Covid 19 Pandemic By Country

"The incoming Biden administration must be prepared to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic head on and distribute a vaccine to over 300 million people in a short amount of time"

"The more the president elect and the president are speaking from the same playbook, the more confidence folks will have taking that vaccine"

"Numerous polls suggest that COVID-19 is a profoundly partisan issue in the United States. Using the geotracking data of 15 million smartphones per day, we found that US counties that voted for Donald Trump (Republican) over Hillary Clinton (Democrat) in the 2016 presidential election exhibited 14% less physical distancing between March and May 2020. Partisanship was more strongly associated with physical distancing than numerous other factors, including counties’ COVID-19 cases, population density, median income, and racial and age demographics. Contrary to our predictions, the observed partisan gap strengthened over time and remained when stay-at-home orders were active. Additionally, county-level consumption of conservative media (Fox News) was related to reduced physical distancing. Finally, the observed partisan differences in distancing were associated with subsequently higher COVID-19 infection and fatality growth rates in pro-Trump counties. Taken together, these data suggest that US citizens’ responses to COVID-19 are subject to a deep—and consequential—partisan divide."

"In the current pandemic, epidemiologists and public health officials have strongly encouraged people to physically distance from one another. Numerous studies have shown that physical distancing effectively stopped the exponential spread of COVID-19 at its onset, preventing the inundation of healthcare providers and saving numerous lives. To determine whether physical distancing differs as a function of partisanship, we examined whether the political leaning of over 3,000 counties in the United States is linked to the extent to which residents of those counties practised physical distancing behaviours during the first few months of the pandemic (March–May 2020). Specifically, we analysed the aggregated Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates of approximately 15 million people across the United States per day (tracked via smartphone location coordinates) to quantify the degree of physical distancing in each US county. Physical distancing was measured in terms of reduction in general movement and reduction in visiting non-essential services (for example, restaurants). Furthermore, to examine the association between party identity and public health, we tested whether partisan differences in physical distancing mediate the relationship between partisanship and COVID-19 infection and fatality growth rates. Critically, in testing these questions we anticipated that what could appear to be partisan differences in physical distancing may actually reflect social or economic third variables. For instance, liberal areas in the United States experienced higher levels of COVID-19 infections and fatalities at the start of the pandemic (early March 2020) and thus may have perceived COVID-19 as more dangerous and engaged in greater preventative measures. To account for this and other possible explanations, we included numerous covariates in our models when testing partisan differences in physical distancing and health outcomes."

"We found that the more a county favoured Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, the less that county exhibited physical distancing between 9 March and 29 May 2020. Specifically, for every 1 percentage point increase in vote share for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, counties exhibited 0.11 percentage points less physical distancing in terms of reducing their general movement and 0.13 percentage points less physical distancing in terms of reducing their visiting of non-essential services. Model marginal R2 was 0.46 for the movement model and 0.54 for the visitation model. Collapsing counties into pro-Trump versus pro-Clinton bins, Trump-voting counties reduced their general movement 9.5 percentage points less and reduced their visiting of non-essential services 19.4 percentage points less than Clinton-voting counties (average reduction, 14.5 percentage points) across the study duration. Illustrating the relative power of the observed links, partisanship was more strongly associated with physical distancing in our main models (when z-scoring all the included variables) than any of the other included variables (aside from the time terms, the weekend factor, and median age in the case of visitation). To put this into context, partisanship was more strongly associated with distancing than counties’ number of COVID-19 cases per capita, median income, percentage employment, average travel time to work, governor political affiliation, and racial make-up, as well as the other variables noted above. Additionally demonstrating the robustness of our findings, partisanship was associated with reduced physical distancing even after adjusting for the interactions between each of the included covariates and partisanship, when including in the analyses counties’ percentage of employment in various types of profession, when adding specific state policies to the analyses."

"Possibly, local stay-at-home policies attenuate the observed partisan differences in physical distancing because these policies send out clear signals about the dangers of COVID-19. In line with this reasoning, we predicted that state-level stay-at-home orders would potentially reduce the observed partisan differences. Our data did not support this prediction. The link between voting for Trump and reduced physical distancing was actually stronger when stay-at-home orders were in effect, as evidenced by negative interactions between vote gap (with higher values indicating greater pro-Trump lean) and state policy: Bmovement = −0.017, 95% CI [−0.022, −0.013], P < 0.001 and Bvisitation = −0.009, 95% CI [−0.016, −0.001], P = 0.030. These results align with recent work finding that Democratic counties responded more quickly to stay-at-home orders than Republican counties at the start of the pandemic. We considered the possibility that variability in state stay-at-home policies explains our findings rather than county-level partisanship. For instance, stay-at-home orders may have been more stringent and remained in place longer in Democratic states or in states with Democratic governors, in turn leading Republican-leaning counties (which are more common in Republican states) to exhibit less physical distancing. Three supplementary analyses argued against this possibility, however. First, our results remained when adjusting for whether state policies were in effect on a specific date, state governors’ political affiliation, and interactions between these variables and partisanship. Second, we also confirmed that our results remained when adding specific state policies (including closing restaurants, closing childcare, closing K–12 schools, closing non-essential business more generally, and closing religious institutions/gatherings), and the interactions between these policies and governor political party and partisanship, to our models. And third, while there was some variation in our findings between states, most states were in line with the population average of the observed partisan differences. In sum, though differences in state policies contribute to variation in county-level physical distancing, our results indicate that county-level partisanship nonetheless explains unique variance in physical distancing."

"The present work used the geotracking data of approximately 15 million people per day across the United States to examine whether partisan identity is linked to objective measures of physical distancing during the coronavirus pandemic. We found that Republican-leaning counties exhibited lower physical distancing than Democratic-leaning counties, both in terms of reducing their overall movement and reducing their visiting of non-essential services (e.g., restaurants, clothing stores). Counties that voted for Trump in the 2016 election exhibited a ~24% drop in general movement and visiting non-essential services between 9 March and 29 May 2020, while counties that voted for Clinton exhibited a ~38% drop (a 14% difference in physical distancing). Moreover, this partisan gap remained consistent after adjusting for numerous third variables, including counties’ number of COVID-19 cases per capita, population density, median income, wealth distribution, travel time to work, and racial and age make-up, among other factors. These data suggest that partisan differences in self-reported attitudes toward COVID-19 (refs) are mirrored by behavioural differences at the US county level."

"We also linked the observed partisan differences in physical distancing to COVID-19 infections and fatalities. Mediation analyses revealed that reduced physical distancing in counties was linked to a subsequent increase in COVID-19 infection and fatality growth rates roughly 17–23 and 25–31 days later, respectively. These results imply that Trump-leaning counties could have curbed their infection and fatality growth rates if they had distanced to the same degree as Clinton-leaning counties did. Such findings provide evidence that partisanship in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic may have had meaningful—and severe—health-related consequences. Partisanship may therefore be an important risk factor during a public health crisis, one that is probably especially relevant when the electorate is highly polarized and leaders fail to generate bipartisan support for public health measures. The observed partisan differences appear to be relatively strong as well as highly robust. Partisanship was more strongly associated with physical distancing than most of the covariates included in our models, including more traditionally examined health-related variables such as economic and social indicators. The relationship between partisanship and distancing also held after statistically adjusting for numerous control variables, and for interactions between partisanship and these control variables. The robustness of these findings is consistent with findings from independent research groups who have also observed links between partisanship and physical distancing using different data sources. Taken together, these findings provide a more complete picture of partisanship during a pandemic and establish it as an important risk factor for COVID-19 in the United States."

"The observed partisan gap in physical distancing was not limited to the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although we had expected that this difference would attenuate as the pandemic worsened after 23 March 2020, we instead found that the partisan gap actually increased over time. We also expected that intervention by local government would attenuate the observed partisan differences. Again, instead we found that stay-at-home orders actually exacerbated the observed partisan gap; that is, stay-at-home orders appeared to be more successful in encouraging Democratic counties to physically distance than Republican ones. This difference may be driven by more Republican-leaning counties ignoring local stay-at-home orders in light of national messaging from right-wing media and federal leaders; or, Republicans may simply hold a greater distrust of government than Democrats. These issues require further investigation to determine how to intervene locally to ensure greater compliance with public health recommendations."

"In our view, a more likely, albeit partial, explanation for the observed results is media polarization or a ‘broadcasting effect’. Republican-leaning media outlets appear to have downplayed the dangers of the coronavirus as compared to more Democratic outlets. For instance, in early March, Fox News repeatedly claimed that the coronavirus was less dangerous than influenza and even referred to other media reports as a hoax (although some commentators took it more seriously than others, and the organization took the pandemic more seriously by mid-March 2020). Consistent with this messaging about COVID-19, we found that US counties that consumed more Fox News than Democratic-leaning outlets (MSNBC and CNN) exhibited less physical distancing. These findings also remained significant when controlling for counties’ partisanship in terms of 2016 voting. These results, along with self-report data indicating similar findings and evidence indicating a causal link between Fox News viewership and decreased social distancing, suggest that Republican-leaning media downplaying the virus at the start of the pandemic may have signalled to Republicans that they should not take the virus very seriously, in turn potentially in part causing the observed partisan differences. This possibility underscores the importance of considering communication and mass media when designing public health messaging."

"Finally, we consider that conservative versus liberal political ideologies may lead individuals to respond differently to threat or specifically to the threat of a viral pandemic. We find this conclusion unlikely, however, given that conservatives were actually more likely than liberals to report being worried about the potential spread of a different virus—Ebola—in the United States in 2014. As such, it seems that our findings are more likely to be driven by modelling the behaviour of political role models and political identity (that is, political group loyalty) than by political ideology (that is, political values). Indeed, Democrats are not only more likely than Republicans to say they prioritize stay-at-home orders, but this partisan difference is most pronounced among highly identified group members."

"People were reluctant to get tested because they did not want to be labeled, they didn't even want to report a contact because they didn't want to be labeled and have to take 14 days off from work."

"[T]he major players in transporting and distributing vaccines will be companies like UPS and FedEx, especially once the vaccines are on the ground. "We have the capability to serve every zip code in the United States of America. We do it every day," FedEx Express executive Richard Smith told sena-tors Thursday in hearing on the logistics of transporting the coronavirus vaccines. "With this net-work capacity, whether you live in Chicago, Illinois or Murdo, South Dakota, we're able to ensure time definite deliveries of these shipments and we feel very confident in our capabilities in this regard," Smith said. "This is what our network was built to do.""

"Infants, kids, teens, young people, young adults, middle aged with no conditions etc. have zero to little risk….so we use them to develop herd…we want them infected…"

"The stimulus package is encouraging. It looks like it's very, very close and it looks like there are going to be direct payments. But it's a down payment. It's very important to get done and I compliment the bipartisan group on working together to get it done."

"We didn’t know how long it was gonna last. Most of us would never have thought this would be the 17th of December and we would be working on yet another Covid package."

"history will record that this week was the beginning of the end [of the pandemic] we have a ways to go."

"My expectation is that next year we return to normalcy in our lives thanks to the incredible work of Operation Warp Speed and these vaccines, as well as the therapeutics"

"“The bill they [lawmakers] are now planning to send back to my desk is much different than anticipated, it really is a disgrace. The bill also allows stimulus checks for the family members of illegal aliens, allowing them to get up to $1,800 each. This is far more than the Americans are given. Despite all of this wasteful spending, and much more, the $900 billion package provides hardworking taxpayers with only $600 each in relief payments, and not enough money is given to small businesses."

"Perhaps the only mistake was believing the Donald Trump and Secretary Mnuchin when we were told that the bill — when it’s passed — would be signed by the president."

"And the reason I'm concerned and my colleagues in public health are concerned also is that we very well might see a post-seasonal, in the sense of Christmas, New Year's, surge, and, as I have described it, as a surge upon a surge, because, if you look at the slope, the incline of cases that we have experienced as we have gone into the late fall and soon-to-be-early winter, it is really quite troubling. We are really at a very critical point. ... So I share the concern of President-elect Biden that as we get into the next few weeks, it might actually get worse."

"I think I read yesterday a report that we’ve done more than everybody — every other country — combined,"

"We believe that under the phase one criteria that we have a sufficient amount of testing at that level to allow states to begin to responsibly reopen. And literally doing more than 150,000 tests a day now, a number that we believe we could double once we activate all the laboratories around the country, we're confident that that would enable any governor who's otherwise met the criteria of 14 days of declining cases to be able to have the testing capacity sufficient to monitor people that may have symptoms so we can identify them and do contact tracing and also deploy the resources to vulnerable populations, nursing homes and particular vulnerable populations in our city to ensure that we don't see a resurgence of the coronavirus. So yes, we think we've laid a strong foundation for testing for phase one and we're going to continue to expand testing going forward for the nation in the weeks and months ahead."

"The American people can be confident that this president wants to reopen the American economy as soon as we can safely and responsibly do it. But we believe, with the guidelines to open up America again, we've given governors around the country our very best counsel about how they can do just that. And we'll continue to work with governors to make sure that they have the guidance, that they have the council and they have the resources to accomplish that. And to put the coronavirus in the past someday and to put America back to work."

"Chuck Todd: I understand that. I've given you a lot of leeway here. I've not been wanting to interrupt you. That's not true, I always want to jump in on some things. I've given you a lot of leeway. Why is the president trying to undermine the guidance you've been laying out and that he's been -- he laid out this guidance on Thursday and undermined it on Friday."

"No one wants to reopen America more than President Donald Trump. And I think the American people have known that from weeks ago when the president declared that important balance, we have to make sure that the cure isn't worse than the disease. Because the reality is that for all of the sacrifice the American people have made, sacrifices that literally have saved lives, the truth is that there are real costs including the health and well-being of the American people to continue to go through the shutdown that we're in today. And so the president laid out new guidelines for every state in the country to say that if you’ve seen cases decline for 14 days, if you're in a position to do the kind of, the kind of testing and you have the health hospital capacity that we want to encourage every state to examine the way to go to phase one. And that's the new guidance that we're giving."

"There's a downward trajectory beginning in even some of the hot spots around the country. And now more than ever it's important that each of us continue to do our part. And I can assure the American people that, at the president's direction, we'll continue to play our role, we'll have a full partnership of governors around the country. And we will some day in the near future, we, will put the coronavirus in the past."

"I've seen that report in the papers this morning. And I know that HHS is making inquiries. But we believe those issues were resolved on that particular test by early February. But it's important for your viewers to know that that test, the slow lab-based test that is typical for CDC and public health labs would never have been able to meet the needs of testing in this coronavirus epidemic. That's why President Trump was so right when he brought together these commercial labs and formed a consortium. And literally took us from -- at that time in February we had done some 20,000 tests total across the country. Now we've done more than four million and we believe we'll have done more than five million tests before the end of this month. None of that would have been possible without the president's leadership, without the innovation, without the incredible efforts of companies like Roche and Avid Laboratories. And the American people can be confident that whether it is supplies, whether it is testing, we're going to continue to make sure that our governors, our state health care officials and most especially our health care workers have the resources and the support they need. But I want the American people to know that sitting here this morning we really are seeing encouraging signs because of what the American people have done, we believe we are slowing the spread."

"At the president's direction, as we announced last week, the CDC is going to deploy teams in every single state in the country to do over the next 12 to 18 months. The CDC is really the expert at contact tracing. And it really is, Chuck, the way that we, that we typically control the outbreak of infectious disease. You identify someone who has symptoms. You test them. And then you immediately find out who they've been in contact with. That's what the CDC does. And, as we announced last week, we'll be deploying coronavirus CDC teams in every state in the country on top of the hundreds of CDC personnel that are already embedded in states today."

"In any health care crisis, we want to make sure the health care workers at the local level have the resources they need because it's locally executed. It is state managed. But it's federally supported. And the federal government at the president's direction will continue to support governors as they deploy the testing resources in the time and manner of their choosing. But we believe today, as Dr. Deborah Birx has confirmed, is we have a sufficient capacity of testing today for any state in America to move into phase one and begin the process of reopening their state and their economy."

"Admiral Brett Giroir of the U.S. Public Health Service spends all of his time coordinating testing deployment and resources deployment from FEMA. And what we're making clear to governors, and I want the American people to know, is that we will continue to do that. While the president has made it clear that we want the governors to implement testing and deploy testing where they deem it's most appropriate in their state, we're going to continue to fully partner with states around the country to increase the supply, to make sure that they have the reagents and the test kits necessary to perform those tests. But I want to say again, it is truly -- it's a tribute to the president's leadership that early on in this process he brought in the top commercial labs in the country. They formed an alliance. And we went from one month ago to 80,000 tests being done to four million tests being completed as of yesterday. We'll continue to increase that. We'll continue to make governors aware of that."

"I've been working almost daily over the last two months with Republican and Democrat governors across the country. And this vast and complex system of testing, using the commercial labs around the country and using hospital and public labs is a new concept. And so we've been working with governors around the country to make sure that they and their health officials know about all the resources in their states. And we also have deployed a team from Walter Reed that over the last two weeks has been calling every single laboratory in the country that can do coronavirus testing. And tomorrow we'll be presenting all of those details to governors so that they can activate those tests in their state."

"Just so we're very clear, when the president outlined his guidelines for opening up America, we laid out a plan for both -- for when and how we thought it was best according to our best scientists and advisors for states to be able to responsibly and safely reopen. And we believe today as Dr. Birx has said, as Dr. Fauci and others have said, is that there is a sufficient capacity of testing across the country today for any state in America to go to a phase one level which contemplates testing people that have . And also doing the kind of monitoring of vulnerable populations in our cities, in our nursing homes that we ought to be watching very carefully for outbreaks of the coronavirus. But we believe working with the governors, as we'll continue to partner with them, that we can activate labs around the country and that states today, if the governor so chooses, have sufficient testing to be able to move into the testing contemplated in phase one."

"What we've done through FEMA and through is literally marshal the full resources of the American economy. We've been bringing medical supplies including, testing supplies, in from all over the world and will continue to do that."