General COVID-19 Topic

[Darkfrog]

The decisions on how fully things can/should "open" are not based on a single data point (hospitalizations, vaccination rate, etc.). Managing a global pandemic is a ridiculously complex task, and there are people who have dedicated their lives to become experts in how to evaluate the data and provide the best guidance. We should listen to them.

[Braivo]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

There are several other things you're seemingly willfully ignoring to paint as rosy of a false picture here as you can.

You willfully ignore the other side of the equation - the costs of restrictions. None of this is a free ride. Every closure or shut down or restriction has a COST associated with it that must be considered in relation to the benefits. Any yes, I am optimistic. 

42 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I'd suggest you're jumping the gun a bit, as you've consistently chosen to do. 

I will consistently err on the side of less restrictions or government interventions. Always. I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance. 

@DaveP043 and @iacas I don't disagree with your sentiment about being "cautious" a bit longer, but I think that should be up to each person or family to decide how cautious they want to be. If you're an unvaccinated grandmother and your grandson when to Miami for spring break, maybe not see him for a bit, right? Your teen son wants to play basketball but you live with your elderly grandmother? Maybe sit out. Choices. You might not believe this, but I have zero interest in being in a big crowd of people until I get the vax. I am being cautious myself. I have seen a few friends in their 40s have a rough bout with the illness with lingering effects. I don't want it. 

And yes, I am fired up. Right now in Michigan, an obese diabetic with big risk factors can belly up to a bar at Applebee's, throw down his mask, and order a rack of ribs and a beer without any questions asked. But my fit and healthy 15-year-old son has to shove a cotton swab up his nose three times a week to be able to participate in sports with about a 50% chance of cancelation. 

[iacas]

Just now, Braivo said:

You willfully ignore the other side of the equation - the costs of restrictions.

That's complete bullshit. We run an indoor golf academy. Golf courses in PA weren't allowed to be OPEN in April of last year. My wife is a teacher, and my daughter graduates amid this mess. My students and friends include business owners, veterans, medical professionals, factory workers, restaurant owners and workers, and more.

I haven't talked about it much lately because I've weighed the costs and am on board with not Leon Letting this shit. We're close, and we're getting there even faster than predicted. Read back to the early days and you'll find me saying some of the same stuff you're saying now. What changed? Information. Science. Etc. We all know more now. Well, most of us anyway.

Spring break isn't a "necessity" by any reasonable definition. It's well across the line. It's not something that needed to be done, for example. Kids are getting their temperatures checked before they can play soccer? Oh, pity. My college team is spending thousands of dollars per week on testing. My college kids have had a hell of a year, with strange and new learning "situations" and lack of interaction and so on. My daughter, my wife… my friends. I've seen the "costs." Now is too soon to let up, Leon.

3 minutes ago, Braivo said:

I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance.

For f***'s sake: this isn't exclusively about people choosing THEIR OWN RISK tolerance. 

3 minutes ago, Braivo said:

If you're an unvaccinated grandmother and your grandson when to Miami for spring break, maybe not see him for a bit, right?

• Vaccines are not 100% effective.
• We don't know the long-term effects of COVID-19.
• Dumbass spring break students aren't always up front about what stupid things they've done.
• More cases spread = more strains, or more of the "bad" strains spreading.
• Etc.

The negligence of some unknowingly affects other people.

You keep saying things that are literally factually incorrect. There's more to this than hospitalizations. There's more to this than "individual risk tolerance."

3 minutes ago, Braivo said:

But my fit and healthy 15-year-old son has to shove a cotton swab up his nose three times a week to be able to participate in sports with about a 50% chance of cancelation. 

Those youth sports are quite likely just doing their own risk assessment. That's them not wanting to be sued.

[saevel25]

4 minutes ago, Braivo said:

I will consistently err on the side of less restrictions or government interventions. Always. I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance. 

You think that people can adequately assess risk tolerance when that risk influences the lives of other people. To me, the is akin to banning smoking. Those people agreed to the risk of lung cancer and other health negatives for their own addiction. In the end, they did not assess any risk to those around them from 2nd hand smoke. The government needed to come in and stop the threat they posed to other people. I am 100% happy with that intervention.

11 minutes ago, Braivo said:

@DaveP043 and @iacas I don't disagree with your sentiment about being "cautious" a bit longer, but I think that should be up to each person or family to decide how cautious they want to be.

So, they have the right to cause harm to other families? 

Do you realize how viruses spread. Its not like I get to say to the virus, "Hey virus, I am going to be an asshole, please don't spread to other people."

5 minutes ago, iacas said:

Those youth sports are quite likely just doing their own risk assessment. That's them not wanting to be sued.

This. Its why they have to sign waver forms. It's a liability issue. 

[Billy Z]

Modelers Suggest Pandemic Lockdowns Saved Millions From Dying Of COVID-19

---

Researchers cast a backward look to see what might have happened during the first months of the...

Interesting article explaining the value of the lockdowns.

[DeadMan]

Since we're talking about mutations (and Erik told me to share these), two articles that talk about the hypothesis that mutations took place in immunocompromised people infected with COVID:

Extraordinary Patient Offers Surprising Clues To Origins Of Coronavirus Variants

---

Scientists are looking at a possible link between the mutations in the U.K. and South Africa — and those in a patient in Boston who had living, growing virus in his body for five months.

Virus Variants Likely Evolved Inside People With Weak Immune Systems - The New York Times

---

Growing evidence suggests that people with cancer and other conditions that challenge their immune systems may be incubators of mutant viruses.

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by DeadMan

[StuM]

33 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Always. I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance. 

Just remember that some people do not have a choice, that person serving you your meal may be high risk but also have mouths to feed and mortgages to pay and thus may be forced to take a risk.  We need to make choices not only based on risk to us but on risks to others, that is one of the obligations of being a member of society.  I agree pros & cons needs to be looked at and that at times the pendulum may swing too far one way or the other.  The current mega-crowds in Florida may place others at risk at they return to their home and work and could be what perpetuates the needs for those unpleasant lockdowns.

We all want the restrictions to end, just some of us want to make sure we are out of the woods before relaxing too much.

A friend of my told me last night that her niece was at work and another employee said she had a sore throat but was not worried.  Two days later they learn that employee had COVID and now the grandmother of the niece has COVID.  All we are asking is for people to show a little patience while the vaccine rollout continues and have concern for others.

As for the economy and it cost, YES, the lockdowns have hurt but there are signs things will bounce back and IMO maintaining some restrictions a little longer to give more time to get the vaccines out is a short-term cost with long-term benefits.  Also, getting the vaccine will help move faster towards the goal of no restrictions.

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, StuM said:

that is one of the obligations of being a member of society.

There you go. Yes.

[boogielicious]

52 minutes ago, Braivo said:

You willfully ignore the other side of the equation - the costs of restrictions. None of this is a free ride. Every closure or shut down or restriction has a COST associated with it that must be considered in relation to the benefits. Any yes, I am optimistic. 

I will consistently err on the side of less restrictions or government interventions. Always. I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance. 

@DaveP043 and @iacas I don't disagree with your sentiment about being "cautious" a bit longer, but I think that should be up to each person or family to decide how cautious they want to be. If you're an unvaccinated grandmother and your grandson when to Miami for spring break, maybe not see him for a bit, right? Your teen son wants to play basketball but you live with your elderly grandmother? Maybe sit out. Choices. You might not believe this, but I have zero interest in being in a big crowd of people until I get the vax. I am being cautious myself. I have seen a few friends in their 40s have a rough bout with the illness with lingering effects. I don't want it. 

And yes, I am fired up. Right now in Michigan, an obese diabetic with big risk factors can belly up to a bar at Applebee's, throw down his mask, and order a rack of ribs and a beer without any questions asked. But my fit and healthy 15-year-old son has to shove a cotton swab up his nose three times a week to be able to participate in sports with about a 50% chance of cancelation. 

I have two friends lose their moms in the last year, one three weeks ago. I would like you to tell them to their face that their moms weren’t worth the cost of keeping you from a rack of ribs. And no, they weren’t obese, they were just seniors. They took every precaution and were very responsible, but still caught it from irresponsible people. 

For goodness sakes, show some compassion, responsibility and patience. My two brothers and I have done everything to protect our mother. She is finally getting her second does this week. 

I am astounded at the people who only think of themselves.

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, Braivo said:

Always. I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance. 

I believe that individuals should be required to take precautions sometimes, in order to reduce the risk they pose to others.  You might choose to drive at 120 mph, and accept your risk, but you put others at risk.  You might choose to drive home after a boozy night in a tavern, accepting that you might run your car into a tree, but you also risk running into a car full of innocent people.  You might choose to smoke, and accept the risks for future disease, but if you do that in an enclosed space you increase my risk of future disease.  Individuals do not always get to choose their own risk tolerance.

Over the past year it has been clearly demonstrated that we, as a society, cannot trust all individuals to act in a way that respects and minimizes the risks to others.  Rules are absolutely needed to force the more careless among us to observe the minimum required precautions, for the good of society as a whole.

[boogielicious]

1 minute ago, DaveP043 said:

I believe that individuals should be required to take precautions sometimes, in order to reduce the risk they pose to others.  You might choose to drive at 120 mph, and accept your risk, but you put others at risk.  You might choose to drive home after a boozy night in a tavern, accepting that you might run your car into a tree, but you also risk running into a car full of innocent people.  You might choose to smoke, and accept the risks for future disease, but if you do that in an enclosed space you increase my risk of future disease.  Individuals do not always get to choose their own risk tolerance.

Over the past year it has been clearly demonstrated that we, as a society, cannot trust all individuals to act in a way that respects and minimizes the risks to others.  Rules are absolutely needed to force the more careless among us to observe the minimum required precautions, for the good of society as a whole.

Excellent post.

[Darkfrog]

19 minutes ago, StuM said:

We all want the restrictions to end, just some of us want to make sure we are out of the woods before relaxing too much.

Exactly. Sometimes I think there is a mischaracterization that those of us who advocate for caution and scientific due process want to keep things locked down indefinitely. My wife's dad has been in a long term care facility for a stroke for 3 years now. She wasn't able to visit him in person for over 6 months, and after that, only able visit briefly and talk to him through a window. She used to be able to take him out and drive around to see things break up the monotony of his days in the care home. My kids haven't seen their grandfather in over a year now. I want my kids back in school, for their sake and mine. I don't want to have to wait in line to get into a grocery store to buy a bag of flour. I don't want to have to get a Covid test everytime I have to go onsite for work. I want to see the businesses in my neighborhood thrive. But I don't want any of this at the cost of more unnecessary dead people.

6 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

They took every precaution and were very responsible, but still caught it from irresponsible people. 

My cousin and his kids took every precaution and they all ended up getting Coronavirus from his ex-wife who took zero precautions and got the virus. Their symptoms were very mild and they all recovered (longterm issues, who knows), however they all could have easily transmitted it to my older and less healthy aunt and uncle, etc. Thankfully they didn't.

[ChetlovesMer]

13 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

I have two friends lose their moms in the last year, one three weeks ago. I would like you to tell them to their face that their moms weren’t worth the cost of keeping you from a rack of ribs. And no, they weren’t obese, they were just seniors. They took every precaution and were very responsible, but still caught it from irresponsible people. 

For goodness sakes, show some compassion, responsibility and patience. My two brothers and I have done everything to protect our mother. She is finally getting her second does this week. 

I am astounded at the people who only think of themselves.

I honestly don't even get why were still having this discussion. 

What are we asking? Just wear your mask when you are indoors with anyone aside from your household. Get your food and go off and eat it alone or outside. Wash your hands often. Get vaccinated when its available to you. I really fail to see why that's so hard. If we just do that we'll get there. 

This isn't about government. This isn't about freedom. This is about doing very simple stuff to protect people who may not be as strong as you are. It's science not rocket science. 

[Elmer]

1 hour ago, Braivo said:

You willfully ignore the other side of the equation - the costs of restrictions. None of this is a free ride. Every closure or shut down or restriction has a COST associated with it that must be considered in relation to the benefits. Any yes, I am optimistic. 

I will consistently err on the side of less restrictions or government interventions. Always. I believe people should choose their own risk tolerance. 

Other countries had leadership, a plan, a common goal and buy in from govt & citizens. And look where they are now!

1 hour ago, iacas said:

For f***'s sake: this isn't exclusively about people choosing THEIR OWN RISK tolerance. 

• Vaccines are not 100% effective.
• We don't know the long-term effects of COVID-19.
• Dumbass spring break students aren't always up front about what stupid things they've done.
• More cases spread = more strains, or more of the "bad" strains spreading.
• Etc.

The negligence of some unknowingly affects other people.

 

What is going to be the long term health issues for those who have caught this?
What will that do to our hospitals and healthcare system when in ten years all these spring breakers have upper respiratory issues?

16 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

I have two friends lose their moms in the last year, one three weeks ago. I would like you to tell them to their face that their moms weren’t worth the cost of keeping you from a rack of ribs. And no, they weren’t obese, they were just seniors. They took every precaution and were very responsible, but still caught it from irresponsible people. 

For goodness sakes, show some compassion, responsibility and patience. My two brothers and I have done everything to protect our mother. She is finally getting her second does this week. 

I am astounded at the people who only think of themselves.

It is amazing during WWI & WWII, we as a society, donated metal, rubber, bough war bonds, turned lights out, went meatless all in an effort.

Now people think it is the worst thing to have to wear a mask while they get a latte!
These people and their privilege is astounding!

[StuM]

53 minutes ago, Elmer said:

Other countries had leadership, a plan, a common goal and buy in from govt & citizens. And look where they are now!

I'm not disagreeing with your overall view but not all countries have faired as well as some think.  I have a client in France and she tells me the French are generally "Anti-Vaccine" and they are now it yet another lock-down (I think the 3rd lock-down for them).  That is why we need as many as possible to get vaccinated, so this can come to an end.

Number of COVID patients in intensive care in France at highest level this year

---

The number of people with COVID-19 in French intensive care units rose by 84 on Tuesday to a new 2021 high of 4,634, health ministry data showed. But the number of new infections, at 14,678, was the lowest since Jan. 3...

 

 

[StuM]

1 hour ago, Darkfrog said:

My wife's dad has been in a long term care facility for a stroke for 3 years now. She wasn't able to visit him in person for over 6 months, and after that, only able visit briefly and talk to him through a window. She used to be able to take him out and drive around to see things break up the monotony of his days in the care home. My kids haven't seen their grandfather in over a year now. I want my kids back in school, for their sake and mine. I don't want to have to wait in line to get into a grocery store to buy a bag of flour. I don't want to have to get a Covid test everytime I have to go onsite for work. I want to see the businesses in my neighborhood thrive. But I don't want any of this at the cost of more unnecessary dead people.

I can sympathize with you and your family.  My father is in Assisted living and we had very limited visitations (6' apart with plexiglass in between) for a part of the lockdown and no visitation at other times.  Fortunately he has now had both of his vaccine shots and we are able to take him out to visit with us again.  This past weekend we took him out for brunch and prior to that took him to Olive Garden for lunch with his younger sisters.  I'm not sure we can undo the damage done by the isolation but we will try our best.  He will be 92 in June I feel fortunate that he survived long enough for us to begin reconnecting with him and feel for those who will not get the opportunity I have now.  Hopefully you & your kids can see your father/grandfather soon.

[Billy Z]

1 hour ago, Elmer said:

Other countries had leadership, a plan, a common goal and buy in from govt & citizens. And look where they are now!

While I agree with a lot of points in your post, and this is only a small portion of that post, but I am guessing this may not be an appropriate part of that post. It is hedging on politics. Although, considering length of time, I do think it is just shy of a miracle that we do have a vaccine, and that vaccine has been given to a large portion of society as we speak.

[Elmer]

2 hours ago, Billy Z said:

While I agree with a lot of points in your post, and this is only a small portion of that post, but I am guessing this may not be an appropriate part of that post. It is hedging on politics. Although, considering length of time, I do think it is just shy of a miracle that we do have a vaccine, and that vaccine has been given to a large portion of society as we speak.

Other countries have returned to some form of normalcy because they all bought into the effort and saw it through to the goal.

Without getting into politics, there needed to be a clear plan of action and message.
Govt  and the states are just like a project manager, who has to coordinator numerous independent contractors towards a common goal. Not have the contractors working independently and tripping over each other to get their supplies. 
We didn't really have that, we have silly political theater.
I am glad we are as close as we are, but we could have been her sooner.
And knowing how close we are surprised me that there are those who would jeopardize it.