of Johns Hopkins, “we would be in a far different place.”
The consequences became clear by the end of February. For the first time, someone with no known exposure to the virus or history of travel tested positive, in the Seattle area, where the U.S.’s first case had been detected more than a month earlier. The virus had probably been spreading there and elsewhere for weeks, researchers later concluded. Without a more complete picture of who had been infected, public health workers could not do “contact tracing” — finding all those with whom any contagious people had interacted and then quarantining them to stop further transmission.
The C.D.C. gave little thought to adopting the test being used by the W.H.O. The C.D.C.’s test was working in its own lab — still processing samples from states — which gave agency officials confidence. Dr. Anne Schuchat, the agency’s principal deputy director, would later say that the C.D.C. did not think “we needed somebody else’s test.”
And the German-designed W.H.O. test had not been through the American regulatory approval process, which would take time.
Throughout February, Dr. Redfield shuttled between Atlanta, where the C.D.C. is based, and Washington, holding multiple calls every day with Mr. Azar and participating in the coronavirus task force.
Mr. Azar’s take-charge style contrasted with the more deliberative manner of Dr. Redfield, who lacked the kind of commanding television presence that impressed Mr. Trump. He was “a consensus person,” as one colleague described him, who sought to avoid conflict. He relied heavily on some of the C.D.C.’s career scientists, like Dr. Schuchat and Dr. Nancy Messonnier, the director of the agency’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.
Under scrutiny from Congress, Dr. Redfield offered reassurances. Responding on Feb. 24 to a letter from 49 members of Congress about the need for testing in the states, he wrote, “CDC’s aggressive response enables us to identify potential cases early and make sure that they are properly handled.”
Days later, his agency provided a workaround, telling state and local health department labs that they could finally begin testing. Rather than awaiting replacements, they should use their C.D.C. test kits and leave out the problematic third probe.
Meanwhile, the agency’s epidemiologists were growing more concerned as the virus spread in South Korea and Italy. On Feb. 25, Dr. Messonnier gave a briefing with a much blunter warning than usual. “Disruption to everyday life might be severe,” she said.
Mr. Trump, returning from a trip to India, was furious, according to senior administration officials. Later that day, Mr. Azar seemed to be tamping down the level of concern. All Dr. Messonnier had meant, he said at a news conference, was that people should “start thinking about, in their own lives, what that might involve.”
“Might,” Mr. Azar repeated emphatically. “Might involve.”
Barriers to Testing
Dr. Stephen Hahn’s first day as F.D.A. commissioner came just six weeks before Mr. Azar declared a public health emergency on Jan. 31. A radiation oncologist and researcher who helped turn around MD Anderson in Houston, one of the nation’s leading cancer centers, Dr. Hahn had come to Washington to oversee a sprawling federal agency that regulates everything from lifesaving therapies to dog food.
But overnight, his mission — to manage 15,000 employees in a culture defined by precision and caution — was upended. A pathogen that Mr. Trump would later call the “invisible enemy” was hurtling toward the United States. It would fall to the newly arrived Dr. Hahn to help build a huge national capacity for testing by academic and private labs.
Instead, under his leadership, the F.D.A. became a significant roadblock, according to current and former officials as well as researchers and doctors at laboratories around the country.
Private-sector tests were supposed to be the next tier after the C.D.C. fulfilled its obligation to jump-start screening at public labs. In other countries hit hard by the coronavirus, governments acted quickly to speed tests to their populations. In South Korea, for example, regulators in early February summoned executives from 20 medical manufacturers, easing rules as they demanded tests.
But Dr. Hahn took a cautious approach. He was not proactive in reaching out to manufacturers, and instead deferred to his scientists, following the F.D.A.’s often cumbersome methods for approving medical screening.
Even the nation’s public health labs were looking for the F.D.A.’s help. “We are now many weeks into the response with still no diagnostic or surveillance test available outside of C.D.C. for the vast majority of our member laboratories,” Scott Becker, chief executive of the Association of Public Health Laboratories, wrote to Mr. Hahn in late February. “We believe a more expeditious route is needed at this time.”
Ironically, it was Mr. Azar’s emergency declaration that established the rules Dr. Hahn insisted on following. Designed to make it easier for drugmakers to pursue vaccines and other therapies during a crisis, such a declaration lets the F.D.A. speed approvals that could otherwise take a year or more.
But the emergency announcement created a new barrier for hospitals and laboratories that wanted to create their own tests to diagnose the coronavirus. Usually, they faced minimal federal regulation. But once Mr. Azar took action, they were subject to an F.D.A. process called an “emergency use authorization.”
Even though researchers around the country quickly began creating tests that could diagnose Covid-19, many said they were hindered by the F.D.A.’s approval process. The new tests sat unused at labs around the country.
Stanford was one of them. Researchers at the world-renowned university had a working test by February, based on protocols published by the W.H.O. The organization had already delivered more than 250,000 of the German-designed tests to 70 laboratories around the world, and doctors at the Stanford lab wanted to be prepared for a pandemic.
“Even if it didn’t come, it would be better to be ready than not to be ready,” said Dr. Benjamin Pinsky, the lab’s medical director.
But in the face of what he called “relatively tight” rules at the F.D.A., Dr. Pinsky and his colleagues decided against even trying to win permission. The Stanford clinical lab would not begin testing coronavirus samples until early March, when Dr. Hahn finally relaxed the rules.
Executives at bioMérieux, a French diagnostics company, had a similar experience. The company makes a countertop testing system, BioFire, that is routinely used to check for the flu and other respiratory illnesses in 1,700 hospitals around the country. It can provide results in about 45 minutes.
“A lot of us said, you know, your typical E.U.A. is just much too demanding,” said Dr. Mark Miller, the company’s chief medical officer, referring to the emergency approval. “It’s going to take much too much time. And can’t you do something to shorten that?”
Officials at the F.D.A. tried to be responsive, Dr. Miller said. But rather than throw out the rules, the agency only modified the regulatory requirements, still requiring weeks of discussions and negotiations.
After conversations with the F.D.A. in mid-February, the company received emergency approval for its BioFire test on March 24. (The company also began talking to the F.D.A. in January about another type of test, but decided not to pursue it in the United States for now.) Dr. Miller said that while he was ultimately satisfied with the F.D.A.’s actions, the overall response by the government was too slow, especially when it came to logistical questions like getting enough testing supplies to those who needed them.
“You’ve got other countries — and I’m sorry, unfortunately, the U.S. is one of those — where they’ve been slow, disorganized,” he said. “There are still not enough tests available there to test everybody who needs it.”
In an emailed statement, Dr. Hahn maintained that his agency had moved as quickly as it safely could to ensure that tests would be accurate. “Since the early days of this pandemic,” he said, “the F.D.A.’s doors have always been and still remain open to test developers.”
A Lack of Trust
Alex Azar had sounded confident at the end of January. At a news conference in the hulking H.H.S. headquarters in Washington, he said he had the government’s response to the new coronavirus under control, pointing out high-ranking jobs he had held in the department during the 2003 SARS outbreak and other infectious threats.
“I know this playbook well,” he told reporters.
A Yale-trained lawyer who once served as the top attorney at the health department, Mr. Azar had spent a decade as a top executive at Eli Lilly, one of the world’s largest drug companies. But he caught Mr. Trump’s attention in part because of other credentials: After law school, Mr. Azar was a clerk for some of the nation’s most conservative judges, including Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court. And for two years, he worked as Ken Starr’s deputy on the Clinton Whitewater investigation.
As Mr. Trump’s second health secretary, confirmed at the beginning of 2018, Mr. Azar has been quick to compliment the president and focus on the issues he cares about: lowering drug prices and fighting opioid addiction. On Feb. 6 — even as the W.H.O. announced that there were more than 28,000 coronavirus cases around the globe — Mr. Azar was in the second row in the White House’s East Room, demonstrating his loyalty to the president as Mr. Trump claimed vindication from his impeachment acquittal the day before and lashed out at “evil” lawmakers and the F.B.I.’s “top scum.”
As public attention on the virus threat intensified in January and February, Mr. Azar grew increasingly frustrated about the harsh spotlight on his department and the leaders of agencies who reported to him, according to people familiar with the response to the virus inside the agencies.
Described as a prickly boss by some administration officials, Mr. Azar has had a longstanding feud with Seema Verma, the Medicare and Medicaid chief, who recently became a regular presence at Mr. Trump’s televised briefings on the pandemic. Mr. Azar did not include Dr. Hahn on the virus task force he led, though some of the F.D.A. commissioner’s aides participated in H.H.S. meetings on the subject.
And tensions grew between the secretary and Dr. Redfield as the testing issue persisted. Mr. Azar and Dr. Redfield have been on the phone as often as a half-dozen times a day. But throughout February, as the C.D.C. test faltered, Mr. Azar became convinced that Dr. Redfield’s agency was providing him with inaccurate information about testing that the secretary repeated publicly, according to several administration officials.
In one instance, Mr. Azar appeared on Sunday morning news programs and said that more than 3,600 people had been tested for the virus. In fact, the real number was much smaller because many patients were tested multiple times, an error the C.D.C. had to correct in congressional testimony that week. One health department official said Mr. Azar was repeatedly assured that the C.D.C.’s test would be widely available within a week or 10 days, only to be given the same promise a week later.
Asked about criticism of his agency’s response to the pandemic, Dr. Redfield said: “I’m personally not focused on whether they’re pointing fingers here or there. We’re focused on doing all we can to get through this outbreak as quickly as possible and keep America safe.”
For all Mr. Azar’s complaints, however, he continued to defer to the scientists at the two agencies, according to several administration officials. Mr. Azar’s allies said he was told by Dr. Redfield and Dr. Fauci that the C.D.C. had the resources it needed, that there was no reason to believe the virus was spreading through the country from person to person and that it was important to test only people who met certain criteria.
But even in the face of a crescendo of complaints from doctors and health care researchers around the country, Mr. Azar failed to push those under him to do the one thing that could have helped: broader testing.
In a statement, Caitlin Oakley, Mr. Azar’s spokeswoman, said that the secretary had “empowered and followed the guidance of world-renowned U.S. scientists” on the testing issue. “Any insinuation that Secretary Azar did not respond with needed urgency to the response or testing efforts,” she said, “are just plain wrong and disproven by the facts.”
By Feb. 26, Dr. Fauci was concerned that the stalled testing had become an urgent issue that needed to be addressed. He called Brian Harrison, Mr. Azar’s chief of staff, and asked him to gather the group of officials overseeing screening efforts.
Around noon on Feb. 27, Dr. Hahn, Dr. Redfield and top aides from the F.D.A. and H.H.S. dialed in to a conference call. Mr. Harrison began with an ultimatum: No one leaves until we resolve the lag in testing. We don’t have answers and we need them, one senior administration official recalled him saying. Get it done.
By the end of the day, the group agreed that the F.D.A. should loosen regulations so that hospitals and independent labs could move forward quickly with their own tests.
But the evening before, Mr. Azar had been effectively removed as the leader of the task force when Mr. Trump abruptly put Mr. Pence in charge, a decision so last-minute that even the top health officials in the White House learned of it while watching the announcement.
Previous presidents have moved quickly to confront disease threats from inside the White House by installing a “czar” to manage the effort.
During an outbreak of the Ebola virus in 2014, President Barack Obama tapped Ron Klain, his vice president’s former chief of staff, to direct the response from the West Wing. Mr. Obama later created an office of global health security inside the National Security Council to coordinate future crises.
“If you look historically in the United States when it is challenged with something like this — whether it’s H.I.V. crises, whether it’s pandemic, whether it’s whatever — man, they pull out all the stops across the system and they make it work,” said Dr. Aylward, the W.H.O. epidemiologist.
But faced with the coronavirus, Mr. Trump chose not to have the White House lead the planning until nearly two months after it began. Mr. Obama’s global health office had been disbanded a year earlier. And until Mr. Pence took charge, the task force lacked a single White House official with the power to compel action.
Since then, testing has ramped up quickly, with nearly 100 labs at hospitals and elsewhere performing it. On Friday, the health care giant Abbott said it had received emergency approval for a portable test that could detect the virus in five minutes.
The president boasted on Tuesday that the United States had “created a new system that now we are doing unbelievably big numbers” of tests for the virus. The U.S., he said, had done more testing for the coronavirus in the last eight days than South Korea had done in eight weeks.
Yet hospitals and clinics across the country still must deny tests to those with milder symptoms, trying to save them for the most serious cases, and they often wait a week for results. In tacit acknowledgment of the shortage, Mr. Trump asked South Korea’s president on Monday to send as many test kits as possible from the 100,000 produced there daily, more than the country needs.
Public health experts reacted positively to the increased capacity. But having the ability to diagnose the disease three months after it was first disclosed by China does little to address why the United States was unable to do so sooner, when it might have helped reduce the toll of the pandemic.
“Testing is the crack that split apart the rest of the response, when it should have tied everything together,” said Dr. Nahid Bhadelia, the medical director of the Special Pathogens Unit at Boston University School of Medicine.
“It seeps into every other aspect of our response, touches all of us,” she said. “The delay of the testing has impacted the response across the board.”
March 29, 2020 at 1:01 am in reply to: Giuliani’s virus wisdom & other examples of virus wisdom #113148
znModeratorSenator says White House turned down emergency coronavirus funding in early February
WASHINGTON — Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, says that Trump administration officials declined an offer of early congressional funding assistance that he and other senators made on Feb. 5 during a meeting to discuss the coronavirus.
The officials, including Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, said they “didn’t need emergency funding, that they would be able to handle it within existing appropriations,” Murphy recalled in an interview with Yahoo News’ “Skullduggery” podcast.
“What an awful, horrible catastrophic mistake that was,” Murphy said.
On Feb. 5, Murphy tweeted: “Just left the Administration briefing on Coronavirus. Bottom line: they aren’t taking this seriously enough. Notably, no request for ANY emergency funding, which is a big mistake. Local health systems need supplies, training, screening staff etc. And they need it now.”
Murphy told Yahoo News that the funding he and other congressional leaders wanted to allocate nearly two months ago would have paid for essential preventative measures, including hiring local screening and testing staff, researching a vaccine and treatments and the stockpiling of needed medical supplies.
“The consequences of that in Connecticut is that we’re going to test less people today than we tested yesterday,” Murphy told “Skullduggery” hosts Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman. “And that means that there are lots of people who are positive who are not going to know it, who are then going to be in contact with other people, who are going to spread the disease.”
An HHS spokesperson said that a few days before the Feb. 5 meeting, Azar had let Congress know he might need to use his “transfer authority” to fund the response to the virus. The Department was already using an Infectious Disease and Rapid Response Reserve Fund, which the spokesperson said was used to pay for CDC technical assistance, medical screening, and more lab capacity, among other things.
Connecticut is so undersupplied that officials have had to cut back on tests administered even as suspected new infections are surging, Murphy said, calling the forced reduction in testing “an abomination.”
Murphy said Connecticut has been particularly challenged in trying to build up its supply of re-agents, the compounds needed to run coronavirus tests. Re-agents are mostly manufactured abroad, and Murphy said “the whole world is competing” for them now.
The senator said he spent part of Thursday on the phone with a lab official in Connecticut who said he cannot administer enough tests due to the re-agent shortage.
“Had we appropriated money in February to start buying re-agent, we would be in a position to do many more tests today than we are,” Murphy said. ”It was just so clear to us that the administration didn’t think this was going to be a problem. We begged them in that meeting to request emergency funding from the Congress and they told us … that they had everything that they needed on hand, which was false.”
Murphy also criticized the White House’s decision not to take coronavirus test kits offered by the World Health Organization in January, which he said was an especially devastating mistake because that test was ready to go and easily replicable. Murphy said he believes that, as a result of the administration’s testing decisions, only about 20 percent to 30 percent of people who should be tested are able to do so.
“We didn’t appropriate the dollars necessary to build out the testing infrastructure,” Murphy said.
The administration’s laissez-faire approach has also contributed to the country’s soaring infection rate, Murphy said, because Trump had resisted calls to invoke the Defense Production Act. The Defense Production Act, or DPA, allows the president to compel private companies to manufacture products deemed necessary for national security.
Trump announced Friday that he was finally invoking the DPA to force General Motors to produce badly needed ventilators. But Murphy said the president had dragged his feet in using the DPA because some of his allies pressured him against invoking it.
“The president is getting push back from right-wing ideologues, from those who believe that the private sector can fix any and all problems that confront the nation,” Murphy said.
“The national Chamber of Commerce and other conservative, free-market ideologues inside the White House are arguing for the president to not use the DPA simply because they philosophically disagree with the idea that government should play any role in the management of supplies at a time like this.”
Sabrina Fang, a spokeswoman for the Chamber of Commerce, did not respond to Yahoo News’ requests for comment.
Calling the president’s coronavirus management strategy an “abysmal failure,” Murphy said the lack of federal leadership continues to directly correlate with cities’ and states’ inability to perform enough tests and stop the disease from spreading in the U.S. He said that supply shortages have led to a “‘Lord of the Flies’ environment in which every single state and every single hospital is left to essentially fend for themselves and try to scrounge together as much equipment as they can.”
Asked what he considers to be the most important thing Trump could do to help the country turn the corner in its effort to contain the coronavirus, Murphy said the president should rethink his recent assertion that the country might be able to return to normal by Easter, which falls this year on April 12.
“What I’m most worried about right now is that the president is just going to get sort of tired of these emergency measures,” Murphy said, referring to the social distancing efforts most Americans are now undertaking. “The result will be that people will start coming out of their homes and we will end up with a health care system in absolute, catastrophic failure.”
Murphy also said he is now close to proposing legislation that will bolster coordination between the U.S, and other countries for pandemic preparedness and protection so that next time a virus emerges, leaders are better able to respond.
“There could be another one at our doorstep next spring at the same time that we’re responding to the current virus,” he said.
He also hailed the passage of a $2 trillion stimulus package late Wednesday. The package is meant to boost an economy staggering under the weight of the coronavirus pandemic and includes billions of dollars in tax credits for hard-hit industries and direct cash payments to individuals, among other provisions.
But while he said he was happy the bill would help the economy recover, “until hospitals have what they need in order to continue to respond to this … our salvation is really in all of our hands.”
“There is no danger of overreacting right now,” Murphy said. “As the number of people infected grows by leaps and bounds every single day, as more hot spots are created all across the country, we need to take drastic measures.”
He said he is gravely worried about the administration’s “mixed messages” to the public about the duration and importance of social distancing.
“Everything in that bill is meaningless,” Murphy said of the stimulus, “unless we are all personally very serious about engaging in the best practices necessary to repel the virus.”
znModerator𝒥𝒾𝓂 𝐸𝓋𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓉𝓉@Jim_Everett
If a player is about to play a game against his former team…don’t believe it when that player says in the media; “oh…it’s just another game.”From first hand experience, I’ll admit that your new teammates get amp up as much as the former player.
March 29, 2020 at 12:43 am in reply to: Giuliani’s virus wisdom & other examples of virus wisdom #113146
znModeratorFox News is responsible for this drunk giving medical advice. https://t.co/q8ZRXutj4g
— Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) March 28, 2020
znModeratorBucky Brooks@BuckyBrooks
The teams that have decided to go with “information gatherers” over scouts will feel the pinch. Teams with proven evaluators who have an eye for talent based on tape study and in-person “feel” will come out on tape. We will find out who can REALLY evaluate players this year.Steve Wyche@wyche89
Spoken to a few folks about this with one personnel guy telling me that the teams with the deepest, most experienced personnel staffs will come out pretty well. The teams that don’t could, and likely will, be exposed
znModeratorNFL plans to stage its draft next month in a studio setting rather than Las Vegas
SAM FARMER
Las Vegas is off for next month’s NFL draft. No celebrations along the Strip. No boats navigating players across the Bellagio Hotel fountain to the stage. All that was scuttled in reaction to the coronavirus outbreak.
But the event is still scheduled for April 23-25, and the league has gone back to the drawing board to determine how best to stage it.
The NFL is not commenting publicly about what’s in the works, but according to two individuals with knowledge of the discussions, the current plans call for some type of studio setting with cut-ins from the headquarters of the teams making the selection at a given time.
In a memo to all league employees this past week and obtained by The Times, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote: “Planning for the Draft is a good example of how we need to think differently, embrace technology and collaborate. We will also use the Draft to help support fans and those people impacted in our communities.”
Goodell continued: “While there have been changes to the way we work and some of our plans, we have an unwavering commitment to upholding the NFL’s legacy of unifying and lifting the spirit of America, and bringing out the best in our fans and in our communities around the world. You’ll hear more from us in the days and weeks ahead about how we intend to demonstrate that commitment well beyond our fields. And I hope you’ll share your ideas on how we can do that.”
The league announced Monday that the draft remained on schedule and that all public events in Las Vegas had been canceled. It wasn’t entirely clear, however, whether it might still be some type of scaled-down version in that city. But the two sources confirmed Saturday that the event will no longer take place there.
The Raiders are scheduled to move from Oakland to Las Vegas this season, and the franchise is finishing construction on its new stadium there. Likewise, the Rams and Chargers are slated to play this season in SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, which is still being built. It’s unclear how the COVID-19 situation will affect the construction schedule.
As for the draft, tradition has been that the league brings in the top 20 to 30 prospects for the event, to participate in festivities, meet with the media, and wait with their families in the green room until they are selected. When they’re picked, the players walk onto the stage, are greeted by Goodell and hold up the jersey of their new team.
It remains to be seen what the NFL will do in that regard. Because it’s not known what travel restrictions, if any, will be in place a month from now, the league is not in position to make a final decision on that protocol. What’s more, that likely would require that everyone involved with the production test negative for the coronavirus, and those tests are not currently readily available.
In his memo, Goodell praises the work of league employees during this trying time and closes with a quote from a beloved former player, afflicted by amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or Lou Gehrig’s disease.
Goodell writes: “I look no further than one of the NFL’s legendary players — Saints’ legend and advocate Steve Gleason — to provide us comfort and inspiration. Steve offered these thoughts in his acceptance speech at his Congressional Gold Medal ceremony which I was honored to attend in January:
“ ‘If we can compassionately collaborate to solve problems, our human potential is boundless. If we can work to understand and solve each other’s problems, and each other’s pain compassionately, then, truly, all things are possible.’ ”
znModerator@thrilll_32 high pointing it! Can’t wait for more highlights in 2020! Straight robbin QB’s! 🙌🏾 pic.twitter.com/hAMfNinDZK
— RAMZILLA (@elitster) March 29, 2020
znModeratorVincent Bonsignore@VinnyBonsignore
Re-watching @Rams @Saints NFC Championship game. It’s funny – & I spoke to some Rams players about this – but I didn’t think it was possible that stadium could get any louder than it was during the crazy 45-35 Saints regular-season win in November. But boy was I wrong.March 28, 2020 at 10:39 pm in reply to: US health care system costs 4X more than Canada’s M4A #113134
znModeratorBERNIE SANDERS’ MEDICARE FOR ALL POLICY WOULD LIKELY INCREASE WAGES AND CREATE JOBS, NEW ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SHOWS
A new analysis of the economic impact of a Medicare for All health care reform, like the signature policy proposal of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, suggests that such a plan would not only increase wages for workers but also create additional jobs.
Sanders, a progressive senator from Vermont who is currently a close second to former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic frontrunner, has long advocated for a universal or single-payer health care system. Critics argue that such a policy would lead to mass job loss and be an economic drain on the country, but the new analysis published Thursday by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) suggests the opposite would happen.
Josh Bivens, EPI’s director who conducted the study, wrote in the report that Medicare for All “would be unambiguously positive” for the labor market in the U.S., leading to a “boost in wages and salaries” as well as an “increase in job quality, while producing “a net increase in jobs.”
Although the analysis notes that policymakers should not “ignore the distress caused by job transitions” due to such a health care reform, Bivens wrote that job losses during a transitional period would be “relatively small.”
B
Study: Big Pharma Companies Earn More Profits Than Most Other Industries
“Despite the fact that M4A [Medicare for All] could deliver these large benefits to efficient labor market functioning, the policy often comes under fire from critics making highly exaggerated claims about the potential job loss that could occur under such a reform,” Bivens noted.
“The grain of truth in some of the claims is that, like any productivity improvement, the adoption of a reform like M4A would require the redeployment of workers from one sector (the health insurance and medical billing complex) to other sectors (mostly the delivery of health care),” he wrote. “But there is little in the M4A-induced redeployment of workers that would greatly stress the American labor market over and above the uncertainty and churn that characterizes this labor market every year.”
Wendell Potter, a former health insurance vice president who left the industry and now advocates for health care reform, told Newsweek that the analysis undermines a key argument the private insurance industry uses to push back against Medicare for all.
“It’s a dark day for my old pals in the insurance industry because one of their few arguments for keeping the current system placing profits over care, is gone,” Potter said. “On top of the obvious medical benefits, America’s jobs outlook will improve under Medicare for All. The data proves it.”
Critics of Medicare for All, which was also endorsed by Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a former Democratic presidential candidate who suspended her presidential campaign on Thursday, have also repeatedly questioned how such a plan would be paid for. They’ve argued that it would be far too expensive and become a major drain on the federal budget.
But a study by researchers at Yale University, the University of Florida and the University of Maryland published in mid-February found that universal health care would actually save about $450 billion per year in health care costs. Additionally, it projected that a Medicare for All system would prevent at least 60,000 unnecessary deaths every year, as tens of millions of uninsured Americans would receive full health coverage under the system.
“Our study is actually conservative because it doesn’t factor in the lives saved among underinsured Americans—which includes anyone who nominally has insurance but has postponed or foregone care because they couldn’t afford the copays and deductibles,” Alison Galvani, an author of that study, who is a researcher at the Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis at the Yale School of Public Health, told Newsweek last month.
Most Democratic voters appear to support a transition away from private insurance toward a universal health care system, according to exit polls conducted in the 18 states to have held primaries and caucuses so far in this election cycle. A plurality of Democratic voters in all the states to have voted thus far have backed the idea of government insurance, while majorities of voters backed the policy idea in 16 states.
Biden supports more modest health care reform. The former vice president has advocated for expanding the Affordable Care Act (ACA), known commonly as Obamacare, by making a Medicare buy-in option available to some Americans. His plan would allow private insurance to continue to compete alongside the government-run system.
znModeratorThat pleases me. I made it.
Hey I didn’t realize that. Good for you.
March 28, 2020 at 8:34 pm in reply to: Senate Democrats block mammoth coronavirus stimulus package #113127
znModerator
znModeratorI’ve been a union rep for multiple healthcare and hospital unions and the running joke is that instead of fair wages, safe equipment, or proper staffing — mgmt is always bringing in free pizza. https://t.co/RwR1d6CGbw
— Union Express (@Grbssss) March 27, 2020
znModeratorThe 5 they have now–AD, Gaines, S-D, Robinson, Brockers–not only gives them a lot of options for rotating guys in the 3/4, but it also gives them about the best 4 or 5 man 3rd & short and goal line DL they’ve had in a long time.
znModeratorfrom Rich Hammond, 3/27/20: https://theathletic.com/1706709/2020/03/27/michael-brockers-greg-zuerlein-and-the-rams-short-term-future/?source=twittered
Brockers reportedly agreed to a three-year, $30 million deal, but later reports said the base value will be $24 million, plus possible incentives.
…
Quarterback Jared Goff is due $10 million in base salary in 2020, but the Rams can choose to reclassify some of that as a signing bonus, spread it out over the rest of Goff’s contract and create some space right now.
znModeratorAnother former Ram has a deal fall through, this time it’s reserve safety Marqui Christian and the Jets. https://t.co/RhmQD9qNhU
— Lindsey Thiry (@LindseyThiry) March 27, 2020
znModeratorAnother former Ram has a deal fall through, this time it’s reserve safety Marqui Christian and the Jets. https://t.co/RhmQD9qNhU
— Lindsey Thiry (@LindseyThiry) March 27, 2020
znModeratorGreg Zuerlein has ice in his veins ❄️
The field goal that sent the @RamsNFL to the Super Bowl. #LARvsNO pic.twitter.com/5GNx1OJGpN
— FOX Sports: NFL (@NFLonFOX) January 20, 2019
znModeratorRich Hammond@Rich_Hammond
Two sides of the Greg Zuerlein thing, both true.1) The Rams now have zero kickers, and it can be very, very difficult to find a reliable kicker.
2) Zuerlein was 5-for-11 in the range of 40-to-49-yards last year and that was kind of a problem that nobody wanted to talk about.
znModeratorGreg Zuerlein signs with Dallas Cowboys, Rams continue search for next kicker https://t.co/jfJIlcYJ7T
— TurfShowTimes (@TurfShowTimes) March 27, 2020
znModeratorAlbaNY_Ram
Brockers’ deal with the Ravens was $30M, but $21M was guaranteed.His deal with the Rams could be worth up to $31.5M with incentives but only $7.5M is guaranteed. (My guess: a bunch of those incentives are not likely to be reached.)
La Canfora says it could end up being a 1 year, $7.5M deal. (And whatever the signing bonus is would be spread over 2 year so Brockers’ cap hit this year is under $7.5M, and probably as low or even lower than the $5M cap hit the Ravens would have incurred had Brockers signed with them.)
znModeratorKevin Demoff recently said that the Rams are leaving cap space available to make sure Cooper Kupp, John Johnson and Jalen Ramsey "are all part of our future" https://t.co/T8zEAVfuM7
— Cameron DaSilva (@camdasilva) March 27, 2020
-
AuthorPosts

