COVID-19 Outbreak Information Updates (Reboot) [over 150.000,000 US cases (est.), 6,422,520 US hospitilizations, 1,148,691 US deaths.] (6 Viewers)

[St. Widge]

Quick google search says no, and anyway, I would prefer to think that Hobbes would be above it all. And your* not going to find a C&H expert around these parts.

Hobbes does have a high horse.

Off to F9 for a C&H expert.

 

[DaveXA]

Is that what you're calling it?

What is the right thing, exactly?

And he hasn't really defined what exactly that right thing is. I'm not sure what the proposal is supposed to be.

 

[DaveXA]

Hobbes does have a high horse.

Off to F9 for a C&H expert.

I ❤ C&H.

 

[jboss]

Ok, I am going to bow out for a while... I'm one of those people that can see merit and make sense in numbers, math, and science being accepted and dismissed by both/either sides of this.... I know many people here are like minded, and only subscribe to one end of the spectrum.... It's just driving me bananas that we are making decisions and forming realities based on half the data being preached as undeniable, and the other half being completely ignored.... seemingly based mostly on what a person or group of persons has already preconceived to be truth. Just wish we could get past that, and start doing the right thing, and not the fright thing.

The affects of this pandemic are gonna be here whether you want them to or not. Health wise, economically, socially, all of it. What do you expect to happen by having certain opinions on how this virus should be handled? Just because you're "one of those people that can see merit and make sense in numbers" yada yada yada what do you think the whole world is just gonna start going back to the way things were because what you think about it? I don't really see what you're trying to accomplish here. We're all (see: planet Earth) still gonna be in the same boat for the foreseeable future. The sooner we all get with the, again, very simple program the sooner this is all over.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

And he hasn't really defined what exactly that right thing is. I'm not sure what the proposal is supposed to be.

That's definitely one of the more frustrating parts of this. We can't even get people to just wear a mask b/c they believe it's a hoax or no big deal.

 

[jboss]

That's definitely one of the more frustrating parts of this. We can't even get people to just wear a mask b/c they believe it's a hoax or no big deal.

That's what I don't get about all the pushback about this. These people are in a self-defeating cycle. Virus is overblown/hoax > don't wear mask > numbers spike > shutdown continues > frustration mounts....because > virus is overblown/hoax > etc. etc. I just don't see the end game in trying to brush this pandemic aside, especially how simple it should be at this point to contain.

 

[Infoman]

And he hasn't really defined what exactly that right thing is. I'm not sure what the proposal is supposed to be.

I didn't claim to have an answer or know exactly what needs to be done... nor would I ever... In general, I consider the right thing to be - removing personal feelings, ideals, preconceived notions, fear tactics, and politics from this equation.... and use all available data to make informed and regionally beneficial decisions that take all options into consideration - and not just the data that fits a specific point of public view one way or the other....

The fright thing - which is what we are doing now - will only serve to draw opposition, resentment, and eventually the public will shed that fear and replace it with defiance and anger when they are faced with the choice of living life or being told to fear for it.

 

[DaveXA]

I didn't claim to have an answer or know exactly what needs to be done... nor would I ever... In general, I consider the right thing to be - removing personal feelings, ideals, preconceived notions, fear tactics, and politics from this equation.... and use all available data to make informed and regionally beneficial decisions that take all options into consideration - and not just the data that fits a specific point of public view one way or the other....

The fright thing - which is what we are doing now - will only serve to draw opposition, resentment, and eventually the public will shed that fear and replace it with defiance when they are faced with the choice of living life or fearing for it.

But the numbers aren't saying what you're claiming they say. There has been reasonable pushback on what you're saying regarding the numbers. There are 200k+ dead, millions suffering from the loss of their loved ones and millions suffering from symptoms short of death, and a lot of people still suffering from the effects months after first being exposed. The data tells us this. It also tells us that without mitigation, hospitals fill up and can easily be overrun in hot spots.

The treatments are slowly but surely improving and and vaccines are being developed, but clearly, we aren't out of the woods yet. I think a reasonable response is to continue mitigation in a way that is responsible. Wear masks, socially distance and avoid large gatherings for long periods of time. That's not fear mongering or doing too much.

What you seem to be suggesting is that the numbers aren't enough to merit worrying about. But the numbers clearly indicate otherwise.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I didn't claim to have an answer or know exactly what needs to be done... nor would I ever... In general, I consider the right thing to be - removing personal feelings, ideals, preconceived notions, fear tactics, and politics from this equation.... and use all available data to make informed and regionally beneficial decisions that take all options into consideration - and not just the data that fits a specific point of public view one way or the other....

The fright thing - which is what we are doing now - will only serve to draw opposition, resentment, and eventually the public will shed that fear and replace it with defiance and anger when they are faced with the choice of living life or being told to fear for it.

Why do you think we didn't do exactly that?

Stay at home as much as you can, IF you have to go out wear a mask and stay at least 6 feet away from others

As far as the "fright thing" - okay you don't agree with what we are doing now, suppose there's a second plan that you agree is the "right thing", you agree that this is the perfect thing to nip this in the bud and get things back to normal as quickly as possible

What should be done when people flat out refuse to do the "right thing"?

when they scream from the rooftops that the "right thing" is the WRONG thing? and the STUPID thing? and the POLITICAL thing? and the UNAMERICAN thing?

What then?

 

[Infoman]

But the numbers aren't saying what you're claiming they say. There has been reasonable pushback on what you're saying regarding the numbers. There are 200k+ dead, millions suffering from the loss of their loved ones and millions suffering from symptoms short of death, and a lot of people still suffering from the effects months after first being exposed. The data tells us this. It also tells us that without mitigation, hospitals fill up and can easily be overrun in hot spots.

The treatments are slowly but surely improving and and vaccines are being developed, but clearly, we aren't out of the woods yet. I think a reasonable response is to continue mitigation in a way that is responsible. Wear masks, socially distance and avoid large gatherings for long periods of time. That's not fear mongering or doing too much.

What you seem to be suggesting is that the numbers aren't enough to merit worrying about. But the numbers clearly indicate otherwise.

Where? When have hospitals ever been overrun in the US? Maybe close to concerning in the early onset... and not close since?

Of course we should still be taking mitigating measures... Masks, Distancing, Hand Washing, No Super Large gatherings.... That makes sense...

The CDC has repeatedly said, they don't have a handle on the "real numbers" of infections, and that those numbers are likely 10x or more higher than being reported... because there are huge numbers of infected people that are not getting tested / asymptomatic / both.

The mortality average age for Covid is literally no more concerning than the average life expectancy age of the average American pre-Covid... IMO.

Let's use all the data, not just the data that fits what we want to believe, or that stokes the most fear / panic.


As I said... I don't have the answer... I don't know that there is a one size fits all solution here... but I know that ignoring the data and science that doesn't fit into your point of view, and stoking fear is not the answer here. And that has to change before we do have a viable solution, or even a workable plan.

 

[brandon8283]

There is no reliable data to say with 100% definiteness that long term effects are a given (or even likely), nor can they be extrapolated... because their is literally no long term data with a novel virus. We have less than 8 months of data on this.

First, this depends on your definition of "long-term." If you had a cold and it lasted 6 months rather than a typical 2 weeks, would you agree that you had some long-term effects from your cold?

So if COVID-19 is supposed to last a couple of weeks, but there are effects 8 months later, is that not long term effects?

And besides all of that, we know when some types of damage are permanent. Brain damage, for example, is frequently permanent. Scarring is permanent. We don't need to wait 10 years down the road to know if scarring is permanent. We know it is right now.

We can see these signs already with COVID-19.

In general, I consider the right thing to be - removing personal feelings, ideals, preconceived notions, fear tactics, and politics from this equation.... and use all available data to make informed and regionally beneficial decisions that take all options into consideration - and not just the data that fits a specific point of public view one way or the other....

You literally never do this. You take everything you see and try to fit it to your preconceived worldview. You have not listened to science at all since this started.

When you get around to removing your personal feelings from this, you will see that "all available data" points directly towards wearing a mask and social distancing. That's pretty much what we're doing now. There's no shuttered cities.

 

[Infoman]

You literally never do this. You take everything you see and try to fit it to your preconceived worldview. You have not listened to science at all since this started.

When you get around to removing your personal feelings from this, you will see that "all available data" points directly towards wearing a mask and social distancing. That's pretty much what we're doing now. There's no shuttered cities.

Of course we should still be taking mitigating measures... Masks, Distancing, Hand Washing, No Super Large gatherings.... That makes sense...

Also... anytime you want, just have a look at these...

LIVE NOW! Times Square Cams - EarthCam

EarthCam presents an extensive collection of live webcams, featuring the most exciting views of New York City's famous Times Square. For the past century, Times Square has been a mecca for music and the arts and has truly become a must-see for millions of tourists every year. Our webcams are the...

www.earthcam.com

Maybe "shuttered" is a strong word... but it's not that far off.

This is why I don't typically respond to you... you don't read what's posted, or you are willfully ignoring what I post and summarizing nonsense.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Where? When have hospitals ever been overrun in the US? Maybe close to concerning in the early onset... and not close since?

It's close now in several hospitals in Wisconsin.

Some hospitals forced to wait-list or transfer patients as Wisconsin's coronavirus surge continues

Hospitals have been especially overwhelmed in Green Bay, Wausau and the Fox Valley, which are among the state's latest COVID-19 hotspots.

www.jsonline.com

It's been close several times all across the county when measures are relaxed, and when they are tightened, the hospitalization rate goes down.

I think this goes against your point. It shows that restrictions actually help keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed.

Of course we should still be taking mitigating measures... Masks, Distancing, Hand Washing, No Super Large gatherings.... That makes sense...

That's pretty much what you seem to be arguing against since that is all that pretty much everyone here is advocating for, so what's your disagreement?

The CDC has repeatedly said, they don't have a handle on the "real numbers" of infections, and that those numbers are likely 10x or more higher than being reported... because there are huge numbers of infected people that are not getting tested / asymptomatic / both.

I don't think this helps your case as much as you think it does. Let's say 75 million people have had some contact with Covid-19 instead of the current number of 7.5 million. If we do that, I think it's fair to say that we can up the actual number of COVID deaths to 260K which is in line with the increase of deaths over expected deaths statistically. If the virus is that contagious, then you need to reach close to 90% of the infected population to reach herd immunity. But for the sake of being generous, let's say it's a more modest 75%. That means 247 million Americans need to get it before we reach herd immunity. That is 3.3 times 75 million. So extrapolate that out to the number of COVID deaths 260k, that would be 858,000 deaths related to COVID-19.

Does that not seem like a number worth taking serious mitigating steps -- like mask mandates and a ban on large indoor gatherings until we either get great therapeutics or a vaccine?

The mortality average age for Covid is literally no more concerning than the average life expectancy age of the average American pre-Covid... IMO.

I mean, it's your right to your opinion, but I'd rather not kill someone who has an expected life of an additional 11 years just because I wanted to go to a concert this one year of my life or have a beer in a bar.

Let's use all the data, not just the data that fits what we want to believe, or that stokes the most fear / panic.

I agree, use all the data -- what is the public policy value of close to a million lives that would otherwise expect to live on average another 11-20 years.

As I said... I don't have the answer... I don't know that there is a one size fits all solution here... but I know that ignoring the data and science that doesn't fit into your point of view, and stoking fear is not the answer here. And that has to change before we do have a viable solution, or even a workable plan.

I don't think most people are ignoring the science, I think they might be placing a higher value on the lives of people who are at risk than you are, or they place a lower value on getting a beer at bar or seeing a live sporting event for 1 year than you do.

 

[Taurus]

Agreed, but it's to be expected right? We can't trust them... We have to control them... right?

Apparently, yes.

Or, y'know, we could've not started a peeing contest between politics and science and had everyone on the same page from the start. That would've been cool.

 

[jboss]

Where? When have hospitals ever been overrun in the US? Maybe close to concerning in the early onset... and not close since?

Of course we should still be taking mitigating measures... Masks, Distancing, Hand Washing, No Super Large gatherings.... That makes sense...

The CDC has repeatedly said, they don't have a handle on the "real numbers" of infections, and that those numbers are likely 10x or more higher than being reported... because there are huge numbers of infected people that are not getting tested / asymptomatic / both.

The mortality average age for Covid is literally no more concerning than the average life expectancy age of the average American pre-Covid... IMO.

Let's use all the data, not just the data that fits what we want to believe, or that stokes the most fear / panic.


As I said... I don't have the answer... I don't know that there is a one size fits all solution here... but I know that ignoring the data and science that doesn't fit into your point of view, and stoking fear is not the answer here. And that has to change before we do have a viable solution, or even a workable plan.

So why do you think we're doing all this? Let's use all the data and science....to what? What has to change exactly? You keep mentioning the data, which I'm sure agencies like the CDC have access to, but what are you suggesting? The CDC is intentionally misusing or altering the data to keep the lockdown going? Because a lot of what you're saying sounds like the same old stuff we've been hearing from a certain part of the population ad naseum since this started.