BBC: China pneumonia outbreak: COVID-19 Global Pandemic

[Larry]

Right.  We shouldn't have "burdened state X with shutdowns".  Because State X's deaths (with the shutdown) weren't as bad as the worst place in the country.  

[The 12th Commandment]

1 minute ago, Larry said:

Right.  We shouldn't have "burdened state X with shutdowns".  Because State X's deaths (with the shutdown) weren't as bad as the worst place in the country.  

Furthermore, cases in those unburdened states would not have increased one iota if they hadn't shut down.

[twa]

9 minutes ago, KAOSkins said:

Furthermore, cases in those unburdened states would not have increased one iota if they hadn't shut down.

 

If you shut down large gatherings, mass transit and use social and work distancing how much would it increase?

 

one iota is not a valid starting point.

[The 12th Commandment]

3 minutes ago, twa said:

 

If you shut down large gatherings, mass transit and use social and work distancing how much would it increase?

 

one iota is not a valid starting point.

I don't want to have a discussion on acceptable deaths.   Not one iota is the only acceptable amount.  Doing everything possible to achieve that, and accepting that no plan is perfect and there will be some anyway is the starting and ending point.

Edited April 19, 2020 by KAOSkins

[twa]

Just now, KAOSkins said:

I don't want to have a discussion on acceptable deaths.   Not one iota is the only acceptable amount.  Doing everything possible to achieve that, and accepting that no plan is perfect and there will be some is the starting and ending point.

 

the flattening the curve does not reduce deaths except from hospital overload(which we are below)

 

the deaths acceptable or not will continue till a effective treatment or vaccine is applied, just as deaths from shutdowns will continue.

[spjunkies]

 

[The 12th Commandment]

2 minutes ago, twa said:

 

the flattening the curve does not reduce deaths except from hospital overload(which we are below)

 

the deaths acceptable or not will continue till a effective treatment or vaccine is applied, just as deaths from shutdowns will continue.

Except from hospital overload is the whole point.  Minimal deaths are unavoidable so of course they will continue.  Opening up the floodgates for commerce will most likely overload hospitals and increase deaths.  

 

I'm probably not a good candidate for this thing, having MS and lungs that were abused for far too long, I suspect you're probably not the ideal candidate either.  If I do get it and I have to go to the hospital, I don't want them to be distracted by too many other patients.  

[Larry]

I suppose it makes as much sense as the "Any disease that (with a shutdown) doesn't kill as many people as the worst years of the flu, should have been ignored" meme.  

 

But again, I have to wonder.  What's the payoff in pushing these lies?  

 

A disaster hit the US.  

The US reacted.  Mostly, in an intelligent manner.  (With notable exceptions.)  

It is guaranteed that these responses saved some lives.  (Although, how many, will probably never be known.)  

I'd say it's likely that they also reduced the economy some.  (Not guaranteed.  Even a slight chance it would have been worse.  But I'd say it's likely.)  

 

So, where's the political benefit of attacking the measres which saved lives, after it's been done?  

 

I mean, there's been a fire.  The firefighters rescued a couple people from the burning building.  The fire's not even out, yet.  And there's an entire movement complaining that the fire department should have just stood there.  

 

[SkinInsite]

You know what will prevent death from the shut down, a robust social safety net.

 

But we can't have that because socialism or something.

 

All the while we gave billions to corporations.

[twa]

2 minutes ago, KAOSkins said:

Except from hospital overload is the whole point.  Minimal deaths are unavoidable so of course they will continue.  Opening up the floodgates for commerce will most likely overload hospitals and increase deaths.  

 

I'm probably not a good candidate for this thing, having MS and lungs that were abused for far too long, I suspect you're probably not the ideal candidate either.  If I do get it and I have to go to the hospital, I don't want them to be distracted by too many other patients.  

 

I'm a great candidate ...to die.

I think the only box I don't check is diabetes

 

in areas not overly burdened healthcare wise we can loosen up and restrict again as needed,we already have a significant % working as essential.

 

Quote

 

Job losses cause extreme suffering. Every 1 percent hike in the unemployment rate will likely produce a 3.3 percent increase in drug-overdose deaths and a 0.99 percent increase in suicides, according to data from the National Bureau of Economic Research and the medical journal Lancet.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/14/we-must-count-the-deaths-from-shutdowns-as-well-as-from-coronavirus/

 

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

I mean, there's been a fire.  The firefighters rescued a couple people from the burning building.  The fire's not even out, yet.  And there's an entire movement complaining that the fire department should have just stood there.  

 

 

I agreed with the initial measures, which were sold as flattening the curve and as necessary due to the unknowns...if you expect reasonable responses you must in turn be reasonable.

 

 

[The 12th Commandment]

6 minutes ago, twa said:

 

I'm a great candidate ...to die.

I think the only box I don't check is diabetes

 

in areas not overly burdened healthcare wise we can loosen up and restrict again as needed,we already have a significant % working as essential.

 

 

 

 

 

I agreed with the initial measures, which were sold as flattening the curve and as necessary due to the unknowns...if you expect reasonable responses you must in turn be reasonable.

 

 

I pretty much knew that, why I like your ornery self.  

 

With testing, I'm for it.  Locally, today was essential worker testing in my county and it is free with no questions asked.  That needs to happen everywhere the virus is present.  Lujan-Grisham appears, so far at least, to have responded very well.  We're also part of a federal study to track spread.  We have a very low incidence per capita and they want to see why.  I know, via the empty streets, it's because we are staying home a lot.  

 

As necessary to avoid hospital overload.   We need to keep it up until we learn more and testing becomes a national priority.

[SkinInsite]

What's stopping all the red States from opening all businesses tomorrow? It's not like the federal government is going to stop them. If the right wants to reopen so bad just go ahead and do it.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

55 minutes ago, twa said:

 

the flattening the curve does not reduce deaths except from hospital overload(which we are below)

 

the deaths acceptable or not will continue till a effective treatment or vaccine is applied, just as deaths from shutdowns will continue.

If less people get it before there is a vaccine won’t that result in less deaths, hospital overload or not?

Edited April 19, 2020 by CousinsCowgirl84

[twa]

3 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

If less people get it before there is a vaccine won’t that result in less deaths, hospital overload or not?

 

good luck with that with the asymptomatic rates this seems to have, which also bodes ill for a effective vaccine from what I hear(though the antibody issues are still unclear)

[spjunkies]

14 minutes ago, SkinInsite said:

What's stopping all the red States from opening all businesses tomorrow? It's not like the federal government is going to stop them. If the right wants to reopen so bad just go ahead and do it.

 

Just heard a news update on the radio saying that some states are planning to do this tomorrow. 

[88Comrade2000]

19 minutes ago, SkinInsite said:

What's stopping all the red States from opening all businesses tomorrow? It's not like the federal government is going to stop them. If the right wants to reopen so bad just go ahead and do it.

They should receive no help then if reopening leads to another wave. The only plus would be more Trumpsters dying.

[Die Hard]

1 minute ago, Rdskns2000 said:

They should receive no help then if reopening leads to another wave.

 

Except you absolutely know they will. That's how the WH will reward them for following protocol.

[Larry]

4 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

They should receive no help then if reopening leads to another wave. The only plus would be more Trumpsters dying.

 

1)  I have a problem with the notion of withholding federal assistance based on a state's politics.  

 

2)  As opposed to all the assistance the Feds have been giving the states, now?  

[Hooper]

13 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

Just heard a news update on the radio saying that some states are planning to do this tomorrow. 

Will be interesting to see if it leads to states protecting their borders in some way. Nothing would surprise me. “Build that wall” might take on a whole new meaning soon if cases explode in red states. 

[LadySkinsFan]

Acceptable deaths = collateral damage. Either is unacceptable and horrendous. And immoral.

[twa]

6 minutes ago, Hooper said:

Will be interesting to see if it leads to states protecting their borders in some way. Nothing would surprise me. “Build that wall” might take on a whole new meaning soon if cases explode in red states. 

 

many already are, they are identifying and requiring self quarantine for out of staters

1 minute ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Acceptable deaths = collateral damage. Either is unacceptable and horrendous. And immoral.

 

lockdowns create collateral deaths/damage

 

managing risks is a factor in most things.

[Larry]

Notice what's going on, here.  

 

Closing down a non-essential business, during an epidemic, kills people.  

 

Opening it up, does not.  

[Die Hard]

8 minutes ago, twa said:

managing risks is a factor in most things.

 

Indeed. And whose specific interests you serve best.

 

Who is this president beholden to?

[twa]

1 minute ago, Larry said:

Notice what's going on, here.  

 

Closing down a non-essential business, during an epidemic, kills people.  

 

Opening it up, does not.  

 

Did someone say that?

 

both result in deaths

1 minute ago, Die Hard said:

 

Indeed. And whose specific interests you serve best.

 

Who is this president beholden to?

 

who are the states beholden to?

[FanboyOf91]