Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Government Medicine Republicans Politics

US Senator Rand Paul Has Tested Positive for Coronavirus (cnn.com) 320

An anonymous reader writes: 57-year-old U.S. Senator Rand Paul has tested positive for the coronavirus, reports CNN, citing a tweet from the senator's Twitter account.

"He is feeling fine and is in quarantine," the tweet reports. "He is asymptomatic and was tested out of an abundance of caution due to his extensive travel and events. He was not aware of any direct contact with any infected person." Another tweet adds that "Ten days ago, our D.C. office began operating remotely, hence virtually no staff has had contact with Senator Rand Paul."

Paul plans to continue working while in quarantine, and hopes to return to the Senate after his quarantine period ends.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Senator Rand Paul Has Tested Positive for Coronavirus

Comments Filter:
  • Coronavirus ignores your libertarian stance.

    As well as all the other ones.

    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      Aye, the libertarians are going to have tough time stomaching the increase in government interference necessary to squash the virus.

      • Yep, just like with the government interference necessary to stop terrorism
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • by gtall ( 79522 )

            If you think like a politician, you can see it is easier to point at those naughty terrorists when they kill wantonly month after month. Not being seen as defending American against them can get you unelected.

            On the flip side, campaigning for preparedness for epidemics means the public cannot understand why they should stockpile supplies for something they are not convinced will ever come. They see those stockpiles as stockpiles of money. And any money appropriated one year gets raided by the pols the next

        • by Uberbah ( 647458 )

          Yep, just like with the government interference necessary to stop terrorism

          If you went to the Pete Hoekstra [wordpress.com] school of analogies, sure. If everything starts magically going well in the United States this virus might "only" kill a million people. Whereas pen caps and your living room furniture [washingtonpost.com] are more likely to kill you than a terrorist.

    • Coronavirus ignores your libertarian stance.

      As well as all the other ones.

      Just an insurance quote of your comment against the angry trolls with censor points (AKA moderation). I don't think it really deserves the current displayed "Insightful" (or any of the hidden negative mods) because you didn't mention how he was brainwashed from infancy. Nor did you say anything about how often he's obstructed Congress, even as regards USEFUL legislation that could have helped (as if McConnell's Senate is capable of helping anyone).

      But focusing on solutions, so far the only one that seems to

  • by ClickOnThis ( 137803 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @02:47PM (#59859894) Journal

    I'm certainly no fan of Dr. Paul's politics, but I do wish him a quick recovery.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      I wish him well, Some college drop could persuade his father-in-law to create a board and certify the drop out, hang out a shingle as a board-certified-doctor and treat Rand Paul and send him a bill for whatever the college drop out thinks his time is worth...

      That would be consistent with Rand Paul's views that as an ophthalmologist certified by the board created by his father-in-law he has the right to bill the government whatever he thinks his time is worth for treating medicare patients. And if govt fi

  • No worries (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22, 2020 @02:47PM (#59859896)

    As a staunch libertarian, I'm sure he'll reject any government interference and enjoy the free market solution of choosing a different virus if he decides he doesn't like covid-19.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Actually, he'll be able to buy his own coverage and care. However, with a socialist solution such as Bernie advocates - you won't have any option but the Government solution [thehill.com]. Somehow a single choice is better than multiple choices?
      • It kind of is, though - it makes the pool larger.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by blitz487 ( 606553 )
        Under the Soviet system, you'd get "free" health care. That meant you needed to bribe the doctors and nurses under the table, and you'd get a "free" root canal but no anesthetic.
      • You can still buy your own care under a Medicare for All plan. What you _can't_ do is sell "insurance" that only pays for things the government program covers, because then you would be charging people for insurance that would never pay out.

        Medicare for All doesn't mandate the end of private healthcare markets, and indeed there's plenty of doctors out there right now that won't take your insurance and will demand cash payments. A bud of mine used one when he had heart problems. Had to pay a couple grand
    • Re:No worries (Score:5, Insightful)

      by blitz487 ( 606553 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @05:30PM (#59860572)
      Dealing with public health epidemics is a proper function for government, even for libertarians.
    • As a staunch libertarian, I'm sure he'll reject any government interference and enjoy the free market solution of choosing a different virus if he decides he doesn't like covid-19.

      Currently barely moderated into visibility (and this is an insurance requote against the trolls without senses of humor), but I can't decide whether it's a justified use of AC. The veil of "It's just a joke" has warn so thin these years.

      And I have yet to meet a Libertarian who could figure out my sig. They don't understand their own worship words. At least Rand Paul has the excuse of having been brainwashed since before he could understand anything.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @02:51PM (#59859906)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by gtall ( 79522 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @03:04PM (#59859962)

      No one can tell how widespread until we have decent testing coverage. That won't happen any time soon given the gov.'s anemic efforts at getting it started. It will be haphazard and run by the states because now they are the only government agencies that have real plans as opposed to the brain trust the alleged administration has thrown together.

      Now let us pray: dear Lord, please stick a cork in Trump's mouth and tie his fingers to his elbows, and please send Pence off for re-education or at least to his own private prayer seance where we don't have to hear his bromides.

      • That won't happen any time soon given the gov.'s anemic efforts at getting it started. .

        It's already started and invites participation. If I'm the only one reading this site...

        https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#what-do-we-know-about-the-risk-of-dying-from-covid-19

        With neat little headings...here's just one:
        There is no single case fatality rate for a disease – it is context-specific, changing with time and location

        ...I'll be surprised and disappointed.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by gtall ( 79522 )

            "I tend to think the federal government needs to step in with that act, tell everyone get on the ball and make the stuff needed, buy it all at a fair market value, then resell it to the states, if possible at the same rate, based on need."

            There is no government agency with that power. The only one with that power is the president and his brain trust of advisors having a plan, capable of executing that plan, and the ability to knock down barriers.

            That won't happen because the alleged administration is inept.

      • Sampling theory (Score:5, Informative)

        by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @05:21PM (#59860532)
        You don't need to test every single individual who has the disease, in order to get valid statistics [wikipedia.org]. Scattershot sampling is sufficient if it's done broadly enough (i.e. not missing huge segments of the population and thus introducing sampling bias).

        Globally, the case-fatality rate for this varies between 0.25% to about 5% [cebm.net] once you throw out outliers due to
        • the heath care system being overwhelmed (e.g. Italy), and people who could've survived dying because they didn't get any treatment,
        • there being practically no testing (e.g. Indonesia), so the number of reported cases is artificially low,
        • there being so few cases the margin of error is huge (e.g. Algeria),

        The U.S. currently sits at 32,356 cases, 414 deaths, 795 serious cases [worldometers.info]. That's a 1.3% fatality rate, with an upper bound (if all serious cases die) of 3.7%. Those figures fall squarely in the middle of the world average, which suggests the amount of testing the U.S. is doing is sufficient to accurately track the progress of this disease. If the amount of testing were inadequate, we'd be seeing a much higher fatality rate in the U.S., as the deaths are certain but the number of confirmed cases would be skewed low due to inadequate testing.

        That's the thing the people pushing the "not enough testing" line don't seem to understand. Lack of testing shows up in the statistics not just as an artificially low number of reported cases, but also as a higher fatality rate. We're simply not seeing the latter in the U.S., which suggests the amount of testing we're doing here is (comparatively) sufficient. If there were inadequate testing, we'd be like Indonesia - few reported cases but a high fatality rate.

        • by khchung ( 462899 )

          The U.S. currently sits at 32,356 cases, 414 deaths, 795 serious cases [worldometers.info]. That's a 1.3% fatality rate, with an upper bound (if all serious cases die) of 3.7%. Those figures fall squarely in the middle of the world average, which suggests the amount of testing the U.S. is doing is sufficient to accurately track the progress of this disease.

          Yes, any kind of consistent sampling allows the disease's progress through the country to be tracked. However, I suppose one would expect a government to do more than just *watch* the virus spread through the entire country?

          Just "tracking the progress" is no different than watching a train wreck, it won't save anyone.

          Now, the *stop* the progress of the virus, that will need more testing. Namely, back tracing contacts and test them, find those who were infected before they showed symptoms and quarantine th

        • It is true that tracking the progress of the disease is a useful minimal goal, and you are correct that statistical sampling is useful enough there.

          But if we want to be more pinpoint in quarantines, in order to significantly reduce the number of infected individuals out there spreading the virus, we need much more testing than that.

        • "Tracking progress" is the goal of epidemiologists, but I think we'd actually like to prevent spreading the disease. There are two proven ways to deal with this as a nation:

          1) The China method - lock everyone down and stop spread by preventing contact between people. Kill your economy in the process.

          2) The South Korea method - test everyone early and often. Spend insane amounts of money on testing and tracking, but keep your economy going by giving people some certainty that they're not infected.

          In the US,

    • by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @03:09PM (#59859988)

      That's what I've been thinking.

      Almost 1% of the US congress has officially tested positive, and so have *way* more than 0.01% of famous celebrities and athletes. (Which would be the expected rate if only 30,000 people in the US currently have it.) Sure these people mingle more than average, but so do hair dressers, cab drivers, cashiers, etc.

      I wouldn't be surprised if we found out that a couple of million infected people are actually walking around this country right now.

    • I mean, sure, there are a lot of "famous" people, and quite a few intermingle, but when you start reading about quite a few famous people having it, it suggests that maybe it's a little more widespread than the official statistics suggest.

      How about the possibility that being famous correlates with meeting a lot more people than Joe Public.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • My gut tells me the official figures (currently over 32,000) are probably out by a factor of 100 (ie probably over 3 million) but I can't prove that

          Remember that "0 cases in West Virginia"? It was only that way because the state authorities were denying tests to people with symptoms. People will die because the state administration wanted to keep their stats at 0. King Canute would have been proud.
          https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/21... [cnn.com]

    • by hey! ( 33014 )

      Currently there are just over 38000 currently active reported cases in the US.

      The number of cases in the US is growing faster than anywhere else, but that's partly a data collection artifact. We got started testing late. Back when we had around 1,000 reported cases models suggested we had somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 infected people. We've just started to put a serious dent in the testing backlog over this last week, but it's a pretty safe bet we're still undercounting. Every state is reporting new

    • It's because they get tested
    • Hopefully. That would imply that the death rate is also much lower than feared.
    • and get out a lot more, so it's not surprising.

      On the plus side, the basement dwellers shall inherit the Earth! And then go back to the basement to play WoW & Call of Duty.
  • I wonder what percentage are over 50, and what rate they'll die at?

    • I wonder what percentage are over 50, and what rate they'll die at?

      Well I'm hoping for zero, on both sides of the aisle.

      More to the point, how will Congress conduct business without meeting in person?

  • by Hey_Jude_Jesus ( 3442653 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @02:54PM (#59859920)
    Hoax. :rolleyeyes:
  • My comment to his article posted to /. from the GlobularRumor (Canada & .ORG) no more than four days ago is missing from my profile and I know I didn't erase it. I liked my comment. It addressed the threshold of sedition a public servant's opinion might approach when parroting nonsense in terms of the loss of lives. It asked at what number would he be forced to admit ignorance and escape punishment.

    [costanza.wrong.jpg]
    • I'm as likely right or wrong about Paul's irresponsible tripe being posted here as Farkied myself. I've monitored more closely than most, but as much as many, since late January when returning to China for work. Apologies if that's the case. I live alone and adhere to the advisories of quarantine and have managed that exhaustion for weeks. /csb
  • by layabout ( 1576461 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @03:13PM (#59860010)
    We should send Rand Paul thoughts and prayers.
    • by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @03:41PM (#59860156) Journal

      Fanatics like Paul would have outright gutted Federal agencies like this CDC. As bad as that simpering halfwit Donald Trump let things gets Rand Paul and his coreligionists would have left the Federal Government a lifeless husk and doomed millions to sickness without medical aid or financial support. Fuck Rand Paul.

    • We should send Rand Paul thoughts and prayers.

      Oh, I'm praying for him but probably not the way you think.

    • I am. [youtube.com]

    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      Dear Lord, we offer this prayer for Rand Paul's fast and total recovery. We also ask that you give him the missing brain material you held back from him, and that he will see his way to retire like his old man. Thank you...and err...would it be too much to ask that he retire forthwith, and Oh G-d, please don't have Tennessee send another gem like Marsha Blackburn to take his place, we can only suffer so long before we lose the faith.

  • I like (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @03:17PM (#59860028)

    How he always throws a monkey wrench into government but most times he's just an asshole. I don't feel bad.

    • Why do you like sabotage?

      • Congress accomplishes so little and what they do accomplish is often not what the constituents were pleading for. Hard to sabotage anything that barely functions in the first place.

        • Re:I like (Score:5, Insightful)

          by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @04:08PM (#59860250)

          Your quote about always throwing the monkey wrench implies that it can function, but doesn't because of Rand Paul's sabotage.
          So, why do you like sabotage and, at the same time, complain that the system being sabotaged doesn't work?
          This should result in cognitive dissonance at the very least.

  • Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart [cnn.com] also tested positive.

  • So how does this work now, with private healthcare and all? He goes to a hospital and rakes up a mortgage-sized bill and has to pay?
    What would obamacare mean now, if it had been implemented? What would be different?

    • So how does this work now, with private healthcare and all? He goes to a hospital and rakes up a mortgage-sized bill and has to pay?

      Well if he had health insurance he might get some of his coverage covered; however, the irony is that as a US Senator, he is covered by the US government the socialized medicine that Paul himself championed against.

    • - He is a Senator and has very good health insurance coverage.
      - Obamacare has been implemented and still exists - I'm not sure why you think it doesn't. Trump has managed to whittle away at it, though.
      - The majority of Americans have health insurance.

      More info on the second and third point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      • So he's OK then, unless he somehow was one of the 30 mill. who were uninsured, then it would be remortgage time?

        • Yeah the rich (Rand Paul net worth: 2.5 million dollars - low for a Senator actually) are generally okay, whatever the circumstances.

          I believe that most of those uninsured are in a more precarious financial position overall, and probably don't have a mortgage to begin with - so no remortgage. In most jurisdictions the hospitals are required to treat them regardless of their ability to pay; but the patient probably would end up having their credit ruined because they would default on the debt.

          Basically (agai

          • by gtall ( 79522 )

            " so why certain people are so against any form of universal coverage makes no sense."

            More to the point: Caucasian Republicans do not want to pay for Non-caucasian Democrats.

    • Probably like most people with private health insurance - you go for treatment, you come out with a $50 copay bill, and maybe a few $25 follow-up innoculations. And note that, at least in California, not having private health insurance is illegal and subjects you to State Government fines.
    • He's a US senator. He has socialized health insurance, paid for by every taxpayer whether they want to keep him alive or not.

      They only eliminated healthcare for the peasants. Not the kings.

  • by gavron ( 1300111 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @03:55PM (#59860208)

    So you and I, in the US, even with a doctor's Rx can't get the test if we show no symptoms.

    Rand's statement is that he is "asymptomatic but was tested out of an abundance of caution."

    Where is that "abundance of caution" for the rest of us?

    - If we can't be tested neither should congressmen.
    - If we can't be tested neither should the President.
    - If we can't be tested neither should the NBA, NHL, and NFL players -- just to name a few.

    Elitism is when a group of people think they are more important than everyone else and jump to the front of the line, take all the toilet paper off shelves, steal the baby wipes from mothers' purses, and in general behave in a sociopathic way.

    It's time to stop accepting this elitist reality.

    E

    • Amen. Congresspricks can get tested just as a cautionary measure while there are health care professionals who can't get tested even if they have symptoms. Fuck Rand Paul in his elitist asshole.

  • ... hence virtually no staff has had contact with ... Paul.

    I've never really liked the way we've highjacked the words virtual and virtually to mean "nearly." (Like nominally, which just means "named" amount, but now usually means a _small_ amount.)

    Regardless. I'm guessing those of his staff who have had contact with him aren't very happy right now.

    Further proof that just because you're a doctor, doesn't necessarily mean you're very smart. Kentucky would be smart to be rid of both of their senators.

  • The very same Rand Paul who held up the stimulus bill with absurd amendments that have nothing to do with the crisis. I don't wish death on anyone but hey, karma.

  • That's not a rhetorical question; I genuinely want to know.

  • by K. S. Kyosuke ( 729550 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @06:01PM (#59860658)
    I hope the virus recovers soon from Rand Paul.
  • by techdolphin ( 1263510 ) on Sunday March 22, 2020 @06:35PM (#59860746)
    Sen. Paul was absolutely irresponsible when he went swimming and to the gym this morning. What makes it even worse is that he is a doctor. If you think you have COVID-19, you should self-quarantine until you get tested and the results come back negative, or you are sure you don't have the disease for some other reason. Paul demonstrated that he has no concern for others, and he should be expelled from the Senate for being so irresponsible.

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Working...