The U.S. Is Not Doing Well Because Of COVID-19

Commentary

The U.S. was doing very well until the COVID-19 (the virus) pandemic struck the U.S. The state of the U.S. economy, as well as other significant issues, can be directly linked to the virus.

This article is trying to make President Trump the scapegoat for the adverse impacts of the virus America is suffering through. There are multiple causes for the spread of COVID-19. President Trump is not one of them.

It is not fair to make anyone a scapegoat. The virus is unique (novel) and it is taking our medical experts a long time to gain an understanding of it. They are still learning. The Obama/Biden presidency, as well as many states, left the U.S. with significant shortfalls in the amount of medical equipment on hand. Misinformation from China and the World Health Organization also had an adverse effect on the U.S.'s ability to deal with this virus.

President Trump approached this pandemic in a methodical and failure-is-not-an-option manner.

He quickly established a team of top medical and logistical experts to address the pandemic. On Jan. 31, approximately one week after the first known case of the virus, he instituted a travel ban from China.

Biden immediately accused the president of being hysterical, a racist and a fear monger. This action saved lives and slowed the spread of the virus.

Approximately one week after the China travel ban, he instituted a travel ban for Europe. The president initiated the largest U.S. medical mobilization to combat the virus, including sending staffed military medical ships to New York and California; building hospitals for New York and New Jersey; addressed PPE shortages by mobilizing private industry to make up the shortfalls; directed the military and private carriers to pick up PPE's from as far away as China and deliver the acquired PPE's to the appropriate parties in the U.S.

He established Operation Warp Speed to expedite the preparation of a safe vaccine.

Under this program, the U.S. purchased in advance millions of vaccine shots from several drug manufacturers before the tests were completed, so that once the drug was approved it would be available for distribution.

Concurrently, a logistics plan has been developed to distribute the vaccine to the appropriate parties as soon as the vaccine is approved by the appropriate U.S. agencies.

Early on he established a daily conference call with all of the U.S. governors to determine what their problems and needs were, and then directed the appropriate staff to expedite a response to the requests.

An article in the July 29 The Wall Street Journal titled "The Worlds Covid Resurgence" identified several major nations that are currently experiencing flair-ups of COVID cases. These same nations were praised for their efforts to stem the tide of the initial outbreak.

The article does not blame the heads of state of these countries for the resurgence of the virus. The major reason noted in the article for each country's flare-up was the population, especially the young, who ignored the guidelines for safely dealing with the virus.

I observed this lack of adherence to guidelines on several occasions. For example, last Memorial Day my wife and I went to an outside stand for ice cream. So did numerous other people, many of which were families with children. Most lined up without masks on and were not practicing social distancing.

I said to myself this behavior is going to undo everyone's effort to stem the virus and we may find ourselves right back where we were at the time the mandatory quarantine order was initiated. The blame for the resurgence primarily rests with our citizens.

Please consider my comments to the innuendos noted in the following paragraphs: Fourth paragraph: This paragraph starts off claiming that one article stated that the president never told people to take hydroxychloroquine.

The article was not identified and the purpose for including this comment in this article was not explained.

Given the tone of this article one can only presume that this article is trying to discredit President Trump.

The fact is President Trump never told people to take this medicine. President Trump always stated that it is up to the individual's physician to decide whether or not to prescribe this medicine to them.

In this paragraph the author is also claiming that, contrary to President Trump's assertions, the "FDA" did not approve the antimalarial drug hydroychloroquine for treating COVID-19. The fact is that the FDA gave the approval for doctors to prescribe this drug to their patients. This was a limited scope approval that only applied to treatment of the virus. Further, this drug has been used for decades to treat certain illnesses.

Fifth and sixth paragraphs: These paragraphs deal with the availability of hydroxychloroquine. The reason for this comment is not explained. I presume the innuendos included in this paragraph were to discredit the president.

The fact is that because the medicine was approved by the FDA several decades ago to treat certain ailments and is actively being prescribed, the medicine is readily available. The president correctly anticipated that over an extended period of time the production of this medicine would have to be increased.

As respects the sixth paragraph, so what if Trump stated that he was taking hydroxychloroquine as a prophylactic? His doctor prescribed the medicine.

The author's statement, "Trump certainly pushed the false narrative that hydroxychloroquine was effective against COVID-19." Currently there are two schools of thought within the medical community on the efficacy of this medicine.

One group feels that this medicine is effective under targeted circumstances and can cite specific examples, supported by statistics, where the medicine was effective. Primarily, this medicine was effective in reducing the intensity and/or duration of the illness.

The other group does not feel there is a benefit from using this medicine and many, including the news media, go out of their way to deliberately discredit this medicine.

My opinion is that it is not appropriate to state with certainty that the president deliberately pushed a false narrative. What did the president have to gain by saying that the medicine was effective if he knew it wasn't? And since this medicine has positive impacts for some people, why not keep this medicine in the toolbox and use it where appropriate.

Also, I feel that much of the opposition to this medicine stems from a political agenda. Whatever President Trump says, the Democrats and the news media are automatically going to take the opposing viewpoint.

Eighth paragraph: The article claimed that on April 13 President Trump "claimed to have the legal right to overrule governors' shelter-in-place orders."

The article states that this was a lie and easily debunked.

The fact is there are open questions on this issue.

For example, was the shelter-in-place order legal?

The legality of this order is being adjudicated in several states. If the courts determined that the orders were illegal, would a president have a legal right to overrule the governors?

Also, could the President use the National Emergencies Act to overrule the governor's orders? No lies here.

The article in question did not offer empirical evidence to debunk the president's comment.

Tenth paragraph: The article states, "Opportunities to control the spread of COVID-19 have been squandered by misleading information consistently set forth by the Trump Administration.

None of the article's comments attributed to the Trump Administration had an adverse impact on the government's ability to deal with COVID-19. This was a new virus and the medical community is still learning about it.

The author ends the article by stating America is not doing well and the cause is the Trump Administration.

Also, paragraph 9 refers to Dr. Anthony Fauci as an expert. At the beginning of the first outbreak of the virus, Dr. Fauci said you do not have to wear a mask.

He changed his position and recommended that everyone wear a mask. Just recently he added that we should also wear goggles.

I look at these changes in position as part of the learning curve and was neither an attempt to deceive the public or harm the country.

I rest my case.

Kenneth Copman Bedford