bluefrogguy

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Gohawks said:

My state is Washington if you must know.

Yeah, no they don’t. Just because they are moving into opening certain parts and just because they have a set of guidelines for when they will open doesn’t mean they have legitimate plan.

It’s like saying to get to the moon is a 4 stage plan. First, you figure out how to build a rocket. Second, you build a rocket. Third, you train astronauts. Forth, you calculate a course to the moon. How do I plan to do any of this and by when? Who cares but at least it’s a plan...

California doesn’t have a legitimate action plan. There is no timeline. I don’t see them providing legitimate solutions to testing or how to meet their other criteria. Unless I’m missing something (and if I am feel free to provide sources) California has a rough outline and that’s it. Calling it a plan is a stretch.

What's your definition of a plan? Perhaps we should agree on basics before we start talking past each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, duke of queens said:

If this is the case then why dont we lockdown during flu season where 50k people die in the U.S. every year and where we are behind on an up to date vaccine. Those people are expendable? 60% of the new hospitalizations in NYC were people that were on "lockdown." That's not good. Everyone is going to get this virus whether you believe that or not. Lockdown is to slow the spread not prevent the spread. 

Paraphrasing from Twitter, but why is it McDonald's can severe millions of hamburgers every year, but if I try ordering 10,000 from my local drive-thru suddenly there's an issue?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, duke of queens said:

If this is the case then why dont we lockdown during flu season where 50k people die in the U.S. every year and where we are behind on an up to date vaccine. Those people are expendable? 60% of the new hospitalizations in NYC were people that were on "lockdown." That's not good. Everyone is going to get this virus whether you believe that or not. Lockdown is to slow the spread not prevent the spread. 

 

I was going to post almost this exact same thing. The flu is transmitted similarly to Coronavirus. We could significantly lower the number of flu cases and deaths by enacting extreme social distancing - but as a society we believe allowing businesses to open, people to have jobs and freely leave their homes to be worth the cost of additional lives lost to the flu.

 

Now I’m not saying you should just open everything up now and let people die. The Coronavirus and flu are obviously different. I’m just stating that there is a point in which the benefit to the many outweighs the risk to the few, and the damage being done by the lockdown is so severe on so many fronts. Good article on the mental health expected consequences below.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-08/mental-health-care-braces-for-coronavirus-anxiety-and-suicides

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TrueToTheBlue said:

I’m just stating that there is a point in which the benefit to the many outweighs the risk to the few, and the damage being done by the lockdown is so severe on so many fronts.

 

Nobody disputes that there is such a point.  What people are saying is that we have not reached that point.  We must absolutely factor in the economic harm, mental health consequences, and other factors into the equation, but anyone saying that we have gone too far in the direction of avoiding needless suffering and death from the disease needs to show their work.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, TrueToTheBlue said:

 

I was going to post almost this exact same thing. The flu is transmitted similarly to Coronavirus. We could significantly lower the number of flu cases and deaths by enacting extreme social distancing - but as a society we believe allowing businesses to open, people to have jobs and freely leave their homes to be worth the cost of additional lives lost to the flu.

Not only that but at least 50% of the US population doesn't even bother to get the flu shot. That's how concerned they are. But watch the lines when they come out with a Covid vaccine that was rushed through testing. I get a flu shot every year but I'm sure as heck not gonna be in the front of the Covid vaccine line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, duke of queens said:

They are closed because it is not pc to open and could destroy your business.

Yes. Opening would destroy your business. Makes a ton of sense? Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gohawks said:

Testing is nowhere near where it should be because states aren't doing anything. That's my entire point.

There is no plan to reopen. There is no target date, no outline, and no action plan. Nothing. States are closed sitting on their a** hoping for a magic solution to rain down from the sky or who knows what. If we had an outline that went something like "We will build X quick access testing facilities in the state of Y to allow it to open by Z" then people in said state would have no problem waiting for said date. The problem is states keep pushing back the reopening date without doing anything or having a plan in motion. Posting plans to reopening presented by the White House is great but if the states don't have action plans it's pointless.  

https://www.governor.wa.gov/news-media/inslee-signs-new-covid-19-order-phased-re-opening-washingtons-economy
 

Yup, no plan at all for Washington except for the televised one anyone could have see.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Crusaderfan said:

Not only that but at least 50% of the US population doesn't even bother to get the flu shot. That's how concerned they are. But watch the lines when they come out with a Covid vaccine that was rushed through testing. I get a flu shot every year but I'm sure as heck not gonna be in the front of the Covid vaccine line. 

I read something that said about half of all polled republicans won’t get a vaccine for covid as they think it’s grossly over exaggerated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

I read something that said about half of all polled republicans won’t get a vaccine for covid as they think it’s grossly over exaggerated. 

100% of Democrats in line with their sleeves rolled up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Nobody disputes that there is such a point.  What people are saying is that we have not reached that point.  We must absolutely factor in the economic harm, mental health consequences, and other factors into the equation, but anyone saying that we have gone too far in the direction of avoiding needless suffering and death from the disease needs to show their work.

 

 

One week.  One month.  Whatever.  Lives are saved.  And yes the lockdown was to save as many lives as possible by way of NOT contracting the virus.  The result being that we receive the bonus thrown in of helping preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which by definition happens with every life protected from the virus.  And every life successfully protected is a life saved. 

And lives are not mere stats.  If that "not to save every life possible" wasn't something intellectually abstract but it was your life or one of your loved ones would you think the same?.  And every single person is a loved one of someone else and wants to survive.  "Every life possible" implies it is possible to save that life.  If it is possible then we should try our very best to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I don't see the contradiction.  We try what we can to save lives.  The threat of COVID is far greater than the threat of the seasonal flu, so we're trying to do more.  We spend a lot of time and resources trying to deal with the seasonal flu as well.  We didn't shut down businesses because it's never gotten to global pandemic proportions.  The amount of intervention should scale with the seriousness of the threat, and I don't see any evidence that we've done too much with COVID, or too little with the seasonal flu.  If you disagree, make an argument instead of a snarky gotcha attempt.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

One week.  One month.  Whatever.  Lives are saved.  And yes the lockdown was to save as many lives as possible by way of NOT contracting the virus.  The result being that we receive the bonus thrown in of helping preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which by definition happens with every life protected from the virus.  And every life successfully protected is a life saved. 

And lives are not mere stats.  If that "not to save every life possible" wasn't something intellectually abstract but it was your life or one of your loved ones would you think the same?.  And every single person is a loved one of someone else and wants to survive.  "Every life possible" implies it is possible to save that life.  If it is possible then we should try our very best to do it.

There is no indication that lives are saved. 

The only thing that we know is the curve is flattened. That means things are spread out over a longer period of time. The initial claims were the lockdown was to prevent a collapse in hospitals. That was the argument and saying otherwise is revisionist history. 

Also, the “save every life possible” argument is weak. Why not make the speed limit 5 MPH everywhere? That would save a lot of lives. Let’s also ban alcohol again. That would save lives. I mean, if we are about saving every life possible here let’s be consistent.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, daynlokki said:

I read something that said about half of all polled republicans won’t get a vaccine for covid as they think it’s grossly over exaggerated. 

The sooner Democrat’s and Republicans realize that both sides are filled with idiots the better off we will be. Instead, they rather attack one another and get absolutely nowhere. Both parties have valuable ideas and contributions to society. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

Sorry, but I don't see the contradiction.  We try what we can to save lives.  The threat of COVID is far greater than the threat of the seasonal flu, so we're trying to do more.  We spend a lot of time and resources trying to deal with the seasonal flu as well.  We didn't shut down businesses because it's never gotten to global pandemic proportions.  The amount of intervention should scale with the seriousness of the threat, and I don't see any evidence that we've done too much with COVID, or too little with the seasonal flu.  If you disagree, make an argument instead of a snarky gotcha attempt.

 

Wasn’t trying to be snarky. He reponded to a post about how long the lockdown should go on by implying it should go on indefinitely until there’s no risk of loss of life (“One week.  One month.  Whatever.  Lives are saved”) and continued by implying we need to have as few people die from COVID as possible no matter the cost. If you can’t see how that contradicts my point of the balance between lives lost and the costs of the lockdown then I don’t know what to tell you. Several other posters have made the same point I’m attempting to make, so clearly I’m not the only one that’s seeing it this way.

 

I don’t dispute anything else in what you posted, and I do consider you a very well informed person on this topic. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

The sooner Democrat’s and Republicans realize that both sides are filled with idiots the better off we will be. Instead, they rather attack one another and get absolutely nowhere. Both parties have valuable ideas and contributions to society. 

Unlike 9/11, the Corona virus has further divided our country. Both parties trying to place blame instead of working together. I find repulsive behavior on both sides of the isle. Using something like this for political gain is really disgusting and it's getting worse every day

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gohawks said:

There is no indication that lives are saved. 

The only thing that we know is the curve is flattened. That means things are spread out over a longer period of time. The initial claims were the lockdown was to prevent a collapse in hospitals. That was the argument and saying otherwise isonist history. 

 

This is nonsense for two reasons, both of which have been mentioned many times in this thread:

1.  What happens when hospital capacity is exceeded?  People get insufficient or no care, and they die.  Flattening the curve was about saving lives that would have been lost because people couldn't get treated.

2.  Flattening the curve gives us more time to make and distribute PPE, more time to make ventilators, more time to develop and test antivirals and new treatment protocols, and more time to test and develop a possible vaccine.

These factors, both of which lead to many lives saved compared to other options, were mentioned at the very outset of the "flatten the curve" conversation, e,g. here (Feb 29th):

Quote

The course of an epidemic is shaped by a variable called the reproductive rate, or R. It represents, in effect, the number of further cases each new case will give rise to. If R is high, the number of newly infected people climbs quickly to a peak before, for want of new people to infect, starting to fall back again (see chart 2). If R is low the curve rises and falls more slowly, never reaching the same heights. With SARS-CoV-2 now spread around the world, the aim of public-health policy, whether at the city, national or global scale, is to flatten the curve, spreading the infections out over time.

This has two benefits. First, it is easier for health-care systems to deal with the disease if the people infected do not all turn up at the same time. Better treatment means fewer deaths; more time allows treatments to be improved. Second, the total number of infections throughout the course of the epidemic can be lower.

Influenza, like many other respiratory diseases, thrives in cold and humid air. If covid-19 behaves the same way, spreading less as the weather gets warmer and drier, flattening the curve will bring an extra benefit. As winter turns to spring then summer, the reproductive rate will drop of its own accord. Dragging out the early stage of the pandemic means fewer deaths before the summer hiatus provides time to stockpile treatments and develop new drugs and vaccines—efforts towards both of which are already under way.

 

and here (March 27):

Quote

The ideal goal in fighting an epidemic or pandemic is to completely halt the spread. But merely slowing it — mitigation — is critical. This reduces the number of cases that are active at any given time, which in turn gives doctors, hospitals, police, schools and vaccine-manufacturers time to prepare and respond, without becoming overwhelmed. Most hospitals can function with 10 percent reduction in staff, but not with half their people out at once.

Some commentators have argued for getting the outbreak over with quickly. That is a recipe for panic, unnecessary suffering and death. Slowing and spreading out the tidal wave of cases will save lives. Flattening the curve keeps society going.

 

If you didn't pay close enough attention to the conversation and just noticed a GIF and a hashtag in your social media feeds, then I can understand why you're confused on this.  But that's on you for not informing yourself, not on those who put forth the idea very clearly and succinctly across a number of venues.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whitecloud0101 said:

100% of Democrats in line with their sleeves rolled up?

Most of the anti vaxxers in the USA vote republican. So while I doubt anything would be 100% I would easily say a much larger majority would be vaccinated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

Most of the anti vaxxers in the USA vote republican. So while I doubt anything would be 100% I would easily say a much larger majority would be vaccinated. 

I don't agree with anti vaxxers at all. My daughter has asthma and we get the flu shot every year mainly for that reason. However, I think there is going to be reluctance for some people to get a Covid vaccine just for the expedited timeline that was used to create it. I do hope there is a vaccine, but I can tell you my family isn't going to be one of the first in line, mainly for that reason. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KCTD25 said:

I don't agree with anti vaxxers at all. My daughter has asthma and we get the flu shot every year mainly for that reason. However, I think there is going to be reluctance for some people to get a Covid vaccine just for the expedited timeline that was used to create it. I do hope there is a vaccine, but I can tell you my family isn't going to be one of the first in line, mainly for that reason. 

I'm with ya. I get the flu shot only so I dont give to my daughter. I never used to get it and never got the flu. Also the flu vaccines that they are administering are years behind the newest strains. Hopefully the COVID vaccine gets pushed out asap for the sake of the most vulnerable,  but I won't be the guinea pig. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, KCTD25 said:

I don't agree with anti vaxxers at all. My daughter has asthma and we get the flu shot every year mainly for that reason. However, I think there is going to be reluctance for some people to get a Covid vaccine just for the expedited timeline that was used to create it. I do hope there is a vaccine, but I can tell you my family isn't going to be one of the first in line, mainly for that reason. 

My wife is type 1 diabetic. Regardless of how good it is we will all have to get it on the off chance it does help. Her life cannot go back to normal until at least then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A vaccine is not even a certainty, let alone in...4 months!? This is some crazy optimism. The country needs to plan and move forward as if there will not be a widely-available vaccine for at least a year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gohawks said:

The sooner Democrat’s and Republicans realize that both sides are filled with idiots the better off we will be. Instead, they rather attack one another and get absolutely nowhere. Both parties have valuable ideas and contributions to society. 

The path forward doesn't have to be a political issue.  I think this whole situation has demonstrated that elected politicians don't really have the answers for us.  All they're really good at is playing the blame game.

It's up to each one of us, regardless of our political persuasion, to try and look out for each other as best we can.  That's really all there is to it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, TribeFoo said:

A vaccine is not even a certainty, let alone in...4 months!? This is some crazy optimism. The country needs to plan and move forward as if there will not be a widely-available vaccine for at least a year.

Which should be slow, incremental openings over a longer period of time. Not going from phase 1 to phase 2 in a week before you can even see if a partial reopening has added to the pool of those sick significantly (Mississippi) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JE7HorseGod said:

The path forward doesn't have to be a political issue.  I think this whole situation has demonstrated that elected politicians don't really have the answers for us.  All they're really good at is playing the blame game.

It's up to each one of us, regardless of our political persuasion, to try and look out for each other as best we can.  That's really all there is to it.

Right. The issue is people disagree with what the best way to look out for one another is. I don't have an issue with people believing we should stay locked down for a certain period of time. Everyone has their own valid reasons for what they believe is the best solution. I do have an issue with the following:

1) Politicizing the issue.

2) Acting like people that disagree with you are uneducated

3) Acting like people that disagree with you are selfish and/or don't care about the well-being of other people.

I've seen a bunch of all 3 across social media and in this thread. Both from the left and from the right. Clearly we can all agree to disagree at this point and arguing isn't going anywhere. I rather discuss football at this stage on this forum than engage in a pointless back and forth. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

Right. The issue is people disagree with what the best way to look out for one another is. I don't have an issue with people believing we should stay locked down for a certain period of time. Everyone has their own valid reasons for what they believe is the best solution. I do have an issue with the following:

1) Politicizing the issue.

2) Acting like people that disagree with you are uneducated

3) Acting like people that disagree with you are selfish and/or don't care about the well-being of other people.

I've seen a bunch of all 3 across social media and in this thread. Both from the left and from the right. Clearly we can all agree to disagree at this point and arguing isn't going anywhere. I rather discuss football at this stage on this forum than engage in a pointless back and forth. 

Yeah.  Now that almost every state will be open in some capacity come tomorrow, it's really just an individual decision about "staying locked down for a certain time."  I think regardless of whatever those personal decisions are, we just have to respect others' choices, follow the guidance of public health officials, and protect ourselves and others best we can.

If you want to stay home, and you're able to, then I respect that.

If you want to go to work and live your life, I respect that too.

Just be safe, think of others, and control what you can control rather than the actions of others, which you can't.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.