..

Friday, December 25, 2020

COVID19, LOS ANGELES---The USC Surveys Analyzed--MOTIVE, INTENT, MITIGATION

IMMEDREL//ATTN//JCL@NYU/UNRCMPS//VIA/TTYP/UNCLSF

     Incline Village, NV (CBD)--Tuesday's article in Deadline by Tom Tap references the University of Southern California's extensive polls taken that relate to a variety of parameters with respect to the coronavirus outbreak. Some of the graphs available at Dornsife, USC are directly related to the medical aspects of the virus while others concern the social aspects. The Deadline article refers specifically to the social aspect and headlines with "L.A. Residents are Defying Stay-at-Home Order;


     "30% of the respondents to a recent survey indicated they had visited a friend, neighbor or relative or had visitors at their residence."
The reporter extrapolated that out to mean that 3 million of the L.A. residents are "not following the safety guidance." That is as close as Tap gets to taking a close look at the data presented at Dornsife, the rest of the Deadline article rehashes known information. There is also no link at the article to follow up on the story so that a clear understanding of the motive, intent and other aspects of the survey respondents can be examined to verify a link between mitigation (social activity) and surge (confirmed cases). Tap alludes to it in the remaining paragraphs of the article but fails to make a connection. In fact, it draws into question as to whether the surveys themselves are useful in even establishing a link. 
     As mentioned, graphs from the surveys are divided into a number of categories: some medical, such as symptoms, risk and mental health, while others detail the social aspects such as discrimination, housing and the labor market. Tap used the stats-graphs under the category "Protective Social and Health Behaviors;" in particular three graphs that show results for those who visited a grocery store, a friends residence, a bar, or who had friend's visit. Graph Two of that series also shows the early stay-at-home 80 percent in April down to just under 40 percent prior to Christmas week, a drop by one-half. Graph Three of the series shows a near parallel at the 80 percent line between hiking and close contact with "coresidents." All of it indicates a possible connection between mitigation and surge, but it still cannot be verified. The low bar on the graph shows that at least some of the mitigation measures are being observed, such as "shared items like towels or utensils with others." Mitigation, thus, is an a-weighted system where some of the requirements are being met, but others are not. 
     It might also be noted that Tap's headline does little to address the spectrum of mitigation measures, which are strong and which are weak; the reporter uses a sensational headline with the buzzword that L.A. residents are "defying" stay-at-home. Adding to that is any disclaimer by the USC team that its material evidence at Dornsife might be misinterpreted by the media for the purpose of readership. Dornsife also offers readers the opportunity to submit their own series of questions for a survey.
     What's missing from all of the data, in spite of the fact it can be filtered by age, gender, income, race and education, is the motive, the intent of the survey respondents. For instance, under that same category from above, three survey questions showed washing hands to be the foremost mitigation measure at 95 and above percent approval, wearing protective face covering at just under 90 percent, and included on the graph, praying, at a dismal 70 percent compared to the others. The graph doesn't indicate whether the respondents actually used any or all of the two high-value measures, with praying being far more sophisticated in response. In fact, that very issue is being contested in court surrounding the indoor worship ban which has been overturned in court, as reported by Kristina Bravo and Sara Welch at KTLA;
     " 'No matter what a Superior Court judge says and given what’s happening now, it is simply too risky to gather indoors with other people who do not live with you,' the L.A. County Department of Public Health said in a statement." 
     From all of the above, it is apparent that a breakdown of civil authority might suggest the rather nonchalant attitude the general public has for the mitigation measures; that includes infighting between local governments in L.A. county, with reports the authorities will not enforce the mandates. Combined with the dispute between the courts and the houses of worship, there appears to be no direction at all in the strategy. All of that might be reflected in the survey responses as there is only the so-called "margin of error" to indicate what might be considered the truth in the stats. Added to that are the rather superficial variables of age, gender, race etc. to show the more meaningful, hidden psychological mechanisms as motive and intent with regard to response.
     It is probably unfair to characterize the general public as defiant in the face of an existential threat, it is human nature to spit in the eye of the devil. With all the talk of non-existent "herd immunity," why should it be a stretch of the imagination that people not just have a lack of understanding of that very threat, but also have a contempt for it as well? Human spirit and determination cannot be rated in statistics, no matter how a-weighted, extrapolated or logarithmically scaled. None of the USC findings show the resolve of the people to overcome the obstacle. 


      The depletion of the national strategic stockpile has been eradicated, basic consumer goods are beginning to reappear on the shelves, the FDA has approved several pharmaceutical companies for vaccines to be administered. In spite of all of the positive turns, the casualty count continues to climb dramatically with health officials factoring in the holiday superspreader coefficient. Lacking in all of the signs of recovery is the one of patience, all around. It is the one key ingredient that will alter the course of the fight against the most insidious virus that has gripped the nation since the AIDS scare of the last century. Suggestions for USC surveys might include that along with questions of intent, motivation, confidence in public officials, self-control and restraint from taboo activities. 
     In the words of 60s icon Jim Morrison of The Doors, "No one here gets out alive," perhaps some of us will.


Marco Rubio Rails Against Fauci, says he "lied about masks," and distorted "herd immunity"

"Dr. Fauci lied about masks in March. Dr. Fauci has been distorting the level of vaccination needed for herd immunity," Rubio wrote. "It isn't just him. Many in elite bubbles believe the American public doesn't know 'what's good for them' so they need to be tricked into 'doing the right thing.'"

Dr. Fauci defends the herd immunity estimate--
IMMEDREL//ATTN//JCL@NYU/UNRCMPS//VIA/TTYP/UNCLSF
Posted by at

Monday, November 30, 2020

MAD--Essay on Mutual Assured Destruction--#IRAN & THE BOMB


//..IMMEDREL//ATTN:JC@NYU//P-SHOP//UNCLSF//TTYP//..//

     Incline Village, Nev. (EoC)-- Published in Rhetoric and Public Affairs in 2011, Leah Ceccarelli's article "Manufactured Scientific Controversy" defines the title as;

     "A scientific controversy is 'manufactured' in the public sphere when an arguer announces that there is an ongoing scientific debate in the technical sphere about a matter for which there is actually an overwhelming scientific consensus." (Ceccarelli, 196)



     The footnote attached to the definition makes the case for the two so-called spheres of "public" and "technical" where Ceccarelli notes the "boundaries between the two are permeable." In a sense, it sets the stage for the non-experts to encroach on the terrain of the experts and call the findings into question. To what degree the evidence of the claim is "overwhelming" is irrelevant. The footnote explicitly points to political policy making as the ultimate goal of those with self-interest beyond the scientific sphere. 

Uncertainty plays a large part in the process of calling into question scientific fact;

     "most scientific findings are inherently probabilistic and ambiguous." (197) 

Again, in the climate warming section, even with overwhelming evidence, Ceccarelli notes;

     "It seems to corroborate the essayists claim of a dogmatic orthodoxy by indicating that
supporters of the dominant paradigm would prefer to silence dissent."  (208)

Translated, the scientists themselves are to blame for allowing the so called "mercenaries" to refute the facts since they (the scientists) are too busy digging up more facts to pay attention to the debate in politics and the press. That very orthodoxy invites criticism. The truth of the matter is that the era of positivism has long since passed, replaced by one of skepticism. 

Based on the above criteria, it might be debated that military superiority is not necessarily a winning strategy in the modern world. The slogan "Might makes right" is something out of the 19th century but didn't really become a reality until atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The debate over whether to develop even more powerful nuclear weapons, especially the hydrogen, or "super" bomb, forced a great deal of soul searching in its developers such as J. Robert Oppenheimer and Edward Teller. (Halberstam, 151-174)

     Now, in the 21st century, with Russia's  annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, with the realignment of NATO forces in Europe, with the threat of development of the bomb by non-aligned nations as Iran and North Korea, it has become essential to question the doubters in the community that thermonuclear war is, as what might be defined from above "probabilistic and ambiguous,"  anything but "uncertain." The assassination of the top bomb expert in Iran last week is a barometer as to how serious the prospect has become.  (BBC) 

The policy was referred to "Mutual Assured Destruction" (MAD) that has prevented nuclear war. Today that policy is being challenged from within and from without.

" 'The central thing was the public had no control,' says Dr Christopher Laucht, a lecturer in British history at Leeds University. 'You were at the mercy of political decision makers. Apart from the fear that one side would do something stupid, there was also the fear of technology and the question of 'what if an accident happened'. ' " (BBC)

Mohsen Fakhrizadeh: Iran buries assassinated nuclear scientist

Iran has held a funeral for its top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, who was assassinated on Friday in an attack that it has blamed on Israel. In a televised speech at the ceremony, Defence Minister General Amir Hatami vowed to avenge Fakhrizadeh's death and continue his path "vigorously".

Discussion reply:
     Paranoia is the bedfellow of conspiracy theory. Neville-Shepard cites Hofstadter's highlight of paranoid conspiracy: the vast network, transcends history, popular villains, the impending apocalypse, and the scapegoat. (Neville-Shepard) The author traces the "early style" to the post-Roosevelt era, in particular, President Truman. This fits well with the initial post regarding the advent of the Atomic Age and the role played by Truman and his cabinet, in particular the Secretary of State, Dean Acheson. 

    Following some rather high-profile spy trials and convictions, including Alger Hiss, who was a friend of Acheson, the Secretary went on the offensive;

     "The political pressure building around Truman to go ahead with the Super was relentless...Failure to do so, Acheson noted, 'would push the Administration into a political buzzsaw.' " (Halberstam, 61)

     Acheson created the specter of the apocalyptic villain in the form of the Soviet Union when at first, sharing nuclear technology appeared to be the preferred strategy considering the Kremlin had been an ally in World War Two. Acheson qualified for all of Hofstadter's categories of the paranoid style, accidentally or otherwise. 

     Today, the assassinated Iranian nuclear scientist became the latest casualty in this strategy of paranoid style, Instead of following up on the preceding regime's tireless efforts to bring Iran and North Korea into the nuclear community as constructive members, the current US administration deserted  arms agreements with those particular non-aligned nations. (Laub, Robinson)

     The paranoid nuclear holocaust environment has been given new life. Comparing Neville-Shepard to Ceccarelli is not as useful as comparing Neville-Shepard to himself, particularly with respect to the "subtextual" component of paranoid style. There is nothing subtextual about nuclear annihilation. There is every reason to believe certain non-aligned nations have atomic weapons capability, and the vehicles for delivery. We can only speculate on how the now long gone Secretary of State Dean Acheson  would characterize the immanent threat.

Cited:

Neville-Shepard, R., Paranoid Style, Full article: Paranoid Style and Subtextual Form in Modern Conspiracy Rhetoric (oclc.org) (Links to an external site.)

Laub, Z., Robinson, K., What Is the Status of the Iran Nuclear Agreement? | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)

Pakistan latest nuclear power to condemn killing of Iranian scientist as world remains on edge

Pakistan is the latest nuclear power to condemn the killing of a top Iranian atomic scientist, deeming the act a destabilizing event in a region already plagued by widespread unrest. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a former Revolutionary Guard officer who led the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research was shot dead last Friday east of the Iranian capital in a yet unclaimed assassination that has fueled suspicions of Israeli involvement.

References:

Ceccarelli, Leah. “Manufactured Scientific Controversy: Science, Rhetoric, and Public Debate.” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, vol. 14, no. 2, 2011, pp. 195–228. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41940538. Accessed 1 Dec. 2020.

Halberstam, David, The Fifties, 1993 Random House, NY

Iran Scientist Assassination, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh: Iran scientist 'killed by remote-controlled weapon' - BBC News (Links to an external site.)

de Castella, T., MAD, How did we forget about mutually assured destruction? - BBC News

//..IMMEDREL//ATTN:JC@NYU//P-SHOP//UNCLSF//TTYP//..//
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)