Just to be fair, not decreasing the number of cases is not the same as not reducing deaths. The hope was that more deaths could be reduced by not overwhelming the hospitals all at once leaving sick patients untreated. Thus flattening the curve saves live without reducing the total number of cases.
But his is now moot anyway. Just ramp up the cure and make sure medicine is practiced by DOCTORS and not politicians.
Yes, I get it. But they've moved the goal posts, otherwise they'd have us open again. The original objective, we were told, was to "flatten the curve" we knew this meant so the hospitals could be prepared and not overrun at one time. We've done that. They didn't even need all the precautionary measures we put in place. The USS Comfort only had 189 patients. Tent hospitals across the country were never needed. Clearly, our medical system is able to handle patients right now and yet, still shut down. So it went from flattening the curve objective, to slowing the spread. Well, now some places like Virginia, are talking about TWO YEARS of this. They are basically now saying we can't treat our neighbors like they are disposable (MN Gov) and we are selfish if we aren't staying inside or social distancing because no one should die again.
Two years? That's insane. If the virus turns out to be completely horrifying, one can consider such measures (or, preferably, other measures that are not extremely vulnerable to exploitation). But saying two years without extreme evidence that everyone agrees 100% upon is insane, and locking down fully is not viable for anything but an extremely short period of time.
A lot of people and organizations on the left and in the deep state seem to exploit this to the extreme.
It is as if they wanted the virus to spread as much as possible early on, such as with:
Several Democrat politicians holding rallies in Chinatowns such as with https://i.maga.host/M4Zidha.jpg , Nancy Pelosi, and others
Leftists (and maybe even the WHO) raging against Trump's travel ban against China in late January and as I recall Trump's ban against Europe in February.
And then, once the virus has spread to the USA, exploit it to its fullest and pretend they were not on "team spread-it-everywhere".
Even a few days ago, when Nancy Pelosi claimed that Trump's travel ban against China was not sufficient, a reporter asked whether she supported some form of travel ban against China, and as I recall, she did not quite want to answer that question....................
I hope my other comments in this thread will end up aging very poorly. I really, really hope they will age poorly.
In case my comments do age well, I fear this is one problem with the reddit-like system with upvotes and downvotes, at least reg. deviating opinions (and sometimes shill teams, though I would believe that is not the case here); downvotes are typically not meant to be "agree/disagree", but are just about always used in that way, at least for some cases.
I think the virus is an unknown. Not certain it only affects the elderly and weak. It may be very little, but it might also turn out to be something.
Lockdowns are insanely expensive, and there is no point in not dying to the disease if you instead die of starvation and famine. If you go the lockdown route, you at least need massive financial support for people, especially those prevented from working. But that is insanely expensive and has other huge costs and problems.
Masks are a very cheap approach (very cheap in many ways) and should definitely be used, since masks do not hinder moving around, working, shopping, etc. And even crappy, cheap homemade masks can help a little bit, especially against droplets. They are also widely used in East Asia.
Reg. the virus being an unknown: I made this comment some days ago, and I am still really curious as to what other people think:
I am hearing/reading increasing rumours that the Chinese coronavirus is causing blood clots, which affects not just the lungs but also other parts of the body such as the brain and the heart.
However, these rumours mostly come from new sources that I do not trust. One source that I do not know whether to trust is this one:
Is this unfounded rumours, intentional fake news (possibly from China), or something possibly real? Might the Chinese coronavirus be among other aspects a blood-affecting virus, possibly not a lung-focused virus?
Please do keep in mind that I am a layman, not a doctor, reg. this.
“Masks are a very cheap approach (very cheap in many ways) and should definitely be used, since masks do not hinder moving around, working, shopping...”
Oh no another mask shill. Ok wear your mask. You do that. You’re helping.
The bug has to spread throughout our population and it has to run its course. Let the healthy folks catch it and isolate the weak, at-risk. Obama ignored the swine flu and it ran its course.
Masks are a placebo. They make people feel safe while providing almost no real protection. People wearing masks are more likely to break social distancing and actually get infected.
I completely overlooked that part, I apologize. There's another article that seems to be using similar sources, though I do not know whether they are more or less trustworthy: https://archive.vn/OCV3D .
It's based on a case series of FIVE patients over 2 weeks in NYC, who happened to be COVID positive (mild cases). Certainly way too soon to draw any conclusions about causality, or to base policy on extreme cases.
If a patient is merely given supportive treatment, instead of treating for the infection, all kinds of bad things can happen to the body. This is typical of viral diseases, generally.
If someone you care about gets this infection, insist on early testing and treatment with a drug cocktail designed to, at minimum, inhibit viral replication. Do not let these mfers kill your own.
Yeah, this could be solved easily. Quarantine the elderly and keep assisted living facilities on lockdown.
Don’t quarantine healthy people indefinitely.
Originally, this was about staying home to “flatten the curve”
It was not “Stay home until no one ever dies again.”
Get America back to work.
Just to be fair, not decreasing the number of cases is not the same as not reducing deaths. The hope was that more deaths could be reduced by not overwhelming the hospitals all at once leaving sick patients untreated. Thus flattening the curve saves live without reducing the total number of cases.
But his is now moot anyway. Just ramp up the cure and make sure medicine is practiced by DOCTORS and not politicians.
Yes, I get it. But they've moved the goal posts, otherwise they'd have us open again. The original objective, we were told, was to "flatten the curve" we knew this meant so the hospitals could be prepared and not overrun at one time. We've done that. They didn't even need all the precautionary measures we put in place. The USS Comfort only had 189 patients. Tent hospitals across the country were never needed. Clearly, our medical system is able to handle patients right now and yet, still shut down. So it went from flattening the curve objective, to slowing the spread. Well, now some places like Virginia, are talking about TWO YEARS of this. They are basically now saying we can't treat our neighbors like they are disposable (MN Gov) and we are selfish if we aren't staying inside or social distancing because no one should die again.
Two years? That's insane. If the virus turns out to be completely horrifying, one can consider such measures (or, preferably, other measures that are not extremely vulnerable to exploitation). But saying two years without extreme evidence that everyone agrees 100% upon is insane, and locking down fully is not viable for anything but an extremely short period of time.
A lot of people and organizations on the left and in the deep state seem to exploit this to the extreme.
It is as if they wanted the virus to spread as much as possible early on, such as with:
And then, once the virus has spread to the USA, exploit it to its fullest and pretend they were not on "team spread-it-everywhere".
Even a few days ago, when Nancy Pelosi claimed that Trump's travel ban against China was not sufficient, a reporter asked whether she supported some form of travel ban against China, and as I recall, she did not quite want to answer that question....................
I hope my other comments in this thread will end up aging very poorly. I really, really hope they will age poorly.
In case my comments do age well, I fear this is one problem with the reddit-like system with upvotes and downvotes, at least reg. deviating opinions (and sometimes shill teams, though I would believe that is not the case here); downvotes are typically not meant to be "agree/disagree", but are just about always used in that way, at least for some cases.
I think the virus is an unknown. Not certain it only affects the elderly and weak. It may be very little, but it might also turn out to be something.
Lockdowns are insanely expensive, and there is no point in not dying to the disease if you instead die of starvation and famine. If you go the lockdown route, you at least need massive financial support for people, especially those prevented from working. But that is insanely expensive and has other huge costs and problems.
Masks are a very cheap approach (very cheap in many ways) and should definitely be used, since masks do not hinder moving around, working, shopping, etc. And even crappy, cheap homemade masks can help a little bit, especially against droplets. They are also widely used in East Asia.
Reg. the virus being an unknown: I made this comment some days ago, and I am still really curious as to what other people think:
“Not certain it only affects the elderly and weak.”
What the fuck?
It nearly exclusively kills the fat, sick and old. We know this.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
“Masks are a very cheap approach (very cheap in many ways) and should definitely be used, since masks do not hinder moving around, working, shopping...”
Oh no another mask shill. Ok wear your mask. You do that. You’re helping.
The bug has to spread throughout our population and it has to run its course. Let the healthy folks catch it and isolate the weak, at-risk. Obama ignored the swine flu and it ran its course.
what's a mask shill?
Masks are a placebo. They make people feel safe while providing almost no real protection. People wearing masks are more likely to break social distancing and actually get infected.
So far. Hopefully that is all it will be. Hopefully.
You are linking a post that uses WaPo as their source.
Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
I completely overlooked that part, I apologize. There's another article that seems to be using similar sources, though I do not know whether they are more or less trustworthy: https://archive.vn/OCV3D .
I did find this online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32294809 , though I do not know the significance of it (it might just be a summary).
Without the actual data used to come to their conclusion it's all suspect. The plural of anecdote is not evidence.
I saw this. I don't know enough about the stroke thing yet, but it seems very strange to me. I want more information on these stroke victims.
It's based on a case series of FIVE patients over 2 weeks in NYC, who happened to be COVID positive (mild cases). Certainly way too soon to draw any conclusions about causality, or to base policy on extreme cases.
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/929345
Thanks for this info. Appreciate it!
If a patient is merely given supportive treatment, instead of treating for the infection, all kinds of bad things can happen to the body. This is typical of viral diseases, generally.
If someone you care about gets this infection, insist on early testing and treatment with a drug cocktail designed to, at minimum, inhibit viral replication. Do not let these mfers kill your own.