Can you point us to some studies that have developed this level of loss of life sue to the shutdown ?However, other medical authorities are telling us that almost that many will die BECAUSE of the lockdowns.
That's not even remotely correct. The fatality rate if you're infected is in the range of 1% -- 50 times higher.That is to say, the odds of dying from the CCP virus are .02% IF you contract it. Many will not contract it, so the denominator is even larger.
How will the majority avoid contracting COVID ?That is to say, the odds of dying from the CCP virus are .02% IF you contract it. Many will not contract it, so the denominator is even larger.
As I said--and contrary to what you said--an "easing" isn't the issue.What is the lssue ?
It's not my plan and I resent your cutesy wording. There will be deaths from the virus in any case. Did you not get that in the post where I mentioned statistics?And, if you're not averse to it, tell us what level of human loss of life you are willing to endure in your plan ?
So ... what limitation, if any, of loss of human loss of life should we be shooting for ?As I said--and contrary to what you said--an "easing" isn't the issue.
Getting us out of most, if not all, of the lockdowns is the issue. Anyone can tinker around the edges--that's what "easing" means to people who advocate doing just that--but tokenism is not what's needed.
It's not my plan and I resent your prejudicial wording. There will be deaths from the virus in any case. Did you not get that in the post where I mentioned statistics?
We have no perfect way out of this. Every competent observer, every expert, knows this. The dispute is over the best course of action when there are no really great ones!
Actually, I was giving you the opportunity to outline and advocate your ideal plan, ... but, no matter.
So ... what limitation, if any, of loss of human loss of life should the US be shooting for ?
I agree and if anyone watched the hearing yesterday they know that Republicans, Democrats, and the medical experts ALL agreed on one thing. We MUST be able to do contact tracing and testing.We have no perfect way out of this. Every competent observer, every expert, knows this. The dispute is over the best course of action when there are no really great ones!
We closed to keep hospitals from overflowing, from going beyond capacity. Almost all hospitals in the country are below capacity, many empty. The University of Kentucky has lost over 170 Million dollars because they cancelled everything to be ready for the onslaught of Covid patients, of which they have had 17.To the OP; your post is a stab the back to people such as myself working on the front lines in the medical field.
We are not ready to open, not even close. It's not about those who will not come down with the symptoms, but rather about who they will unknowingly spread it to.
I will continue to open my mouth in favor of continuing stay-at-home orders.
NYC couldn't shut down the subways, nobody owns cars. When you go to NY and see cars you are seeing tourists. Anyway... 0.02% of this country have contracted and died from Covid 19. Remove the over 65 crowd and you have 16,000 left which is 0.004%. Those are REAL numbers... but we are destroying the economy over it.That is to say, the odds of dying from the CCP virus are .02% IF you contract it. Many will not contract it, so the denominator is even larger.
Both sides have some good arguments. NYC is the epicenter of the virus in the US (and probably the world) because Cuomo and De Blasio did not restrict the NYC subway to essential travel. De Blasio was still encouraging people to come to public functions late in the game, even later than Pelosi with her infamous invitation to come to Chinatown in SF. Masks were not required on the subway until a few weeks ago. Then there's Cuomo's disastrous order for nursing homes to accept Covid patients from hospitals.
That's a different picture than in South Dakota, where the average distance between people is measured in miles. We're a big country and one size does not fit all.
But for governors to lock down beaches and other outdoor areas is baseless. To prevent churches from open-air services is absurd. To empty prisons of violent criminals and then fill the cells with businessmen trying to feed their families and avoid ruination is itself criminal.
So I support intelligent civil disobedience. Not all the rules should be broken at this point, but many should. All the models were wrong. It's past time to get back to work.
BTW, this is a compelling video. Watch to the end. Slight language warning.
California Police STAND DOWN After Marine Vet
California Police STAND DOWN After Marine Vet Challenges Their Integrity
We closed to keep hospitals from overflowing, from going beyond capacity. Almost all hospitals in the country are below capacity, many empty. The University of Kentucky has lost over 170 Million dollars because they cancelled everything to be ready for the onslaught of Covid patients, of which they have had 17.
We have succeeded keeping hospitals from going over capacity... it's time to go back to work. But we won't because this is now political, and insane political. In Ocean County NJ you can surf but not swim, job on but not sit on a beach. Is there science to that? Yes... sitting on a beach causes your body to create vitamin D-3 which might actually keep you healthy. In Michigan going to your neighbors home was a crime? Riding in a Kayak was ok but a motor boat was against the law? Politics...
In the end, 0.0... that is the % of people in this country that have contracted and died from this virus. Open the country, we are ready!
And if you infect the entire population, twenty times that will die.Again... based on 82,000 deaths and a population of 330 million... 0.02% of the country has contracted and died from Covid 19.
I wasn't aware that people over 65 didn't count.If you remove the over 65's that have passed from this, you are left with 16,000 people or 0.004%.
That's what we're supposed to be doing: getting the infection rate down low enough that testing, tracing, and less onerous distancing measures will keep the outbreak from getting out of control. That's what all of our efforts should be focused on -- something that would be a lot easier if we had any leadership coming from the Federal government. But if we relax measures without getting to that situation, we'll be right back where we started -- uncontrolled spread of a deadly disease in an almost entirely susceptible population -- except that we will have done immense economic damage for no gain.We are closing the country and destroying the economy, creating an unemployment situation that will seriously hurt people in the months to come... when we could protect the elderly and get back to work.
What are you talking about? Every state I know of is making plans for relaxing restrictions. Here in Massachusetts, restrictions will probably start loosening in a couple more weeks. Who gains politically from keeping people out of work?But we won't because there is now politics behind all this.
And if you infect the entire population, twenty times that will die.
You appear to be relatively new to this august forum. Well, I hate to deliver the sobering news, and this may not be news at all, but this place is a veritable petri dish for the propagation of nonsense, some of it amusing (e.g. the flat-earthers), some of it downright dangerous (e.g. the anti-vaxxers).You're delusional if you think 0.0% contracted and died from this virus..........
Excellent point, that bears repeating. I am a mere layman, but this seems this like precisely the factor that should drive the trade-off between opening and remaining shutdown.That's what we're supposed to be doing: getting the infection rate down low enough that testing, tracing, and less onerous distancing measures will keep the outbreak from getting out of control.