Why Severe Social Distancing Might Result In More Deaths: What media and policymakers won't tell us

[ToddNotTodd]

One might note that this is a DISCUSSION forum.

Yes, and we’re DISCUSSING how stupid the article is that you posted.

I tend to post articles which I find interesting and believe are worth discussing. Sometimes I mostly agree with the articles I post; sometimes I mostly disagree. All times I believe the subject worthy of discussion.

From what I see, you post articles that push a particular agenda, regardless of whether said articles have any basis in fact...

 

[hedrick]

Who are you nominating to run the gamut and risk severe health complications or death for the sake of the economy? Even healthy, fit people in their 20s and 30s are dying. You don't have to be old, out of shape, or chronically ill to die of this disease.

Shelter-in-place is the best we have until a vaccine is developed and/or a cure is found. A true quarantine where people stay home except for absolute essentials is the best way to minimize exposures and deaths. Unfortunately, we're still not doing that in this country. Even in states with shelter-in-place orders, companies are demanding workers come in for non-essential projects, churches members are congregating for services, people in grocery stores are failing to keep their distance, and people are not following rules prohibiting gatherings with other households and relatives who live in a different home. Until the quarantine is taken seriously by everyone and enforced by law, the virus will spread and people will die. More people breaking quarantine will endanger everyone. The people who develop coronavirus from acting foolish will also hog up space and resources needed by others suffering the usual heart attacks, broken ankles, cancer and burns, so even more people will die. I don't know about you but I have people in my family who need regular medical treatment and will not be able to get it if the resources are used up and the hospitals are full. Sending more people out there to risk their health and very lives will only exacerbate the problem. Sit tight, stay home, and wait for the vaccine or for hydrochloraquine to be approved.

I agree that every state should have stay at home. In NJ it's being reasonably effective. In my condo complex almost no one is going to work. The State has ways to report it if your company is forcing you to come in. Police are breaking up gatherings (typically weddings).

NY deaths seem to be stabilizing. Maybe NJ -- it will take another couple of days to know. I'm not convinced things have to get stricter here. In states that still have beaches open, yes. Maybe in other states more people are being forced to come into work than should be.

Take a look at Coronavirus in the U.S.: Latest Map and Case Count. In most of the hotspot states, new cases are decreasing. Unfortunately, new hot spots are developing. It could well be that those are in areas that haven't been taking it as seriously. Since the hot spots are being successful, I wouldn't think there's any excuse for new hot spots if everyone is playing by the same rules.

 

[Hank77]

I agree that every state should have stay at home. In NJ it's being reasonably effective. In my condo complex almost no one is going to work. The State has ways to report it if your company is forcing you to come in. Police are breaking up gatherings (typically weddings).

NY deaths seem to be stabilizing. Maybe NJ -- it will take another couple of days to know. I'm not convinced things have to get stricter here. In states that still have beaches open, yes. Maybe in other states more people are being forced to come into work than should be.

Take a look at Coronavirus in the U.S.: Latest Map and Case Count. In most of the hotspot states, new cases are decreasing. Unfortunately, new hot spots are developing. It could well be that those are in areas that haven't been taking it as seriously. Since the hot spots are being successful, I wouldn't think there's any excuse for new hot spots if everyone is playing by the same rules.

The problem is that many places haven't had any testing going on so like my county was/is they really don't know how many cases they have. When they do get tested there are already many cases.
Even though my county took ALL steps feasible by March 17th testing is showing that we have our own little hotspot with 113.5 cases per 100,000, [we have a total population of <8,000] and the results of all the 100 tests they did over 2 wks ago are not in yet.

 

[Fantine]

I've seen the Federalist Society's list of Supreme and Federal Court judicial nominees--that's enough for me. They continually prioritize business and the elites over the rest of America. They want to change our country into an oligarchy.

I distrust their motivation re: Covid especially because it is written by "Anonymous." Any guesses who that might be? My guesses would be 1) Steven Miller, 2) Tom Cotton, or 3) Jared Kushner.

Tom Cotton might be my first choice--because the very first words at the top of the page are "Wuhan Virus."

Need you know more to discredit this completely?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Who are you nominating to run the gamut and risk severe health complications or death for the sake of the economy? Even healthy, fit people in their 20s and 30s are dying. You don't have to be old, out of shape, or chronically ill to die of this disease.

Shelter-in-place is the best we have until a vaccine is developed and/or a cure is found. A true quarantine where people stay home except for absolute essentials is the best way to minimize exposures and deaths. Unfortunately, we're still not doing that in this country. Even in states with shelter-in-place orders, companies are demanding workers come in for non-essential projects, churches members are congregating for services, people in grocery stores are failing to keep their distance, and people are not following rules prohibiting gatherings with other households and relatives who live in a different home. Until the quarantine is taken seriously by everyone and enforced by law, the virus will spread and people will die. More people breaking quarantine will endanger everyone. The people who develop coronavirus from acting foolish will also hog up space and resources needed by others suffering the usual heart attacks, broken ankles, cancer and burns, so even more people will die. I don't know about you but I have people in my family who need regular medical treatment and will not be able to get it if the resources are used up and the hospitals are full. Sending more people out there to risk their health and very lives will only exacerbate the problem. Sit tight, stay home, and wait for the vaccine or for hydrochloraquine to be approved.

Thank you for your opinion. The article however is not about the economy.

Please note that the virus has already been loosed. The question is how best to minimize the number of deaths.

Since you raised the matter of the economy it must be said that the term "economy" is simply a term which describes how we are able to sustain our lives, both individually and as a nation. The global economy describes how the planet full of people manages to sustain all those people. When an economy collapses people die, lots of people. That's just a FACT. The twentieth century is full of examples where economic collapse led to millions of deaths, millions upon millions of deaths. People must work to sustain themselves. People must work even when it is inconvenient and even painful. An economy is not really about luxuries or stylish living though there is certainly some of that. An economy is about people doing things which support life for themselves and others. Turning off an economy results in certain death. In truth, the result of turning off the American economy for an extended period will result in far more deaths than the virus itself.

As state earlier though, the OP isn't really about the economy, it's about how to minimize the number of deaths. The OP offers an opinion which differs from the dominant group-think of the day. For that reason I found it both interesting and worthy of consideration. The author is neither entirely wrong nor entirely right, IMHO.

 

[durangodawood]

...Vast majority of fatalities would be old people or people with severe handicaps already that it would probably be way more profitable to get rid of than keep around.

However most people object to that. Some feel like it is not the most.....Christian thing you could do.

We can see how "pro life" is just a political wedge.

"Pro life" so quickly abandoned when its my life that impacted. Sorry, old people!

 

[wing2000]

The so-called "medical and scientific experts" to whom you refer have not been very forthcoming about what the best course of action for this extended period of time should be.

There are a lot of unknowns with this pandemic. What we do know from experience it is overwhelming health systems and will do so even more if social distancing is not implemented everywhere.

You might recall that initially they simply recommended a two-week shutdown. Now, that two weeks has been extended to at least a month. Some places have extended things even longer, much longer.

Citation? ...and btw, there are states that are still not "shut down"....