Coronavirus Thread

[GoldZ]

Oops, make that debated instead of doubted.

 

[MWBATL]

Completely my worthless opinion, but it sure seems as if a lot of folks are questioning the accuracy of data (yeah it's often wrong in ref to Covid) and are ignoring the overwhelming fact that it's correct directionally. Geesh, you'd think somebody stepped on a MAGA cap or smelled Karmala's hair or something.

C'mon, a thunderstorm might produce 2.1 inches of rain, or it may have in fact produced 2.3 or 1.9 inches, but the point is....there was a LOT of dang rain, period.

The more the accuracy of Covid data is doubted, the wetter we seem to get out in the thunderstorm. No, I don't drink this early in the day.

Interesting analogy. Maybe accurate too.

I guess a big part of the debate is whether a society needs to worry about 2-ish inches of rain. If you are frail and subject to illness, then standing out in the rain, even if it is only 2 inches might lead to fatal consequences. But, if you are healthy, might not lead to anything more than a cold. How much pain should we put society through in circumstances like that?

I get that the analogy isn't perfect, but it does kinda go along with what you're suggesting.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Completely my worthless opinion, but it sure seems as if a lot of folks are questioning the accuracy of data (yeah it's often wrong in ref to Covid) and are ignoring the overwhelming fact that it's correct directionally. Geesh, you'd think somebody stepped on a MAGA cap or smelled Karmala's hair or something.

C'mon, a thunderstorm might produce 2.1 inches of rain, or it may have in fact produced 2.3 or 1.9 inches, but the point is....there was a LOT of dang rain, period.

The more the accuracy of Covid data is doubted, the wetter we seem to get out in the thunderstorm. No, I don't drink this early in the day.

Be careful referencing politics - a lot of people get triggered by it these days.

Aside from that analogy, the point was well made. We have 140,000 deaths. There may be lots of trash in there and it may be 130,000. There may be a bunch of people who die/died of other stuff and didn’t seek treatment (Navy’s excess deaths comparisons) and we may have 200,000 direct and indirect deaths. But this is certainly an insidious virus.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Be careful referencing politics - a lot of people get triggered by it these days.

Aside from that analogy, the point was well made. We have 140,000 deaths. There may be lots of trash in there and it may be 130,000. There may be a bunch of people who die/died of other stuff and didn’t seek treatment (Navy’s excess deaths comparisons) and we may have 200,000 direct and indirect deaths. But this is certainly an insidious virus.

Don't you know it's ok if it's their politics?

 

[RonJohn]

Interesting analogy. Maybe accurate too.

I guess a big part of the debate is whether a society needs to worry about 2-ish inches of rain. If you are frail and subject to illness, then standing out in the rain, even if it is only 2 inches might lead to fatal consequences. But, if you are healthy, might not lead to anything more than a cold. How much pain should we put society through in circumstances like that?

I get that the analogy isn't perfect, but it does kinda go along with what you're suggesting.

We should try to minimize the pain that we put society through. People should also take personal responsibility to limit their impact on others and the at risk. Spreading the virus wildly through the healthy population still puts the at risk people in more risk. The more people that have it, the more chance that an at risk person will get it.

Asking for everything to be shut down completely until there is a vaccine is ridiculous and ignores the responsibilities of a society. Refusing to wear a mask in public is ridiculous and ignores personal responsibility to society.

 

[bobongo]

We should try to minimize the pain that we put society through. People should also take personal responsibility to limit their impact on others and the at risk. Spreading the virus wildly through the healthy population still puts the at risk people in more risk. The more people that have it, the more chance that an at risk person will get it.

Asking for everything to be shut down completely until there is a vaccine is ridiculous and ignores the responsibilities of a society. Refusing to wear a mask in public is ridiculous and ignores personal responsibility to society.

I agree with all of this, but I will point out that almost nobody is calling for what's in the bolded part. What some are advocating is shutting down until this thing is well under control, so we can open back up again fully. Had we thoroughly done so the first time around, perhaps we wouldn't be in this spot.

Medical Experts Tell Government: ‘Shut It Down Now, And Start Over’

Medical Experts Tell Government: ‘Shut It Down Now, And Start Over’

If new lockdowns aren’t imposed, experts warn, “the consequences will be measured in widespread suffering and death.”

www.forbes.com

 

[RonJohn]

I agree with all of this, but I will point out that almost nobody is calling for what's in the bolded part. What some are advocating is shutting down until this thing is well under control, so we can open back up again fully. Had we thoroughly done so the first time around, perhaps we wouldn't be in this spot.

Medical Experts Tell Government: ‘Shut It Down Now, And Start Over’

Medical Experts Tell Government: ‘Shut It Down Now, And Start Over’

If new lockdowns aren’t imposed, experts warn, “the consequences will be measured in widespread suffering and death.”

www.forbes.com

I would argue against even that. IF people will act responsibly I see no reason to drastically limit a lot of business. There are some things like nightclubs that would make no sense to run if people have to social distance themselves. But why should a landscaping business be shut down if their employees work outside and maintain distance. If things are that dangerous, then why should employees at electrical companies go to work? Why should hospital employees? If things are so dangerous that being personally responsible can't bring the numbers down, then stop all work and services.

The IHME projections show that infection rate would drop tremendously if people universally wore masks. I don't know how accurate those projections are, but I do believe that as a general idea if people maintain distance as much as possible and wear masks that we can keep the country running. Maybe we can't all go to a dance party at a nightclub right now, but I see no reason that we can't: buy groceries, buy garden supplies, hire a landscaper to replant a flower bed, or hire a contractor to re-pour a driveway. Things don't have to be back to the way they were last year right now, but I don't believe that people have to stay in their house all of the time either.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I agree with all of this, but I will point out that almost nobody is calling for what's in the bolded part. What some are advocating is shutting down until this thing is well under control, so we can open back up again fully.

I mean, you say that, and then you stated exactly what you just said that nobody was advocating.

We’re not going to shut down “until this thing is under control”. When we shut down the first time we still had 30,000 new cases a day and the economy and people’s lives were in free fall. At that rate of transmission, we’d have to stay like that for years. Ain’t going to happen. Many people’s lives are still in shambles from this right now. The science has shown us we can live and run businesses and live life and be safe. Just because a segment of society refuses to operate responsibly doesn’t command the rest of us to suffer.

 

[RonJohn]

The science has shown us we can live and run businesses and live life and be safe. Just because a segment of society refuses to operate responsibly doesn’t command the rest of us to suffer.

If those people who refuse to operate responsibly don't get onboard, it is possible that further restrictions might be necessary. I don't see regulations and fines causing them to change. Speeding fines don't stop speeding, except for when drivers see officers on the road. It will take people deciding for themselves to start acting responsibly.

In the last week there are "two friends" that I know of that have suddenly changed their stances that masks are extremely difficult to wear and totally useless. (Actually three, a sister-in-law, niece, and church friend of my mother's-- and I can name them) I am not sure why they suddenly made a 180 degree spin on the issue but hopefully it is a sign of many others making the same change.

 

[Milwaukee]

If those people who refuse to operate responsibly don't get onboard, it is possible that further restrictions might be necessary. I don't see regulations and fines causing them to change. Speeding fines don't stop speeding, except for when drivers see officers on the road. It will take people deciding for themselves to start acting responsibly.

In the last week there are "two friends" that I know of that have suddenly changed their stances that masks are extremely difficult to wear and totally useless. (Actually three, a sister-in-law, niece, and church friend of my mother's-- and I can name them) I am not sure why they suddenly made a 180 degree spin on the issue but hopefully it is a sign of many others making the same change.

It’s crazy to me that Georgia is still as open as it is without mask requirements. Spoke with a good friend in GA this week and told him we’re required to wear masks everywhere in Milwaukee and Madison, everywhere. I can’t leave the house without it, so I just keep them in my car. If I wanna go to Hooters (giggity) I have to wear the mask into that damn fine establishment (#Merica) and I can only take it off once I’m seated 6 feet away from all other patrons that aren’t in my group. Rules like that seem kind of silly to me but we have to do it in order to participate in society. I wore a damn mask to an hour long HIIT training class at the gym this morning, do you realize how difficult that is and how inconvenient? But if we don’t wear it we don’t get to go to the gym. Same with barbershops, grocery stores, etc. From speaking with him, they’re doing NONE of that down in the Henry Co area. That’s very surprising.

 

[bobongo]

I mean, you say that, and then you stated exactly what you just said that nobody was advocating.

No didn't. I said some are advocating a shutdown until it's under control, not until there's a vaccine as was postulated in the post I was referencing. You've made up something once again out of whole cloth, apropos of nothing.

 

[RonJohn]

It’s crazy to me that Georgia is still as open as it is without mask requirements. Spoke with a good friend in GA this week and told him we’re required to wear masks everywhere in Milwaukee and Madison, everywhere. I can’t leave the house without it, so I just keep them in my car. If I wanna go to Hooters (giggity) I have to wear the mask into that damn fine establishment (#Merica) and I can only take it off once I’m seated 6 feet away from all other patrons that aren’t in my group. Rules like that seem kind of silly to me but we have to do it in order to participate in society. I wore a damn mask to an hour long HIIT training class at the gym this morning, do you realize how difficult that is and how inconvenient? But if we don’t wear it we don’t get to go to the gym. Same with barbershops, grocery stores, etc. From speaking with him, they’re doing NONE of that down in the Henry Co area. That’s very surprising.

I think Kemp is afraid of reactions from the anti-maskers if regulations are put in. I think it is true that some of those people in Georgia would have had the same kind of armed protests at the capital building if he put in such a policy a few weeks ago. I also don't think enforcement would be easy or effective if people still decide they don't want to. People still drive down GA-400 at over 100 mph even though police sometimes give tickets and even though Georgia has a super-speeder law with higher fines for speeds over 85. From an anecdotal standpoint, I think attitudes are changing. One of the people that I posted who is now OK with wearing masks was posting two weeks ago that -- wearing a mask is extremely dangerous and would end up causing more deaths than COVID-19 if people are required to wear them for hours a day --. I know that is ignorant and stupid, but that is the type of attitude that people have been expressing. (And that person is a teacher) I am in favor of regulations requiring masks, but I think it is more important to work to diffuse that type of ignorant attitude.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

No didn't. I said some are advocating a shutdown until it's under control, not until there's a vaccine as was postulated in the post I was referencing. You've made up something once again out of whole cloth, apropos of nothing.

No, I quoted you. You may think I didn’t, but I did. Meanwhile, you quoted me as saying we’d have to shut down until there is a vaccine. I never said anything even close to that. The word is not there, nor is any implication.

What I said was we’d have to shut down for “years” to get it “under control” according to your assertion. Why? Because when we shutdown the first time, we had 30,000 new cases a day. And it was stable and flat and never improved - that was the best it got and it stayed there for several weeks of that. That’s 0.00001 of our population per day. Think about how long that would go on for before we have any sort of immunity - and even that rate is not “under control”. But if we assumed that was “under control”, you be like that for years. IIWII.

 

[bobongo]

No, I quoted you. You may think I didn’t, but I did. Meanwhile, you quoted me as saying we’d have to shut down until there is a vaccine. I never said anything even close to that. The word is not there, nor is any implication.

What I said was we’d have to shut down for “years” to get it “under control” according to your assertion. Why? Because when we shutdown the first time, we had 30,000 new cases a day. That’s 0.00001 of our population per day. Think about how long that would go on for before we have any sort of immunity - and even that rate is not “under control”.

This is utterly ridiculous. I referenced not you but Ron John. Again, you're either lying intentionally or mistaken in a totally baffling way. I clearly said, "not until there's a vaccine as was postulated in the post I was referencing". I was referencing Ron John's post, not yours. Do you understand? Look at the post I originally responded to. Was it your post or Ron John's?

READ.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

This is utterly ridiculous. I referenced not you but Ron John. Again, you're either lying intentionally or mistaken in a totally baffling way. I clearly said, "not until there's a vaccine as was postulated in the post I was referencing". I was referencing Ron John's post, not yours. Do you understand? Look at the post I originally responded to. Was it your post or Ron John's?

READ.

You should think about deleting your account if you’re going to act like this when someone disagrees with you, and in a polite way and backs up their argument with data and information no less. Doesn’t mean you have to agree with their perspective, but your attitude is abhorrent.

 

[bobongo]

You should think about deleting your account if you’re going to act like this when someone disagrees with you, and in a polite way and backs up their argument with data and information no less. Doesn’t mean you have to agree with their perspective, but your attitude is abhorrent.

Your data and information are obviously wrong regarding my post and I will not abide someone misrepresenting my own words, as you have done on numerous occasions. If anyone should think about deleting their account, it is you.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Your data and information are obviously wrong and I will not abide someone misrepresenting my own words, as you have done on numerous occasions. If anyone should think about deleting their account, it is you.

See, there you go again. Go read the thread. I disagreed with your assertion and explained why. We did have 30,000 cases per day when we were shutdown. It was stable and flat for several weeks. That does represent 0.00001 of our population. Extrapolate that out, and it’s years of that before we get any immunity...and you could argue that wasn’t really under control.

I’m not misrepresenting anything - go read the full conversation again. But for some reason you’re having an emotional breakdown about it and accusing me of all kinds of idiocy.

You should take a time out.

 

[bobongo]

See, there you go again. Go read the thread. I disagreed with your assertion and explained why. We did have 30,000 cases per day when we were shutdown. It was stable and flat for several weeks. That does represent 0.00001 of our population. Extrapolate that out, and it’s years of that before we get any immunity...and you could argue that wasn’t really under control.

I’m not misrepresenting anything - go read the full conversation again. But for some reason you’re having an emotional breakdown about it and accusing me of all kinds of idiocy.

You should take a time out.

Yes, I understand your disagreement with my assertion - which had nothing whatsoever to do with my post, which called into question your misrepresentation of my words and did not even address your point about immunity. You're so far out in left field you're not even in the ball park.

READ.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Yes, I understand your disagreement with my assertion - which had nothing whatsoever to do with my post, which called into question your misrepresentation of my words and did not even address your point about immunity. You're so far out in left field you're not even in the ball park.

READ.

Well I’m sorry I hurt your feelings. I think at this point your best choice of recourse is to report me.

 

[GoldZ]

Be careful referencing politics - a lot of people get triggered by it these days.

Aside from that analogy, the point was well made. We have 140,000 deaths. There may be lots of trash in there and it may be 130,000. There may be a bunch of people who die/died of other stuff and didn’t seek treatment (Navy’s excess deaths comparisons) and we may have 200,000 direct and indirect deaths. But this is certainly an insidious virus.

Yeah, that's why I included both sides of the aisle, but I get your point.