https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/cuomo-top-aide-reportedly-...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cuomo-nursing-home-deaths-total...
He knowingly sent people with covid into nursing homes against the will of the people running them, even though that's how the first major outbreak happened in Washington state. He then covered it all up by trying to attribute the deaths to hospitals. Then stonewalled the Feds asking for information about those deaths. His aide admitted to it. He should be in jail. He killed at least 15,000 people as a direct result of his orders.
I just hope they investigate the other 5 governors that sent the people with covid back into nursing homes.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/five-governors-cuomo...
They should have all known. This is how it all started, it seems deliberate. Cover-up or not, they are all either dangerously incompetent or malicious.
Before Washington state we had the clear data from the elderly homes in Bergamo Italy where they made the exact same mistake over a month earlier with catastrophic results. Before that we knew from the Wuhan data that CV19 is a highly asymmetric threat and it was critical to protect elderly and immuno-compromised.
The history is still to be written but the U.S. policy choice to go with broad lockdowns of everyone instead of the "focused protection" plan may go down as the worst public health error of modern times. Since they were hit hard and first, Hubei Province and Northern Italy at least have the excuse of no priors. By the time NY got hit any serious analyst knew and many were recommending circling the wagons around the vulnerable.
I have no idea if fault lies with Cuomo personally or someone he delegated this to, but someone in NY seriously fucked up. Hell, in Bergamo prosecutors filed charges against some city/regional administrators for negligent manslaughter (or similar).
Sweden also deserves credit for getting the public health policy right. They had the right plan but have admitted they could have done better in some of the early execution phase around protecting elder facilities. 7
the whole colored tier system was a farcical distraction from real mitigations like quarantining nursing homes and their staff who'd volunteer for 24-hour hero pay and 2-week on-off cycles (long enough to recuperate and re-quarantine), and asking people to distance indoors around familiars, which is where most transmission happens, rather than around strangers or out on the street where your silly mask-wearing does less than nothing. 90% of angelenos, by my anecdotal count, still wear masks outdoors, as if it were a talisman against impending death.
despite unceasing media howling, our infection rates held relatively steady for a year, until recently, when vaccinations finally started to have a real effect on those rates. none of that (double-)mask-wearing, excessive hand-sanitizing, overly restrictive retail-closing, and incessant surface-disinfecting propounded by the state/county/city did anything to mitigate spread, only modest distancing indoors and restricted interfamilial contact had much mitigative effect (and the latter could have been handled much less invasively and damagingly).
i'm decidedly unamused by the stupidity of it all and ready for new leadership of any stripe other than democrat or republican.
Now, the post-facto coverup, that doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt. That's just sleaze and corruption.
That was when we were still counting the first hundred and contact tracing.
The people running the homes dissented against it. He still did it.
It doesn't take a genius to know you will infect elderly people by sending a highly contagious disease into their facility.
The cover up is beyond despicable, but the original action is indefensible.
Everyone was panicking that the epidemic would grow exponentially and the hospitals would get over-run. Hence freeing up beds, and building a bunch of eventually pointless overflow hospitals.
A lot of modelling was claiming that's exactly what would happen, e.g. Imperial College London claiming millions of deaths, while the actual infection curves never hit those numbers.
In hindsight, that's not how the virus works, it seems to infect clusters and then drops and eventually levels out, jumps to a new clusters does the same thing, and on.
Because we took action to avoid that.
I truly don't understand why people keep repeating such dezinformatsiya.
Those projections were still wildly off the mark. There is no way to look at their projections and take them seriously as modelers. They were simply wrong. They made bad parameter assumptions, didn't question their results or cross-validate, and ran with the scariest projections of their models.
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/in-defense-of-mathema...
"For those readers who are unfamiliar with it, the Imperial College model is the one that projected that 2.2 million Americans (and 510,000 residents of the UK) could die from COVID-19 over the next two years without public health interventions."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01003-6
"When updated data in the Imperial team’s model indicated that the United Kingdom’s health service would soon be overwhelmed with severe cases of COVID-19, and might face more than 500,000 deaths if the government took no action... The same model suggested that, with no action, the United States might face 2.2 million deaths..."
Here's the March 26, 2020 report, covering the rest of the world, with far more specific predictions:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/m...
In this report, they predict 2.2 million deaths in the US in the unmitigated scenario, and over 1 million in the "social distancing" scenario. Their projection if the US "suppressed" the virus (by uniformly cutting contacts by 75% as soon as the death rate exceeded 1.6 per 100k; by my math, that's about 5,000 deaths) was 474,000 dead.
So, uh...that was wrong.
They projected 40 million deaths, worldwide (current actual total 3.14M) in the unmitigated scenario, with between 1.9M and 10.5M deaths in the "total suppression" scenario (depending on how soon lockdowns occurred).
If you go to the spreadsheet [1], you'll see lots of other fun projections:
* 470,000-670,000 deaths in Japan in the "social distancing" scenarios (current total: 10,031, despite living mostly normally throughout 2020).
* 330k-740k deaths in the "social distancing" scenarios for France (620k-760k "unmitigated"; current total: just over 3M, despite a year of strict interventions).
* Let's not forget their projection of 60,000-90,000 deaths in Sweden, in the "unmitigated" scenario (current total: 13,968).
Overall, their predictions bear very little resemblance to reality.
[1] https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...
Okay. And the revised reports?
This is why, in most fields of modeling with any intellectual rigor, we have blinded prospective tests.
Either properly supply your nursing homes with PPE or bring the nursing home staff to the hospitals.
The PPE that was acutely in short supply and unavailable at the beginning of the pandemic? Even doctors and nurses didn't have adequate PPE back then, and many of them got sick and died because of it.
Source of people dying due to lack of PPE?
As I understand it, there was always a low supply, not no supply.
Other states managed to supply their nursing homes just fine.
Seems like rationalization. Cuomo never came out and said this was caused by lack of PPE.
Unless you have a source that they weren't able to equip their nursing homes due to supply issues you are assuming.
Also, after the death toll rolled in they deleted the executive order from the New York State website despite it still being in effect.
There was a cover up from the moment the order was issued, I'm not sure how this action was taken in good faith.
Regardless of your political persuasion what Cuomo did is wrong by covering it up. We can't have 2 standards for politicians based on if it is someone on your team.
I can forgive bad decisions in a time of crisis. But what they did was way beyond that.
Writing a book about his supposed epic handling of the virus.
Still in office.
Don't mean to be aggressive but where else would you like for the people whose domicile is in the nursing home to go? These are not people in independent living facilities, they likely need 24/7 skilled care. Allowing the people to go back to the nursing home (aka their home) seemed like the right thing to do at the time. It unfortunately didn't play out so well and I am glad I wasn't the one making that decision.
I think it was a tough decision. The nursing homes could have contained the spread but clearly were incapable of doing so.
> Then stonewalled the Feds asking for information about those deaths.
No excuse for that, just lay it all out. The stonewalling was intentional and possibly illegal, he should answer for that.
I don't want to play politics and I do think more could have been done here). Like: quickly granting nursing homes aid in terms of PPE + cash + national guard help. I'm just trying to change your mind that the situation was much more nuanced that the NYTimes is advocating for.
Send more non-covid patients to them, keep elderly patients in the hospitals. New York never reached full capacity overall.
If you MUST send covid patients to nursing homes, make sure they are prepared with PPE.
Other states did so, Cuomo and the 5 other governors should have known to do so. We already had outbreaks in a nursing home that everyone was aware of.
The opposite, I thought -- he seemed to be weathering the nursing home scandal, and now the sex scandal seems to be taking him down. Before his sexual behavior was publicized, people were joking/not joking that Andrew Cuomo was the poster child for our (Democrats') inability to hold anyone accountable for anything as long as they seemed woke and likable and said all the right things on cultural issues. Then his sexual behavior hit the news, and it was like, wow, is there anything metoo can't do? At least now Democrats nationally want him gone, though it's always harder to get a popular politician's own constituents to turn against him.
After they left the hospital they needed somewhere to go. Otherwise, they would be homeless.
If nursing homes couldn’t safely take recovering patients back then people were in danger before these people left for the hospital.
I also imagine there were COVID patients in the homes who didn’t need to go to a hospital
However, I would have throw in much more aid to the ones that were forced. Cash + PPE + National Guard. If I couldn't provide help, then I wouldn't force. That would mean that it would be up to the hospitals to figure it out and find a home for them or until they were covid-free.
Obviously I'm playing backseat Covid response governor here. Hindsight is 20/20.