Reopening America ?

[Sweetwater]

They just announced opening dates :
Georgia--- June 22
Florida ----June 24
NYC-------May 27
This is because of their stats. I am so confused. This is not reasonable nor fair.
Here in Ohio we start May 1 . This is Government rules. More stress on the economy.
Will the states do what is suggested ? We need positive input here. Can they
follow safe guidelines ? Seems too long.

Sponsored

 

[Redundant]

You have no "right" to safety other than what you provide for yourself and what the civil society demands, (life, liberty, and property not taken by others unjustly)

You would be much safer if you are not 50lbs overweight, but the government doesn't force you to lose weight.

You would be safer if you didn't smoke, but the government doesn't stop you from smoking.

You would be much safer if you didn't drink to excess or take drugs, but we still have easy access to them and little government intervention.

I'm sure I could go on and on.

So I believe I have right to keep my job. I believe I have a right to partake in commerce with another willing citizen. I believe I have a right to go to my local park and enjoy the fresh air. But government has removed these rights from millions. Why are you in support of my rights being taken away, while using your "rights" as the reason to take mine away?

I support your right to stay home and protect yourself in any manner you wish.

Why won't you give me the same consideration?

I again wrote a long diatribe which I erased to ask this question. Like you, I am repeating myself, but as far as I can see, no-one has answered. Do you agree that to reopen the economy, we need to have a concrete plan, from the federal government, enacted largely by the states, to testing, isolating, contact tracing and quarantining? It requires more testing than we are capable of right now and it requires hiring many more people to contact trace. Again, I attached an interview on how that would look.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...testing-really-look-like-top-expert-explains/

 

[Redundant]

I again wrote a long diatribe which I erased to ask this question. Like you, I am repeating myself, but as far as I can see, no-one has answered. Do you agree that to reopen the economy, we need to have a concrete plan, from the federal government, enacted largely by the states, to testing, isolating, contact tracing and quarantining? It requires more testing than we are capable of right now and it requires hiring many more people to contact trace. Again, I attached an interview on how that would look.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...testing-really-look-like-top-expert-explains/

BTW, to express a concern I have that plays more along the lines of your position, I am very worried about the current administration, which has totalitarian tendencies, to use this period of time to take rights away from us. I realized after I closed my browser, that all of my comments are based on, let's say, rational thought and positions. Also, positions of trust, that the government(s), largely states, are largely trying to do what is best for their citizens. I don't think Florida, Georgia or South Dakota are doing that. They are making political decisions, not moral or scientific decisions.

We don't have Marshall law, we are free to move about and there is a lot of trust that our fellow citizens in our communities are doing the best they can to not get or spread the virus. Something like 80% of people, regardless of political party are on board with the approach taken so far and while anxious to get back to work, they and I want a new normal that is as safe as possible.

I know you want that too. I think we are arguing the same point perhaps, but with different views of how that will look.

Stay safe.

 

[pbojanoski]

Do you agree that to reopen the economy, we need to have a concrete plan, from the federal government, enacted largely by the states, to testing, isolating, contact tracing and quarantining?

I believe we need exactly what I said in my previous post and that included testing. And no, I don't believe it needs to come from the Federal government. The Federal government can provide support where needed, but does not need to formulate and run the plan for each state.

1. Keep vulnerable protected.
2. Allow all people to protect themselves and to stay home if that is their choice.
3. Use businesses to enforce all accepted mitigation techniques. (social distancing, masks, disinfection of surfaces, personal hand washing, etc.)
4. Open less affected areas first. Over a period of days, continue to open other areas that are not clearly "hotspots".
5. Test all people that present to a physician, whether or not it is for a COVID-19 related visit.
6. As flair ups present, reinforce mitigation, but use business closures and lockdowns as a last resort. Business closures should be limited to time required to disinfect surfaces and verify mitigation techniques.
7. Continue and expand antibody testing to get a clear indication of the extent of infection and the real mortality and complication rates.
8. Continue to update mitigation recommendations as new information present itself.
9. Continue to explore and verify treatment techniques.

I do not believe it is worth the risk to the economy to demand more testing than we can do now or can do over the next couple of weeks. I believe we can ramp up testing while at the same time prudently reopen the economy using the steps above or some other guidelines that make sense to minimize the risk of spread.

Will you now do me the courtesy of answering my questions from my previous post?

Why can government force me to stay in my home because of COVID-19, but doesn't stop me from personal harm that results in cancer or heart disease?

I believe I have right to keep my job. I believe I have a right to partake in commerce with another willing citizen. I believe I have a right to go to my local park and enjoy the fresh air. But government has removed these rights from millions. Why are you in support of my rights being taken away, while using your "rights" as the reason to take mine away?

I support your right to stay home and protect yourself in any manner you wish. Why won't you give me the same consideration?

 

[Ken7]

BTW, to express a concern I have that plays more along the lines of your position, I am very worried about the current administration, which has totalitarian tendencies, to use this period of time to take rights away from us. I realized after I closed my browser, that all of my comments are based on, let's say, rational thought and positions. Also, positions of trust, that the government(s), largely states, are largely trying to do what is best for their citizens. I don't think Florida, Georgia or South Dakota are doing that. They are making political decisions, not moral or scientific decisions.

We don't have Marshall law, we are free to move about and there is a lot of trust that our fellow citizens in our communities are doing the best they can to not get or spread the virus. Something like 80% of people, regardless of political party are on board with the approach taken so far and while anxious to get back to work, they and I want a new normal that is as safe as possible.

I know you want that too. I think we are arguing the same point perhaps, but with different views of how that will look.

Stay safe.

So let me get this straight, the current administration (assuming you mean the big bad Orange Man) has totalitarian tendencies, but the states where operating under a Governor's orders, not the President, where they've arrested a father for playing catch in an open field with nobody around, where you can't buy paint or carpets at your local small retailer but you can have an abortion, where you can't get your doctor to prescribe HCQ if you're not in a hospital and a list that could go on and on, are actually blue states but those are not totalitarian tendencies?

How exactly does this work?

 

[zhackwyatt]

BTW, to express a concern I have that plays more along the lines of your position, I am very worried about the current administration, which has totalitarian tendencies, to use this period of time to take rights away from us.

Me too. I'm worried about all the government infringing upon our rights. The previous president and the president before that had totalitarian tendencies as well. (I could go even farther back.) What powers are given to "your" guy, are then available to his/her successor as well. Fortunately the Constitution doesn't give that much power to the office of President, unfortunately, no one seems to give a flip and have violated it over and over.

 

[Sweetwater]

Minnesota announces to open 20,000 non retail bussineses April 27

 

[Nak]

I've watched this thread since it started. First off, let me say that almost everyone on here is clearly concerned with the greater good--obviously except for the trolls we all know about, right LYT?. Everyone has a different idea how to get there, but please remember that with only a few exceptions everyone here cares what happens to others. Just because you disagree with how someone else wants to save others, you both still want to save others. Please, please remember that.

Also, please remember there is a difference between politicians and people. Many politicians on both sides say whatever they need to say to get re-elected. Just because someone falls for their spiel, does not mean they are a bad person. If you truly believe in what you espouse, you will do more to change the world when you convince your opponents you are right, than you will by insulting and degrading your opponents. In fact, when you insult and degrade and believe in your superiority over your opponents, you are just proving that your values don't matter to you--winning does. When you respect your opponents and both try to learn from them and influence them you show that you actually care about your values. Politicians by and large care about winning, not the values they claim to espouse. Be a person, not a politician.

OK. Now onto the subject at hand. The media wants to scare you, it's how they make money. Sometimes they are telling the truth--when the truth is scary. Sometimes they lie--when they can make more money lying. It's up to you to look at the raw data and make up your own mind.

Here are three studies. They were the very first studies that actually tried to study the actual Covid-19 virus mortality rates. New York just published a similar study that I saw on the news. I don't have a link to it yet... It's similar in that it shows that mortality is considerably less than the press would have you believe. However, the New York study shows a higher mortality rate than the other studies. That's OK, there will be different results to different studies. I wouldn't even say these studies are the end-all answer. They are studies that start to give us a feel for what is going on. Prior to these studies we had nothing that was data or science driven. Just "Oh my God, this is horrible." Without studies of a representative section of the population, we are driving blind. Anyways, these are the first. I hope that most will consider Oxford, The New England Journal Of Medicine, Stanford, and USC to be reputable sources. Better than CNN, NBC and FOX anyways...

New England Journal of Medicine
Oxford
USC/Stanford

Please, study the actual data and discuss that, not what the fear mongers have to say. Maybe they're right. If you believe it, make up your own mind on it rather that just what you are told to believe. Discuss your thoughts with others here; it's a great place to do that. Come to your conclusions via rational thought; decide what YOU think makes sense. But come to that conclusion after thinking about what other views are on the same data. Respect other's opinions, even if they are wrong you can learn from them. "We learn nothing from those we agree with; we can only learn from those we disagree with. Whether we learn that we are right or that we are wrong. Or more likely, we learn that the truth lies somewhere in between."

 

[pbojanoski]

I've watched this thread since it started. First off, let me say that almost everyone on here is clearly concerned with the greater good--obviously except for the trolls we all know about, right LYT?. Everyone has a different idea how to get there, but please remember that with only a few exceptions everyone here cares what happens to others. Just because you disagree with how someone else wants to save others, you both still want to save others. Please, please remember that.

Also, please remember there is a difference between politicians and people. Many politicians on both sides say whatever they need to say to get re-elected. Just because someone falls for their spiel, does not mean they are a bad person. If you truly believe in what you espouse, you will do more to change the world when you convince your opponents you are right, than you will by insulting and degrading your opponents. In fact, when you insult and degrade and believe in your superiority over your opponents, you are just proving that your values don't matter to you--winning does. When you respect your opponents and both try to learn from them and influence them you show that you actually care about your values. Politicians by and large care about winning, not the values they claim to espouse. Be a person, not a politician.

OK. Now onto the subject at hand. The media wants to scare you, it's how they make money. Sometimes they are telling the truth--when the truth is scary. Sometimes they lie--when they can make more money lying. It's up to you to look at the raw data and make up your own mind.

Here are three studies. They were the very first studies that actually tried to study the actual Covid-19 virus mortality rates. New York just published a similar study that I saw on the news. I don't have a link to it yet... It's similar in that it shows that mortality is considerably less than the press would have you believe. However, the New York study shows a higher mortality rate than the other studies. That's OK, there will be different results to different studies. I wouldn't even say these studies are the end-all answer. They are studies that start to give us a feel for what is going on. Prior to these studies we had nothing that was data or science driven. Just "Oh my God, this is horrible." Without studies of a representative section of the population, we are driving blind. Anyways, these are the first. I hope that most will consider Oxford, The New England Journal Of Medicine, Stanford, and USC to be reputable sources. Better than CNN, NBC and FOX anyways...

New England Journal of Medicine
Oxford
USC/Stanford

Please, study the actual data and discuss that, not what the fear mongers have to say. Maybe they're right. If you believe it, make up your own mind on it rather that just what you are told to believe. Discuss your thoughts with others here; it's a great place to do that. Come to your conclusions via rational thought; decide what YOU think makes sense. But come to that conclusion after thinking about what other views are on the same data. Respect other's opinions, even if they are wrong you can learn from them. "We learn nothing from those we agree with; we can only learn from those we disagree with. Whether we learn that we are right or that we are wrong. Or more likely, we learn that the truth lies somewhere in between."

Couldn't have said it better @Nak. We need to focus on issues and a constructive path forward. Blaming politicians, parties, or one another will do none of us any good. But we do need to honestly discuss real issues and to not only challenge the person you may disagree with, but also challenge your own thought process and preconceived ideas. All constructive ideas deserve consideration. Everyone has their own perspective. It is always good to put yourself in the shoes of others to help get the full picture.

Thanks again.

 

[Orangefirefish]

There has to be an achievable balance for the future. What if a vaccine is never feasible since the virus keeps mutating?
Here is how I envision a way forward. The vulnerable population (which tends to be a smaller proportion of the general workforce) continue to self-isolate. That’s fine- as long as they remain at home, there’s not really much at risk for these individuals, and less impact on the macro-economy.
The others that are ready to return to work and businesses- follow social distancing and hygiene guidelines, and wear a face mask all the time when around others. This should be a legal requirement.

We have many antibody studies come out with results which suggest a much lower fatality rate than initially thought, at highest 0.5% from what I’ve seen based on the New York study. If face masks, proper hygiene and safe distancing can reduce the infection rate to even half of what it is currently (which I don’t doubt for a second that face masks could do) we have a real shot reducing the general fatality rate to below that if what the flu causes. In fact if you think one person could easily infect six or seven individuals, just sneezing in public, the benefit might be even greater. This is a twofold benefit: the bigger impact being the ill individuals significantly reduce the likelihood of spreading respiratory diseases, and then the lesser impact on the non-ill population.

People like to point to South Korea for their testing helping in their fight, but my observation is that, having visited there myself a few times, 1) people have a huge sense of responsibility for their fellow citizens, and 2) pretty much everyone and their grandma wears a face mask in public. You can’t change American culture overnight, but I do think the latter aspect is a huge difference maker in parts of Asia and in hindsight would have been critical for many densely populated areas. For the elderly and vulnerable, remaining at home will prevent them from infection, and for the returning younger workforce, their chances of infection are far lower, not to mention that their chances to surviving are significantly higher to begin with. Asymptomatic Or weakly symptomatic carriers were the ones that probably caused the bulk of the damage- not sick or sick enough to be sidelined at home, and not distancing from others. Face masks change that factor.

My thought is that the common cold and influenza started this way anyway, the general population had to acquire immunity over time. We are just not ready as a population, antibody wise. One day this will just be yet another virus in the Coronavirus family- something that everyone has been exposed to at some point, especially while young. Do we have a vaccine for the cold? Do we bring everything to a grinding halt because someone died from the flu or the cold? I don’t mean to be insensitive but when is the last time the news featured someone that died from that? If that were the sensational topic every hour, gee we would all have a right to turtle at home too.

 

[Ken7]

I've watched this thread since it started. First off, let me say that almost everyone on here is clearly concerned with the greater good--obviously except for the trolls we all know about, right LYT?. Everyone has a different idea how to get there, but please remember that with only a few exceptions everyone here cares what happens to others. Just because you disagree with how someone else wants to save others, you both still want to save others. Please, please remember that.

Also, please remember there is a difference between politicians and people. Many politicians on both sides say whatever they need to say to get re-elected. Just because someone falls for their spiel, does not mean they are a bad person. If you truly believe in what you espouse, you will do more to change the world when you convince your opponents you are right, than you will by insulting and degrading your opponents. In fact, when you insult and degrade and believe in your superiority over your opponents, you are just proving that your values don't matter to you--winning does. When you respect your opponents and both try to learn from them and influence them you show that you actually care about your values. Politicians by and large care about winning, not the values they claim to espouse. Be a person, not a politician.

OK. Now onto the subject at hand. The media wants to scare you, it's how they make money. Sometimes they are telling the truth--when the truth is scary. Sometimes they lie--when they can make more money lying. It's up to you to look at the raw data and make up your own mind.

Here are three studies. They were the very first studies that actually tried to study the actual Covid-19 virus mortality rates. New York just published a similar study that I saw on the news. I don't have a link to it yet... It's similar in that it shows that mortality is considerably less than the press would have you believe. However, the New York study shows a higher mortality rate than the other studies. That's OK, there will be different results to different studies. I wouldn't even say these studies are the end-all answer. They are studies that start to give us a feel for what is going on. Prior to these studies we had nothing that was data or science driven. Just "Oh my God, this is horrible." Without studies of a representative section of the population, we are driving blind. Anyways, these are the first. I hope that most will consider Oxford, The New England Journal Of Medicine, Stanford, and USC to be reputable sources. Better than CNN, NBC and FOX anyways...

New England Journal of Medicine
Oxford
USC/Stanford

Please, study the actual data and discuss that, not what the fear mongers have to say. Maybe they're right. If you believe it, make up your own mind on it rather that just what you are told to believe. Discuss your thoughts with others here; it's a great place to do that. Come to your conclusions via rational thought; decide what YOU think makes sense. But come to that conclusion after thinking about what other views are on the same data. Respect other's opinions, even if they are wrong you can learn from them. "We learn nothing from those we agree with; we can only learn from those we disagree with. Whether we learn that we are right or that we are wrong. Or more likely, we learn that the truth lies somewhere in between."

Here here, well said!

Here in NY we were just informed that random antibody testing showed about 21% of those tested in NYC had the virus at some point and most didn’t know it. Statewide the number was almost 14%. If more testing is in line with these numbers as other pockets of testing seem to indicate, the actual death rate will be well below 1%. That might wind up being not much much different than a bad flu season.

Aren’t facts both refreshing and liberating?

 

[pbojanoski]

There has to be an achievable balance for the future. What if a vaccine is never feasible since the virus keeps mutating?
Here is how I envision a way forward. The vulnerable population (which tends to be a smaller proportion of the general workforce) continue to self-isolate. That’s fine- as long as they remain at home, there’s not really much at risk for these individuals, and less impact on the macro-economy.
The others that are ready to return to work and businesses- follow social distancing and hygiene guidelines, and wear a face mask all the time when around others. This should be a legal requirement.

We have many antibody studies come out with results which suggest a much lower fatality rate than initially thought, at highest 0.5% from what I’ve seen based on the New York study. If face masks, proper hygiene and safe distancing can reduce the infection rate to even half of what it is currently (which I don’t doubt for a second that face masks could do) we have a real shot reducing the general fatality rate to below that if what the flu causes. In fact if you think one person could easily infect six or seven individuals, just sneezing in public, the benefit might be even greater. This is a twofold benefit: the bigger impact being the ill individuals significantly reduce the likelihood of spreading respiratory diseases, and then the lesser impact on the non-ill population.

People like to point to South Korea for their testing helping in their fight, but my observation is that, having visited there myself a few times, 1) people have a huge sense of responsibility for their fellow citizens, and 2) pretty much everyone and their grandma wears a face mask in public. You can’t change American culture overnight, but I do think the latter aspect is a huge difference maker in parts of Asia and in hindsight would have been critical for many densely populated areas. For the elderly and vulnerable, remaining at home will prevent them from infection, and for the returning younger workforce, their chances of infection are far lower, not to mention that their chances to surviving are significantly higher to begin with. Asymptomatic Or weakly symptomatic carriers were the ones that probably caused the bulk of the damage- not sick or sick enough to be sidelined at home, and not distancing from others. Face masks change that factor.

My thought is that the common cold and influenza started this way anyway, the general population had to acquire immunity over time. We are just not ready as a population, antibody wise. One day this will just be yet another virus in the Coronavirus family- something that everyone has been exposed to at some point, especially while young. Do we have a vaccine for the cold? Do we bring everything to a grinding halt because someone died from the flu or the cold? I don’t mean to be insensitive but when is the last time the news featured someone that died from that? If that were the sensational topic every hour, gee we would all have a right to turtle at home too.

I think we are on the same page @Orangefirefish. A couple of clarifications I would add:

I think we need to be reasonable on the legally required to mitigate thing. I don't think we want to see people hauled away in cuffs for a lapse in judgement in wearing a mask or inadvertently getting too close to someone. Maybe a small fine if anything. I would really like to see businesses enforce it and not necessarily be a legal requirement.

I agree that I think this virus, especially now that it seems to be mutating, will probably effect all of us sooner or later. A vaccine probably will not be effective or at least not anywhere near 100% effective. This is another reason why I believe we can't keep crippling the economy as long as the medical system is not overwhelmed.

Thanks!

 

[pbojanoski]

A doctor weighs in on where we are in the COVID-19 fight. I'm not saying this is the final word, but it is worth examining seriously.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthc...in-stop-the-panic-and-end-the-total-isolation

Sponsored