If those were the only people at risk you'd have a point. I would think that people with lung problems would be the most at risk. Statistically, we are not. Diabetes is. I understand that diet affects diabetes tremendously. Ok, so you have a point there. Emphysema, COPD and asthma are lumped together as the second most at risk group, outside of age. Most people with asthma have it controlled well or easily with an inhaler or two. I can't believe they are statistically comparable to those of us with more serious lung problems. If this data were used in a sensible fashion I don't know if it would show that we're hit harder by this disease or not, we don't have that data available.

Other risk groups do exist that have no bearing on being "fat, lazy, self-indulgent food shovels." And none of that is even the point! Totally apart from the OP, Trump pills make all that almost entirely irrelevant, if you get them when you're first diagnosed positive.

The point in the OP is simple: there is no legal basis to quarantine the healthy. The healthy should not have their rights taken away from them. Her question following that is rhetorical. That's where you came in, correctly; she wasn't being judgmental. She's trying to make a point, and apparently doing a poor job of it.

Of course she shouldn't be able to force anyone to do anything! People shouldn't be responding to the suggestion as though it were serious. The point is the government shouldn't even try to force her (or anyone healthy) to sacrifice rights. Period. The Constitution is not suspended because of CCPvirus. Never has the US responded this way. Other Countries haven't and are doing as well or better than the US.

If those were the only people at risk you'd have a point. I would think that people with lung problems would be the most at risk. Statistically, we are not. Diabetes is. I understand that diet affects diabetes tremendously. Ok, so you have a point there. Emphysema, COPD and asthma are lumped together as the second most at risk group, outside of age. Most people with asthma have it controlled well or easily with an inhaler or two. I can't believe they are statistically comparable to those of us with more serious lung problems. If this data were used in a sensible fashion I don't know if it would show that we're hit harder by this disease or not, we don't have that data available.

Other risk groups do exist that have no bearing on being "fat, lazy, self-indulgent food shovels." And none of that is even the point! Totally apart from the OP, Trump pills make all that almost entirely irrelevant, if you get them when you're first diagnosed positive.

The point in the OP is simple: there is no legal basis to quarantine the healthy. The healthy should not have their rights taken away from them. Her question following that is rhetorical. That's where you came in, correctly; she wasn't being judgmental. She's trying to make a point, and apparently doing a poor job of it.

Of course she shouldn't be able to force anyone to do anything! People shouldn't be responding to the suggestion as though it were serious. The point is the government shouldn't even try to force her (or anyone healthy) to sacrifice rights. Period. The Constitution is not suspended because of CCPvirus. Never has the US responded this way. Others Countries haven't and are doing as well or better than the US.