Month: October 2020

Walter Shapiro in TNR tells Democrats to calm down about the election-stealing scenario and offers a number of reasons why they shouldn’t be too concerned. Let’s hope he’s right. Personally, I’m going to remain anxious through the election and even if Trump concedes I will not feel calm until January 22nd and he is hunkered down, pouting, at Mar-a-lago.

Still, reality is reality and I think this is an important thing to keep in mind for election night:

The current spate of alarmist journalism is rooted in a widespread misunderstanding of how TV networks will call states on November 3. With Democrats disproportionately voting with absentee ballots, the fear is that the initial election night tallies will show Trump with hefty leads based solely on voters who cast their ballots in person. With on-screen network maps depicting swing states in Republican red, based on these premature returns, Trump will declare victory before most ballots for Joe Biden are counted. And the networks, led by Fox News, will go along with this Trumpian deception, leading to massive conspiracy theories and violent outbreaks when Biden belatedly takes the lead a few days later.

The biggest factual problem with this common electoral nightmare scenario is that networks have never called swing states based on fragmentary—and misleading—early returns. In fact, only two of the last five presidential elections were even decided on election night. After 2000’s long count, the cautious networks only called the 2004 election for George W. Bush at midday on the Wednesday after the election, when Ohio finally went to the Republicans. Even Trump in 2016 was not anointed as the forty-fifth president until well after midnight.

With the conspicuous exceptions of Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, swing states begin counting absentee ballots before Election Day. What that means is that many mail ballots will be reflected in the counts released immediately after the polls close. This is particularly true in states that backed Trump four years ago like Florida, Arizona, North Carolina, Ohio, and Georgia, all of which begin tallying absentee votes well in advance of Election Day. If Biden is winning in, say, two or three of these battleground states on election night, a second Trump term becomes close to a statistical impossibility.

Orson Welles during the downslide of his career made a series of TV ads for Paul Masson pledging to “sell no wine before its time.” That comes close to the mantra of the decision desks at all the TV networks, including Fox: “We call no state before its time.” In an online panel discussion last week, sponsored by the writers’ organization Pen America, election night data crunchers for CNN, Fox, and the Associated Press made this very point. As Arnon Mishkin, who heads the Fox News decision desk, put it, “This will be a high-visibility election, on which there will be a competition to try to tell the story as accurately as possible.”

There will be no rush to judgment—and no states prematurely colored red on the electoral maps. Sam Feist, CNN’s Washington bureau chief, was unequivocal about an unnamed candidate (hint: It isn’t Joe Biden) having the temerity “to declare victory on election night before they had actually won, before the news organizations had projected winners.” If that were to occur, Feist said, “We will all note that the facts do not support this declaration.… You have to get to 270 electoral votes. That means you need a certain number of states. And if you don’t have those states, you haven’t won.”

Sure, Trump can declare a historic victory. But it won’t matter much as long as the only place that accepts this Trump triumphalism as truth is the One America News Network.

Personally, I’m hoping that Trump is behind on election night and starts screeching that we have to “count every mail-in vote!” before anyone can be declared the victor. Oh how that would be sweet.

But whatever comes, keep in mind that there are only a couple of states in which the big pile-up of mail-in ballots could delay the count so unless those states will be decisive, we probably won’t have the long wait.

Then, of course, we’re going to see what all those wingnut lawyers have up their sleeves …

Update — Here’s what the Democratic lawyers are planning for:

Bob Bauer, Biden campaign legal adviser, talked to @jheil about election integrity. #TheCircus pic.twitter.com/ZvTXBcNmZZ

— The Circus (@SHO_TheCircus) October 20, 2020

Paul Krugman issues an important warning about what’s probably coming if Biden’s the election. From his newsletter:

Today’s column was about the case for large-scale deficit spending if we get a Democratic president and Senate. As I said in the column, it was mainly about the economics; the political discussion will come later, maybe Friday, depending on how many outrageous and horrible things happen over the next couple of days. But I thought I could use this newsletter to get a bit ahead of the curve.

So let me tell you what worries me about the prospects for doing the right thing economically.

One possibility is that Trump beats the odds and wins, or at least gets within stealing range. If that happens, however, macroeconomics is going to be the least of our problems.

Another, more likely possibility is that Republicans hold the Senate. In that case the G.O.P. will simply sabotage Biden every way it can. I know that sounds harsh, but does anyone really doubt it?

But even if Democrats take both the White House and the Senate, they’ll face a problem: the Very Serious People will surely reappear.

Who are the VSPs? I think I stole the term from the blogger Atrios, who used it to describe all the influential people who thought it was sensible to support the Iraq War because all the other influential people were supporting it. In economics, the VSPs became critically important — and destructive — in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.

Here’s what happened: When the housing bubble burst, leading not just to a plunge in home building but a slide in private spending across the board, the economy was in desperate need of fiscal support; because the private sector wasn’t willing to spend, it was essential that the public sector pick up the slack. But this meant running budget deficits — and in 2010 or thereabouts it somehow became conventional wisdom that debt and deficits were a huge threat, far more important than mass unemployment.

Where did this conventional wisdom come from? Not from the markets, which showed no concern whatsoever about U.S. solvency. Not from the math, which didn’t suggest any problem with running large deficits for multiple years. Not from history: advanced countries like Britain for much of the 20th century and Japan for much of the 21st so far saw debt exceed 150 percent of GDP without experiencing any kind of crisis.

But going on about debt, talking about the need to make tough choices, sounded serious and hardheaded. It sounded even more serious because all the other serious-sounding people were saying the same thing.

Oh, and obvious phonies like Paul Ryan, who pretended to care about deficits when all they really wanted was to cut social programs and hobble President Obama, were treated with great respect.

As far as I can tell, it’s now almost universally agreed that the result of all this seriousness was a premature withdrawal of government support that greatly slowed economic recovery. But let me tell you, those of us arguing against the deficit obsession in real time felt pretty isolated.

So now we’re in another crisis, and once again we desperately need to maintain government spending despite big deficit numbers. Will we actually do what needs to be done?

It’s a given that Republicans, who ignored deficits under Trump, will proclaim imminent economic doom. Nothing can be done about that.

What’s still unclear is how centrists and the news media will react. Last time around they went all in on deficit panic, lionizing those who spread it. Will they do it again?

To be fair, much of the reporting I’m seeing looks much better than what we went through in 2010-11. On the other hand, I’m still seeing a fair bit of giving credit where it isn’t due, with news reports saying things like “Republicans are concerned about budget deficits.” Dear colleagues in the news media: you don’t know that. You only know that Republicans claim to be concerned about deficits, and there is in fact very good reason to believe that they’re hypocrites whose only goal is to undermine Biden.

So, will the elite get serious about the budget deficits we’re likely to see in the months and maybe years ahead? Let’s hope not.

I saw Larry Summers (!) on TV the other day saying there was no need for worry about the deficits. Borrowing is cheap and the needs to boost the economy is so great that nobody should even talk about the deficits. The need for infrastructure and jobs etc is over whelming and the Fed has said it has no intention of raising interest rates any time soon, so the traditional excuses aren’t available.

But we’ll see. I also saw Fareed Zakaria (Original VSP) wringing his hands over the deficits so I expect this fight will be real. Let’s hope the Biden people learned their lesson from last time .

A Public Religion Research Institute survey is out and it is fascinating. Here are some of the highlights:

Americans are most concerned about issues surrounding the coronavirus pandemic and the upcoming presidential elections. Out of 14 issues included on the survey, majorities of Americans said that only four issues were critical: the coronavirus pandemic (60%), fairness of presidential elections (57%), health care (56%), and jobs and unemployment (52%). Less than half of Americans say that foreign interference in presidential elections (49%), crime (46%), terrorism (45%), racial inequality (43%), climate change (43%), or the growing gap between rich and poor (42%) are critical issues. Four in ten Americans or less say that the appointment of Supreme Court justices (40%), the federal deficit (36%), abortion (36%), immigration (33%), and trade agreements with other countries (23%) are critical issues.^[3]

Democrats and Republicans appear to be living in separate worlds based on their issue priorities. The only issue which majorities of Democrats and Republicans agree is critical is the fairness of presidential elections (68% and 55%, respectively), though partisans likely have divergent views of what “fairness” means.

This one is very instructive: the only religious group that doesn’t care about the pandemic is white evangelicals. And they really don’t care about it.

How about this:

That is simply astonishing.

And here’s how the various religious groups will be voting. It’s not good news for Trump.

Trump won white mainline Protestants and white Catholics in 2016.

This is just depressing:

This is equally awful:

That one’s going to take some pondering. I assume that black men think it wasn’t a great idea to name a black woman simply because they think racists wouldn’t like it. They can’t believe that on the merits, right? I’m glad to see that 60+ percent of white women with college degrees think it was a good decision but I wonder the same thing about the other 40%. I know some personally who were very nervous about the choice because they worried racism and misogyny would help Trump.

But this really says it all about this election. Even people who like him think he is a dishonest, childish, selfish, immoral, phony.

The big finding here is not a surprise. White Evangelicals are Donald Trump’s greatest supporters. And Republicans who watch Fox News are completely brainwashed.

That’s from Admiral McRaven’s endorsement of Joe Biden in the Wall St Journal.

Here’s a perfect example of the crass transactional nature of Trump’s foreign policy from yesterday:

What the hell is this? One of the poorest countries in the world is paying the US to get taken off the State Sponsors of Terrorist list? https://t.co/ncG8D96onv

— digby (@digby56) October 19, 2020

Those annoying, smart people at Scientific American think “President Trump, a congressman and conspiracy fantasists” are, in technical terms, full of shit about the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 being inflated:

A persistent falsehood has been circulating on social media: the number of COVID deaths is much lower than the official statistic of more than 218,000, and therefore the danger of the disease has been overblown. In August President Trump retweeted a post claiming that only 6 percent of these reported deaths were actually from COVID-19. (The tweet originated from a follower of the debunked conspiracy fantasy QAnon.) Twitter removed the post for containing false information, but fabrications such as these continue to spread. U.S. Representative Roger Marshall of Kansas complained in September that Facebook had removed a post in which he claimed that 94 percent of COVID-19 deaths reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “were the result of 2-3 additional serious illnesses and were of advanced age.”

Now some facts: Researchers know beyond a doubt that the number of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. have surpassed 200,000. These numbers are supported by three lines of evidence, including death certificates. The inaccurate idea that only 6 percent of the deaths were really caused by the coronavirus is “a gross misinterpretation” of how death certificates work, says Robert Anderson, lead mortality statistician at the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics.

The scope of the coronavirus’s deadly toll is clear, even if final numbers will not be known until the pandemic is over. “We’re pretty confident about the scale and order of magnitude of deaths, but we’re not clear on the exact number yet,” says Justin Lessler, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

“When we ask if COVID killed somebody, it means ‘Did they die sooner than they would have if they didn’t have the virus?’” says infectious disease epidemiologist Justin Lessler. Not “Did they have underlying conditions that made them more susceptible to dying from COVID?”

You can read more at the link if you are one of those smarty-pants liberals who prefers facts with their well-known liberal bias to All-American truthiness. Data shows COVID-19 is now the third leading cause of death in the U.S.

If anything, cases and death counts to date are understated.

When this mess took hold in March, my wife and I knew 3 people infected with all the now-classic COVID symptoms at a time there were only 40 official cases in this county of 260,000 residents (all survived). How is that possible? Because none fit the profile to be tested at a time testing was rationed. They were never tested or counted.

I was exposed to Legionnaires’ in September 2019. But I was already on antibiotics for a week-long “fever of unknown origin” several days before health authorities discovered the Legionnaires’ outbreak. On follow-up a week later, I was tested and came up negative. My mild case (likely Pontiac Fever) does not show up in those statistics either.

Update: Guess what?

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

“Donald Trump is right, people are tired of hearing about the virus,” MSNBC’s Chris Hayes said Monday evening. “People are also tired of seeing their friends and family suffer…They’re tired of worrying about getting sick…tired of watching people they love die alone.”

Aside from the acting president minimizing the mounting coronavirus death count and case counts, and aside from the xenophobia and the “anti-authority, anti-science sentiment” among his followers, what’s striking is the Republican insistence that policymakers put the oxygen mask on the economy before thinking about saving the people who serve it. Because clearly the economy does not serve us. They see us as drones.

Perhaps that reality has not yet reached consciousness among a lot of the acting president’s followers. (Notice how easy it has become to substitute followers for supporters?) But an increasing number of Americans understand what their guts tell them about their standing in the Midas cult’s pecking order. They are turning to a presidential candidate who values people over their utility as economic fuel.

Thus, voters prefer former Vice President Joe Biden over the acting president, the New York Times reports:

Joseph R. Biden Jr. holds a nine-point lead over President Trump amid widespread public alarm about the trajectory of the coronavirus pandemic and demand among voters for large-scale government action to right the economy, according to a national poll of likely voters conducted by The New York Times and Siena College.

With just two weeks left in the campaign, Mr. Trump does not hold an edge on any of the most pressing issues at stake in the election, leaving him with little room for a political recovery absent a calamitous misstep by Mr. Biden, the Democratic nominee, in the coming days. The president has even lost his longstanding advantage on economic matters: Voters are now evenly split on whether they have more trust in him or Mr. Biden to manage the economy.

On all other subjects tested in the poll, voters preferred Mr. Biden over Mr. Trump by modest or wide margins. Mr. Biden, the former vice president, is favored over Mr. Trump to lead on the coronavirus pandemic by 12 points, and voters trust Mr. Biden over Mr. Trump to choose Supreme Court justices and to maintain law and order by six-point margins. Americans see Mr. Biden as more capable of uniting the country by nearly 20 points.

Over all, Mr. Biden is backed by 50 percent of likely voters, the poll showed, compared with 41 percent for Mr. Trump and 3 percent divided among other candidates.

Most of all, the survey makes clear that crucial constituencies are poised to reject Mr. Trump because they cannot abide his conduct, including 56 percent of women and 53 percent of white voters with college degrees who said they had a very unfavorable impression of Mr. Trump — an extraordinary level of antipathy toward an incumbent president.

“People are thinking about what to do with their resumes,” Times Editorial Board member Mara Gay told MSNBC’s “Deadline Whitehouse” on Monday.

Former Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele endorsed Biden in a letter posted to NBC News Tuesday morning. His party has failed “to stand up against the arrogance of power and the erosion of our principles” and strayed too far from ideals in which it once believed:

I, of course, disagree with Biden on many issues and policies, sometimes vigorously; and it is my fervent hope that he will pursue policies that will help our country heal. But this election is not about those issues or policies. Rather, it is about the course of a nation and the character of her people reflected in the leader they choose. I am asking my fellow Americans to consider what is in your best interests, and not Donald Trump’s.

Joe Biden, Steele concludes, “is what is best for our country.”

As for Trump’s enablers, “People are going to remember these folks as totally complicit, as people who did not stand up for their state, or stand up for American values,” former North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp told MSNBC’s “All In.”

By their poisoned fruit ye shall know them.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

This time will be remembered as a time when there was a genuine debate as to whether a million people should die so that others could go to a bar and par-TAY:

…the [so-called “Great Barrington Declaration” calling for the US to adopt herd immunity] omits mention of how many people the policy would kill. It’s a lot.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, whose modeling of the pandemic the White House has used, predicts up to about 415,000 deaths by Feb. 1, even with current restrictions continuing. If these restrictions are simply eased — as opposed to eliminating them entirely, which would occur if herd immunity were pursued — deaths could rise to as many as 571,527. That’s just by Feb. 1. The model predicts daily deaths will still be increasing then.

Will we have achieved herd immunity then? No.

Herd immunity occurs when enough people have immunity either through natural infection or a vaccine so the outbreak eventually dies out. By Feb. 1, even with eased mandates, only 25 percent of the population will have been infected, by my calculations. The most optimistic model suggests herd immunity might occur when 43 percent of the population has been infected, but many estimate 60 percent to 70 percent before transmission trends definitively down.

Those are models. Actual data from prison populations and from Latin America suggest transmission does not slow down until 60 percent of the population is infected. (At present, only about 10 percent of the population has been infected, according to the C.D.C.)

And what will be the cost? Even if herd immunity can be achieved with only 40 percent of the population infected or vaccinated, the I.H.M.E. estimates that a total of 800,000 Americans would die. The real death toll needed to reach herd immunity could far exceed one million.

As horrific a price as that is, it could prove much worse if damage to the heart, lungs or other organs of those who recover from the immediate effects of the virus does not heal and instead leads to early deaths or incapacitation. But we won’t know that for years.

This vomitous policy is our present moral reality. A moral reality so calloused and cruel that it has no problem accommodating a strategy to deter immigration that depends upon separating children from their parents, locking them in cages, and “losing” the paperwork needed to reunite them. A moral reality designed and celebrated by modern conservatives.

There is something deeply, profoundly sick about America these days. No society that considers itself remotely healthy should be debating the “worth” of such insane notions as herd immunity or family separations.

(picture and caption from WHYY)

Trump: "They're getting tired of the pandemic, aren't they? You turn on CNN, that's all they cover. COVID, COVID, pandemic, COVID, COVID, COVID … They're trying to talk people out of voting. People aren't buying it, CNN, you dumb bastards." pic.twitter.com/ZaLamOrUHL

— The Recount (@therecount) October 19, 2020

People are buying it. This upcoming surge is scaring the hell out of people, and rightfully so. Look at that graph above and you’ll see that people are getting freaked out by his attitude toward the virus.

It is the biggest issue in this campaign and he has completely failed on every level. That’s why he’s losing. And at this point, it’s clear that he doesn’t care. He’s encouraging people to get the virus and spread it around.

But it appears that more and more people aren’t listening to him.

This is some good news, actually, and not just for those of us who live here. It’s a model for what might work nationally once we have rational leadership in place:

You know about dramatic increases in cases, hospitalizations across US

Surge began after labor day

But one state has done well during this time

Big state that would move national numbers

And what they've done holds a lesson for all of us

Yes — let's talk California

Thread

— Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH (@ashishkjha) October 19, 2020

Walk down memory lane:

California early to act in March, preventing surge of cases that affected many others

Over April/May, CA cases were low

But California had an awful summer surge, especially in SoCal

Cases peaked in late July: over 12,000 cases, 150 deaths / day

But in August, strong leadership from @CHHSAgency Health Secretary Mark Ghaly and @GavinNewsom

What did they do? Huge increases in testing including bringing new capacity online

Created highly customized approach on a county by county level — micro targeting policies

OK — so did it actually work?

Data:

Over past 6 weeks (since labor day), USA outside of California:

cases up 68%,
hospitalizations up 22%
% of tests positives: 5.6% –> 6.6%

California

Cases down 9%
Hospitalizations down 26%
% of test positive 3.5% –> 2.4%

California a big state (40 Million folks)

So this is not about small numbers or a fluke

Its concerted effort to increase testing (up 32% since Labor Day) and smart, county-level policies

California bucking the national trend

Here’s their approach:

https://covid19.ca.gov/safer-economy/

And here’s county level guidance

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/COVID-19/Dimmer-Framework-September_2020.pdf

What do I like here?

Instead of approaching lockdowns as light switch (on or off), CA approach is that of a dimmer switch

And it looks like its working

Obviously we don’t know if it will last but so far, so good

But here’s the bottom line

When so many states struggling

micro-targeting, more testing are smart policies that can avoid big surges

Golden State leading the way

We don’t have to look abroad to see this success story

And we can learn to keep COVID under control

Fin

Originally tweeted by Ashish K. Jha (@ashishkjha) on October 19, 2020.

“People are tired of COVID. Yep, there’s gonna be spikes, there’s gonna be no spikes, there’s gonna be vaccines—with or without vaccines, people are tired of COVID. I have the biggest rallies I’ve ever had and we have COVID. People are saying whatever, just leave us alone. They’re tired of it.

People are tired of hearing Fauci and all these idiots — these, these people, these people that have gotten it wrong.

Fauci, he’s a nice guy, he’s been here for 500 years. He called every one of them wrong. And he’s like this wonderful guy, a wonderful sage telling us how … He said, ‘Do not wear face masks,’ and the number of months ago. He said do not close it up to China. Don’t —I have a list of 15 things, this guy, and yet, we keep him.

Every time he goes on television, there’s always a bomb. But there’s a bigger bomb if you fire him. But Fauci’s a disaster, I mean this guy, if I listened to him we’d have 500,000 deaths

If there’s a reporter on, you can have it just the way I said it, I couldn’t care less.” — Donald Trump on a call to supporters today.

He obviously doesn’t give a damn anymore. He’s just lashing out at anyone he thinks makes him look bad.

Here’s a story about Trump throwing his lot in with this odious quack Scott Atlas who has taken over the federal COVID response. And he is literally trying to kill people in order to reach “herd immunity” which all the epidemiologists say cannot be done with out mass suffering and dying and may not work even then. It’s criminal:

As summer faded into autumn and the novel coronavirus continued to ravage the nation unabated, Scott Atlas, a neuroradiologist whose commentary on Fox News led President Trump to recruit him to the White House, consolidated his power over the government’s pandemic response.

Atlas shot down attempts to expand testing. He openly feuded with other doctors on the coronavirus task force and succeeded in largely sidelining them. He advanced fringe theories, such as that social distancing and mask-wearing were meaningless and would not have changed the course of the virus in several hard-hit areas. And he advocated allowing infections to spread naturally among most of the population while protecting the most vulnerable and those in nursing homes until the United States reaches herd immunity, which experts say would cause excess deaths, according to three current and former senior administration officials.

Atlas also cultivated Trump’s affection with his public assertions that the pandemic is nearly over, despite death and infection counts showing otherwise, and his willingness to tell the public that a vaccine could be developed before the Nov. 3 election, despite clear indications of a slower timetable.

Atlas’s ascendancy was apparent during a recent Oval Office meeting. After Trump left the room, Atlas startled other aides by walking behind the Resolute Desk and occupying the president’s personal space to keep the meeting going, according to one senior administration official. Atlas called this account “false and laughable.”

Discord on the coronavirus task force has worsened since the arrival in late summer of Atlas, whom colleagues said they regard as ill-informed, manipulative and at times dishonest. As the White House coronavirus response coordinator, Deborah Birx is tasked with collecting and analyzing infection data and compiling charts detailing upticks and other trends. But Atlas routinely has challenged Birx’s analysis and those of other doctors, including Anthony S. Fauci, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield, and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Stephen Hahn, with what the other doctors considered junk science, according to three senior administration officials.

Birx recently confronted the office of Vice President Pence, who chairs the task force, about the acrimony, according to two people familiar with the meeting. Birx, whose profile and influence has eroded considerably since Atlas’s arrival, told Pence’s office that she does not trust Atlas, does not believe he is giving Trump sound advice and wants him removed from the task force, the two people said.

In one recent encounter, Pence did not take sides between Atlas and Birx, but rather told them to bring data bolstering their perspectives to the task force and to work out their disagreements themselves, according to two senior administration officials.

The result has been a U.S. response increasingly plagued by distrust, infighting and lethargy, just as experts predict coronavirus cases could surge this winter and deaths could reach 400,000 by year’s end.

This assessment is based on interviews with 41 administration officials, advisers to the president, public health leaders and other people with knowledge of internal government deliberations, some of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide candid assessments or confidential information.

This is a long article and it left me feeling absolutely terrified of what is happening in our government. This is much worse than even I realized:

Birx and Fauci have advocated dramatically increasing the nation’s testing capacity, especially as experts anticipate a devastating increase in cases this winter. They have urged the government to use unspent money Congress allocated for testing — which amounts to $9 billion, according to a Democratic Senate appropriations aide — so that anyone who needs to can get a test with results returned quickly.

But Atlas, who is opposed to surveillance testing, has repeatedly quashed these proposals. He has argued that young and healthy people do not need to get tested and that testing resources should be allocated to nursing homes and other vulnerable places, such as prisons and meatpacking plants.

Who. The. Fuck. Is. This. Monster?

As I said, the article is long but it is well worth reading. This man is killing people. Or should I say, “these men” are killing people. This quack should be stripped of his medical license.

You can click to page 2 or read the full article here.