Corona Virus. How much of a threat is it?

[enjoy_tren]

You are the one with the strong opinion so YOU provide the data.

Do I disagree with your opinion? I do not. But there is not good science to back up your claims.

I’m in the “it’s too soon to tell” camp as far as data and the “let’s get back to work (wearing masks)” camp policy wise.

I accept your stance on the issue but the science you present is not sound.

That study in Santa Monica found volunteers through Facebook. The specificity and sensitivity of the serological tests they used was not acceptable to draw at authoritative conclusions; and they stated higher values than even the manufacturer provided.

Fact is we do not have a good serologic test yet.

You want to debate policy. I am looking only at science.

The science is inconclusive. I’m not making statements that one point of view or another is accurate. Only that we do not know.

I appreciate your views on the issues.

policy and science go hand in hand when one is based off the other. In this case there is no evidence that social distancing and staying at home is working. It is unethical to play with people's livelihood off a presumption that the above methods would save lives in exchange for financial ruin of the public. you cant deny the fact that theres multiple studies and evidence backing up the claim there are a substantial amount of people walking around with 0 symptoms and positive for covid regardless of how flawed the methodologies may be. If the public is asking to sacrifice what they've worked years to build then it is the burden of the state to proof the remedies in question will provide tangible results. I do have strong opinions due to the fact that our governor has mandated salons, gyms, etc closed for another few months when we've already been shut down for a month. These business owners are being told "its okay....you wont receive even a $1 in revenue for 1/4 of the year, but continue paying fixed expenses out of your own pocket. It will save lives...maybe".

 

[Jin]

policy and science go hand in hand when one is based off the other. In this case there is no evidence that social distancing and staying at home is working. It is unethical to play with people's livelihood off a presumption that the above methods would save lives in exchange for financial ruin of the public. you cant deny the fact that theres multiple studies and evidence backing up the claim there are a substantial amount of people walking around with 0 symptoms and positive for covid regardless of how flawed the methodologies may be. If the public is asking to sacrifice what they've worked years to build then it is the burden of the state to proof the remedies in question will provide tangible results. I do have strong opinions due to the fact that our governor has mandated salons, gyms, etc closed for another few months when we've already been shut down for a month. These business owners are being told "its okay....you wont receive even a $1 in revenue for 1/4 of the year, but continue paying fixed expenses out of your own pocket. It will save lives...maybe".

So because it is literally impossible to prove exactly what effect social distancing has made, it was a mistake to make that call and your point of view is automatically correct?

We can and will see the effect that lifting of the ban will have. Let’s see how it goes in states like Georgia.

No, I “cannot deny” that there are multiple studies suggesting that this virus is extremely widespread and results in high numbers of asymptotic cases; I only deny that those studies are of sound methodology.

Why cling to poor science only to support your pre existing point of view? Why not just have an opinion based off your feelings. Because that’s what you have. Nothing wrong with that.

What we don’t know is more important than what we do know. And there’s a lot we don’t know.

 

[Jin]

Not only do I think that lockdowns work; in the upcoming year I’m betting many states will go back into lockdown after coming out.

This whole thing sucks.....

 

[Pearl]

My company got an $86.4mil contract to make face masks in Puerto Rico but guess what?....there's a world shortage of elastic (!)....so I'm all of a sudden only working half the week despite the lucrative contract, due to the rest of business slowing down because of COVID-19. As Jin said..."This whole thing sucks"....

 

[Jin]

policy and science go hand in hand when one is based off the other. In this case there is no evidence that social distancing and staying at home is working. It is unethical to play with people's livelihood off a presumption that the above methods would save lives in exchange for financial ruin of the public. you cant deny the fact that theres multiple studies and evidence backing up the claim there are a substantial amount of people walking around with 0 symptoms and positive for covid regardless of how flawed the methodologies may be. If the public is asking to sacrifice what they've worked years to build then it is the burden of the state to proof the remedies in question will provide tangible results. I do have strong opinions due to the fact that our governor has mandated salons, gyms, etc closed for another few months when we've already been shut down for a month. These business owners are being told "its okay....you wont receive even a $1 in revenue for 1/4 of the year, but continue paying fixed expenses out of your own pocket. It will save lives...maybe".

Regarding policy.

I believe the only two things that need to be balanced (in the short term) are the economy and the healthcare system. I don’t think we have a chance at eradicating the virus (New Zealand did do that via a very strict lockdown) in the US without a vaccine.

Whatever the fatality rate. Doesn’t matter. No matter how many asymptotic people. Doesn’t matter. If the healthcare system can function effectively then we should be satisfied with that and keep the economy going (people free to work).

If the healthcare system is becoming overrun, back to lockdown.

The virus is clearly capable of crippling the healthcare system of any city in the USA.

Which is worse:
Financial Ruin
Or
Ruin of your well being?

Hospitals must remain functional, and not just for Covid patients, for everyone.


————

Social distancing and lockdowns obviously work.

You avoid exposure to the pathogen. By staying away from people.

Same way you avoid getting yellow fever: stay away from a specific type of mosquitoe.

That’s common sense.

What I think you were asking is “what would have happened if we did not go on lockdown? Wouldn’t we have been just fine?”

That’s an aternate reality question. Kind of like “what would my life have been like if I married another person?”. You’ll never know. You can speculate and that’s about it.

 

[tommyguns2]

I think the lockdown and social distancing thing was reasonable with the information we had at the time. Did it "work?" Depends on how you measure success with something like that. I would call it a success, if we measure success by whether it appeared to slow the rate of transmission and allow the health care system to not become overburdened.

If you measure success by the net cost/benefit of lockdown/social distancing vs. the net cost/benefit of no such restrictions, I think it's more difficult to gauge. How many elderly people or otherwise sickly people have been unable to get their normal medical care the past 6 weeks due to those hospital services being shut down? And what impact will that have on those same sickly people over the next 6 months?

What are the economic/health/social costs of all those people out of work over the past 6 weeks, and over the next 6 months.

While some kids are getting excellent home school education from the parents, who value education and are likely working remote at home, do you honestly believe that many kids from the inner city public schools are learning a damn thing at home right now? Will they ever "catch up" from this dislocation in the education process? What are the costs of that?

My "guess" is that continued lockdown and undue social distancing restrictions are a net negative going forward, and thus should be discontinued. I don't see any reason why reasonable social distancing guidelines can't be maintained for some period of time. I've been pretty impressed that when I go out in public, most people appear to be making good faith efforts to comply with the guidelines.

Just remember that once the lockdown stops, there will likely be another uptick in those contracting the virus, and there will be many who will hysterically run around like their hair is on fire. Those people (maybe me, maybe you) who get sick are worthy of sympathy and care, but we have to use our heads and apply a rational net cost/benefit analysis on our decision making. The fact that one cost is more easily calculated than the other does not mean that the "other" cost is negligible.

 

[CFM]

and there will be many who will hysterically run around like their hair is on fire.

Silly people with businesses, paying rent, paying insurance(s), paying utilities, paying worker's compensation and making nothing while paying a mortgage, paying home owners insurance , paying utilities, buying food. All of those other silly people out work, they too, are just for no reason running around hysterically. I wonder why?

 

[Mike_RN]

Silly people with businesses, paying rent, paying insurance(s), paying utilities, paying worker's compensation and making nothing while paying a mortgage, paying home owners insurance , paying utilities, buying food. All of those other silly people out work, they too, are just for no reason running around hysterically. I wonder why?

I think he was referring to the new uptick in cases making those infected run around like their hair is on fire. The ones who will ignore good sense and relax as if the danger is gone because the federal gov't says so. You obviously are seeing a different reality where you live (than Washington, California, New York and New Jersey) but our reality might soon become yours if people rush back to large social gatherings without being careful.

If my state opened today, I'd use my gym only if they checked peoples pulse ox's and temperature before letting them enter. Otherwise, I'd continue to go to work, resupply and stay home. I certainly wouldn't breathe easier because the Fed and/or governor told me I could. We both know they are not ever concerned about our best interest

 

[1bigun11]

When no one knows something, the issue is who gets to decide it. I would let each person decide for themselves when to return to work, to the gym, to reopen their business or to just stay inside till the world is a perfect place and unicorns shit cotton candy. Their choice.

 

[MorganKane]

When no one knows something, the issue is who gets to decide it. I would let each person decide for themselves when to return to work, to the gym, to reopen their business or to just stay inside till the world is a perfect place and unicorns shit cotton candy. Their choice.

Thats the thing, we have a big pandemic research community around the world.
They know something and they are telling the world their recommendations.
The problem is that we have people who doesnt know shit about this commenting all the time like the media, the President and conspiracy bullshitters.

If you read the papers in other countries or even better the CDC equivalents in other countries you see its a very uniform response and opinions from the expertise.
Here people make up their opinion then look for some type of evidence supporting it, instead of looking at all the data or expertise.
Example is the video of the 2 urgent care doctors, why are two urgent care docs who are not in the middle of this shit as many other ER doctors, why do we think their opinion matters more than the ER and ICU docs who are in the middle of this. Why do we take 2 urgent care docs opinion over the worlds pandemic expertise?

Obama even started a task force to deal with this and they worked for several years before Trump fired them.
We have a plan on how to handle this type of outbreak but it wasnt followed. We have seen several problems that was addressed by the plan.

Also, Trumps response was fucked up. Why does all the supporters not hold him accountable.
It took the white house way too long before they started to respond properly and the price for that will be high.
Its amazing how much we have made this into a political issue in this country vs a health crises. The blame goes to both parties.
They both saw an opportunity to advance their agenda and took that over our health. Fuck'em both.

I think that we need to define what success is when it comes to this crises.
I am seeing all the pro lifers saying they are willing to sacrifice lives for the economy. Its a bit weird how much politics that has been injected into this.

The way I see it, is that the opening can't happen fast enough for but it must not happen too fast.
The challenge is to find the cross section between the pandemic community who are watching out for our health vs the politicians who are watching our economy.
I wish my crystal ball was not in the shop so I could tell you what the right answer is.

 

[1bigun11]

The "experts" are the ones who decided, for my own good, that steroids should be illegal; that if Vietnam fell, the world would follow; that Saddam Hussein had nukes; and on and on. Pardon me if I don't blindly accept what any of them have to say.

 

[rawdeal]

The "experts" are the ones who decided, for my own good, that steroids should be illegal; that if Vietnam fell, the world would follow; that Saddam Hussein had nukes; and on and on. Pardon me if I don't blindly accept what any of them have to say.

Some good examples offered here. Those experts were all politicians ... not doctors and scientists.