Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Government Response To The Coronavirus


James Daulton

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

The protests were outside and mask usage was quite good. How does that have anything to do with gathering indoors with friends and families, likely without a mask?

Oh I forgot.  Everyone at the BLM riots wore masks.  Silly me.  I apologize 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jobarules said:

Ones done outdoors, one indoors. It just shows that this spreads indoors and not as much outdoors. That being said I agree 100% with you about the optics and messaging not being consistent. 

So why was i hearing about how horribly dangerous the Florida beaches were?  Those are outside.  Heck im hearing about it right now!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Oh I forgot.  Everyone at the BLM riots wore masks.  Silly me.  I apologize 

Yes, most did. Go back and look at the footage of the protests and even the riots that happened afterwards, most wore masks. Many of the organized protests required masks and handed them out to anyone who didn’t.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Biff84 said:

Yes, most did. Go back and look at the footage of the protests and even the riots that happened afterwards, most wore masks. Many of the organized protests required masks and handed them out to anyone who didn’t.

Youre joking right.  Who's footage?  Should I check out what fox news's footage shows?  Would that be ok?

Edited by supermike80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biff84 said:

So during a period where four major holidays happen, the hospitalizations more than tripled. And you’re using this as an argument that the holidays weren’t the cause?

Seems like that would be exactly what you’d expect from having one holiday after the next. What is your explanation of the continual growth during these months if it has nothing to do with holiday gatherings?

No. It is not. You would have rapid accelerations if it was associated with singular dates of substantially increased gatherings. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

No. It is not. You would have rapid accelerations if it was associated with singular dates of substantially increased gatherings. 

 

You don’t consider hospitalizations tripling over 2 months a rapid acceleration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Biff84 said:

They did great developing vaccines but there was no sign that the distribution was going to be any better than testing or any other part of their pandemic response. The initial rollout was horrible and there didn’t seem to be any plan.

link

There were 1.5 million vaccines given on the day Biden took over.

How many were given yesterday, 2 months later? 1.7 million. 

Yes, the rolling average is moving up and they are getting out there but the initial rollout was hardly horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

No. I consider it an almost straight line increase. 

And why was it a straight line increase? Just random, consistent growth that has nothing to do with holidays with people traveling and gathering together. I just don’t get why you are fighting this so much. What have the hospitalizations done in the months since the holidays? Another random coincidence? And how do you explain that most states followed the exact same path? Random events happening everywhere at the same time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Biff84 said:

And why was it a straight line increase? Just random, consistent growth that has nothing to do with holidays with people traveling and gathering together. I just don’t get why you are fighting this so much. What have the hospitalizations done in the months since the holidays? Another random coincidence? And how do you explain that most states followed the exact same path? Random events happening everywhere at the same time!

I dont get why you are fighting so much without presenting a shred of data supporting your case. 

I have shown many places where cases substantially decreased during the holidays. 

I have shown that the increase started in mid October in Florida(which was the dataset I presented)

I have shown there were no large spikes that coincided with singular events. 

Do you buy pizza in a straight line? 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

No. It is not. You would have rapid accelerations if it was associated with singular dates of substantially increased gatherings. 

 

Normally people don't just do holiday gathers on those days only as they try to juggle work schedules and other conflicts.   I would think that those two weeks are a jumble of family gatherings.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jobarules said:

Ones done outdoors, one indoors. It just shows that this spreads indoors and not as much outdoors. That being said I agree 100% with you about the optics and messaging not being consistent. 

I think messaging was bad around Trump rallies. Everyone kept crying they would super spreader events and since out doors they really weren’t. I thought BLM protests were inappropriate as were Trump ralllies. We are in a pandemic and honestly no good reason to be in large groups for any reason BLM or Trump rallies. 
 

That all said it is clear in door close contact is the main driver of spread which explains basically why the whole country peaked like Jan 15 which is two weeks after holiday gatherings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, supermike80 said:

The BLM protests throw the holiday gathering theory out the window.  I believe masks are helpful but when I'm told I will get sick seeing my family at Thanksgiving but I'll be fine if I take part in a huge BLM protest I start to question the message.

No one said that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, moleculo said:

Well then it should be easy to prove me wrong.

No.  Not even going to try. If you don't believe it im fine with that. Not remotely interested in pulling links from November.  I have better things to do.    Sigh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Biff84 said:

So during a period where four major holidays happen, the hospitalizations more than tripled. And you’re using this as an argument that the holidays weren’t the cause?

Seems like that would be exactly what you’d expect from having one holiday after the next. What is your explanation of the continual growth during these months if it has nothing to do with holiday gatherings?

 

3 hours ago, jobarules said:

People get sick on Thanksgiving, make other people sick in between Thanksgiving and XMAS, more people get sick in XMAS/NYE get other people sick in January. 

As more people get sick, people starting knowing more people sick and start curtailing those activities. This started sometime in January 

The larger "event" here was the official "opening" of the state at the end of September.  At that point, this administration said that local municipalities could still impose mask requirements, but they were not allowed to impose fines or other punishment to enforce them.  It was believed that we were beginning to plateau at that point, then cases started rising once again and remained on a constant trajectory through the holidays as the parties and whatnot were back on in a lot of areas here in the state and mask enforcement was officially neutered.  

Edited by The Commish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, supermike80 said:

So why was i hearing about how horribly dangerous the Florida beaches were?  Those are outside.  Heck im hearing about it right now!!

Because the show/person/people you chose to listen to aren't all that bright?  Beaches aren't an issue....the bars/restaurants on the beaches, they can be a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

No.  Not even going to try. If you don't believe it im fine with that. Not remotely interested in pulling links from November.  I have better things to do.    Sigh

I can respect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jamny said:

link

There were 1.5 million vaccines given on the day Biden took over.

How many were given yesterday, 2 months later? 1.7 million. 

Yes, the rolling average is moving up and they are getting out there but the initial rollout was hardly horrible.

I’m sure these numbers are correct but it doesn’t make a ton of sense to me.  Here in Cali we’ve been ramping up like crazy and went from a million a week (140k a day) just over a month ago to 400k yesterday alone.  So the rest of the country has made no progress or has gotten worse?  Some thing doesn’t line up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, jamny said:

link

There were 1.5 million vaccines given on the day Biden took over.

How many were given yesterday, 2 months later? 1.7 million. 

Yes, the rolling average is moving up and they are getting out there but the initial rollout was hardly horrible.

You gloss over the rolling average but it was 900k on Jan 20 and nearly 2.5M today. The rollout was completely disorganized. You don’t remember claims of a vaccine surplus that didn’t actually exist or the manufacturers having doses to ship out but no instructions of where to send them.
 

I also had hands on experience of how much of a mess it was. We were initially told that all stores (around 50) would be getting the Pfizer vaccine around Dec 26th. The story continually changed until finally on January 15 we were one of 6 stores to receive the Moderna vaccine. Come to find out that the delay was due to the state being uncertain of future deliveries and couldn’t distribute many doses without risking shutting down the PODS they had set up for mass vaccination. We were given 1000 doses and told to give them at a fairly aggressive pace but hold back about 2 weeks of second doses because they were uncertain when they could give us more doses.

Towards the end of January that narrative changed. They want us to use up our remaining doses ASAP and not to save any for second doses. Future deliveries will be coming on a regular basis and anything we received, they expected it to be used within 7 days and then be replenished without gaps in service. We were naturally skeptical because of our previous experience but since then everything they promised has remained true. Distribution has expanded to all of our stores as well as several other chains mainly because of a federal program that distributed directed to pharmacies, again with the expectation of giving within 7 days. We no longer worry about running out. The difference is night and day.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

You gloss over the rolling average but it was 900k on Jan 20 and nearly 2.5M today. The rollout was completely disorganized. You don’t remember claims of a vaccine surplus that didn’t actually exist or the manufacturers having doses to ship out but no instructions of where to send them.
 

I also had hands on experience of how much of a mess it was. We were initially told that all stores (around 50) would be getting the Pfizer vaccine around Dec 26th. The story continually changed until finally on January 15 we were one of 6 stores to receive the Moderna vaccine. Come to find out that the delay was due to the state being uncertain of future deliveries and couldn’t distribute many doses without risking shutting down the PODS they had set up for mass vaccination. We were given 1000 doses and told to give them at a fairly aggressive pace but hold back about 2 weeks of second doses because they were uncertain when they could give us more doses.

Towards the end of January that narrative changed. They want us to use up our remaining doses ASAP and not to save any for second doses. Future deliveries will be coming on a regular basis and anything we received, they expected it to be used within 7 days and then be replenished without gaps in service. We were naturally skeptical because of our previous experience but since then everything they promised has remained true. Distribution has expanded to all of our stores as well as several other chains mainly because of a federal program that distributed directed to pharmacies, again with the expectation of giving within 7 days. We no longer worry about running out. The difference is night and day.

How did I gloss over the rolling average when I mentioned it in my post?

I didn't quote today's number because they aren't complete yet and if I did someone would have said "sure, why don't you wait for the final numbers from today before quoting them" So I used yesterday's. You can never win.

I never said the rollout was perfect but I'm not sure how someone would expect the rollout of a virus during a pandemic, where states are in charge, to be flawless. Especially with the deep freeze temps needed with the first one. It also wasn't like 6 months later. I mean a couple month's after coming out with it getting to 1.5 million was pretty impressive, imo. I know everyone wants to bash Trump for it but a lot of people worked really hard to get it to the point where we were administering 1.5 million on Biden's inauguration day. That is not horrible or a disaster and the constant attempt to label it as such, all in an effort to discredit Trump, is disgusting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

I dont get why you are fighting so much without presenting a shred of data supporting your case. 

I have shown many places where cases substantially decreased during the holidays. 

I have shown that the increase started in mid October in Florida(which was the dataset I presented)

I have shown there were no large spikes that coincided with singular events. 

Do you buy pizza in a straight line? 

 

You showed a significant spike that occurred with several events - Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Years and all the other gatherings in-between. 

Do I really need to present you the data that is readily available on any COVID tracking site? You have the data and ignore the obvious conclusions. You presented data for around 6 Midwestern states that peaked early. Nearly every other state follow the same path as Florida that you inexplicably refuse to connect to the holiday gatherings that happened everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jamny said:

How did I gloss over the rolling average when I mentioned it in my post?

I didn't quote today's number because they aren't complete yet and if I did someone would have said "sure, why don't you wait for the final numbers from today before quoting them" So I used yesterday's. You can never win.

I never said the rollout was perfect but I'm not sure how someone would expect the rollout of a virus during a pandemic, where states are in charge, to be flawless. Especially with the deep freeze temps needed with the first one. It also wasn't like 6 months later. I mean a couple month's after coming out with it getting to 1.5 million was pretty impressive, imo. I know everyone wants to bash Trump for it but a lot of people worked really hard to get it to the point where we were administering 1.5 million on Biden's inauguration day. That is not horrible or a disaster and the constant attempt to label it as such, all in an effort to discredit Trump, is disgusting. 

You used a significantly lower number and compared it to the highest pre-Biden number. Why didn’t you use the 4.5M number that was done a couple days ago? Vaccinations numbers have been closer to that 

States are only ‘in charge’ because the Trump administration refused to do it on a federal level. The federal pharmacy program has been highly successful and could have been done from the beginning. They left it up to the states and then left the states hanging. You might describe it as Trump bashing but it’s the reality of what happened and my highly right wing co-worker would give you the same timeline of events.
 

It was a mess, you can choose to not believe me or selectively choose numbers to support your opinion but it doesn’t change how much better it has been since Biden has been in charge. States are giving all their vaccine within a week because they don’t have to worry about when the next shipment is coming. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biff84 said:

You used a significantly lower number and compared it to the highest pre-Biden number. Why didn’t you use the 4.5M number that was done a couple days ago? Vaccinations numbers have been closer to that 

States are only ‘in charge’ because the Trump administration refused to do it on a federal level. The federal pharmacy program has been highly successful and could have been done from the beginning. They left it up to the states and then left the states hanging. You might describe it as Trump bashing but it’s the reality of what happened and my highly right wing co-worker would give you the same timeline of events.
 

It was a mess, you can choose to not believe me or selectively choose numbers to support your opinion but it doesn’t change how much better it has been since Biden has been in charge. States are giving all their vaccine within a week because they don’t have to worry about when the next shipment is coming. 

I used the most recent final number and compared it to the day Biden took office. I cant help you if it doesnt fit the narrative that the rollout was a disaster and they had no plan. All those that got us to Inaugeration Day deserve praise and not have the hard work they put in be politicized. But go ahead and continue with the narrative that has been pushed so history will always remember Orange Man Bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jamny said:

I used the most recent final number and compared it to the day Biden took office. I cant help you if it doesnt fit the narrative that the rollout was a disaster and they had no plan. All those that got us to Inaugeration Day deserve praise and not have the hard work they put in be politicized. But go ahead and continue with the narrative that has been pushed so history will always remember Orange Man Bad.

Yes ignore everything I posted about my personal experience, it’s just a political thing. FYI much of the frustration and delays with the early rollout was expressed by Republican leadership in AZ. But I guess if you say Orange Man Bad, that’s all that matters.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

Yes ignore everything I posted about my personal experience, it’s just a political thing. FYI much of the frustration and delays with the early rollout was expressed by Republican leadership in AZ. But I guess if you say Orange Man Bad, that’s all that matters.

They had Fauci on their team since Dec 3rd and still botched the rollout. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jamny said:

I used the most recent final number and compared it to the day Biden took office. I cant help you if it doesnt fit the narrative that the rollout was a disaster and they had no plan. All those that got us to Inaugeration Day deserve praise and not have the hard work they put in be politicized. But go ahead and continue with the narrative that has been pushed so history will always remember Orange Man Bad.

I have no interest in your COVID debate with Biff but I hope to god the history books remember that because quite frankly, he was and is.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The early phases of the vaccine rollout were not good, and were not going to be good regardless of who was at the top of the federal bureaucracy.  The demand was through the roof and no framework existed to execute the rollout.  Many things were out of their (feds) control. I'm sure that many people worked tirelessly to do their best. 

That said, what was in the control of the feds was the creation of a clear strategy and the messaging to set expectations.  I believe that they failed hard on this front.   Whether they had a plan and didn't promote it properly, or they didn't have a solid plan and thus couldn't promote it, I don't know. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

big programs are hard to roll out quickly.  Remember Obamacare web page debacle?  

I'm not going to find fault with trump org because they fumbled here...IMO fumbling was expected.  That being said, they didn't exceed expectations.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting study out by Brookings that conservatives are downplaying risks of Covid and liberals are over concerned.  A real problem when neither side can get the facts right on a fundamental thing like this.  Not a good sign re: polarization of this country.

 

https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-misinformation-is-distorting-covid-policies-and-behaviors/?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210318&instance_id=28184&nl=the-morning&regi_id=65040260&segment_id=53661&te=1&user_id=3ea1d4ddae9a047bd45c49df728706e2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, the moops said:

Are you going to try and offer some proof? Because if not, GTFO with these conspiracies

lets do this

things would have been a lot worse had we not shut down, worn mask, drove millions to unemplyment, tens of thousands of small businesses gone and trillions added to debt ... I mean we went from 40,000 dead to 530,000 and lets call that a huge success because it'd have been much worse right ?

and

lets say things would have been a lot worse had Trump's administration not acted the way it did, they were a huge success

 

agree on both right?  I mean if we're going to spin positive how much worse it could have been one way, we kinda have to equally spin it positive the other too right ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Redwes25 said:

Interesting study out by Brookings that conservatives are downplaying risks of Covid and liberals are over concerned.  A real problem when neither side can get the facts right on a fundamental thing like this.  Not a good sign re: polarization of this country.

 

https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-misinformation-is-distorting-covid-policies-and-behaviors/?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210318&instance_id=28184&nl=the-morning&regi_id=65040260&segment_id=53661&te=1&user_id=3ea1d4ddae9a047bd45c49df728706e2

And the "sides" are completely focused on each other rather than the problem.  My wife is a perfect example and it drives me nuts :wall: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Commish said:

And the "sides" are completely focused on each other rather than the problem.  My wife is a perfect example and it drives me nuts :wall: 

Yup, and you see it very clearly in this thread.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

 

Sometimes you live through something, experience it, and know what happened. There's not a "link" for it. 

Covid is a regional phenomenon. In many cases there are multiple regions within states. Literally upstate NY has a completely different curve than NYC and the suburbs. The locals here know what happened here and when, we were paying attention. Multiple locals have commented on it. Maybe you're familiar with how your region played out. It probably was different. 

on this I agree

so the people submitting the Kansas studies on the counties for and against mask mandates as "proof" the masking worked .... you'd tell them the same right ? covid is regional and in many cases completely different than other areas

obesity has a lot to do with it

elderly has a lot to do with it

being healthy has a lot to do with it

masks/washing hands/6 foot rule ......... minimal impacts IMO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, John123 said:

Let me tell you about India.  I went there for a month for work about 5 years ago.  I was in a city called Banaglore, considered to be the silicone valley of India.  And, even with all the high tech and money that comes with that, it's still a cesspool of a third world country/city.  I had to get a bunch of vaccines even to go.  You ever heard the saying "don't drink the water" when going to Mexico?  Well, in India you don't even use tap water to brush your teeth.  You use bottled water for everything.  The point being, the locals have a much more tolerant immune system than we do BECAUSE it's a third world country and they're exposed to stuff daily that would kill you and I.  I'm not saying this gives them immunity to Covid.  Studies would have to be done.  But it wouldn't surprise me, if those studies were done, if it was found that their immune systems could fend off newer diseases better just because of it's exposure to so many horrible ones.  I would suspect the other countries you mentioned are similar.

This is why it's hard to compare country to country.  Japan apparently has a different culture so we can't use the data from there.  Per my supposition, India isn't an apples to apples comparison with the U.S. due to differences in immune systems.  If you're going to compare it would have to be to countries with similar demographics, economies, etc.....but I suspect there would still be differences. 

great post

add American's high obesity rate, add the unhealthyness that many American's experience, add that most American's take drugs for something they think they need to .........

 

American's for the most part are very weak humans at a physical level - a deadly virus would thrive here

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Redwes25 said:

Interesting study out by Brookings that conservatives are downplaying risks of Covid and liberals are over concerned.  A real problem when neither side can get the facts right on a fundamental thing like this.  Not a good sign re: polarization of this country.

 

https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-misinformation-is-distorting-covid-policies-and-behaviors/?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210318&instance_id=28184&nl=the-morning&regi_id=65040260&segment_id=53661&te=1&user_id=3ea1d4ddae9a047bd45c49df728706e2

Of course it’s best to get it right, neither to downplay the risks nor to be overly concerned. 

But given the fact that this pandemic has killed over a half million Americans, it seems to me that, given the choice, overly concerned is much more preferable to downplay the risks. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Of course it’s best to get it right, neither to downplay the risks nor to be overly concerned. 

But given the fact that this pandemic has killed over a half million Americans, it seems to me that, given the choice, overly concerned is much more preferable to downplay the risks. 

I tend to agree with you but statements about crowded beaches, risks of catching it from a box or other activities that are not really risky create unnecessary economic and other pain and also create non-compliance issues with those under estimating the risks.  The mainstream media has not really been helpful on this front.  

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

great post

add American's high obesity rate, add the unhealthyness that many American's experience, add that most American's take drugs for something they think they need to .........

 

American's for the most part are very weak humans at a physical level - a deadly virus would thrive here

Problem is you have to live in squalor and filth.  I will personaly take the risks of deadly virus vs. living there.  Great country to visit and I would go back but saying it is disgusting is an understatement.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Redwes25 said:

I tend to agree with you but statements about crowded beaches, risks of catching it from a box or other activities that are not really risky create unnecessary economic and other pain and also create non-compliance issues with those under estimating the risks.  The mainstream media has not really been helpful on this front.  

 

To this point "the beaches" (at least here) are analogous with all the bars/restaurants on said beach as well.  All our media outlets here group them together.  "Look at those crowds out on Daytona Beach today" (bike week was last week and the shots they were showing were up on the boardwalk at all the bars/restaurants/shops etc.....the actual beach was pretty empty.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Commish said:

To this point "the beaches" (at least here) are analogous with all the bars/restaurants on said beach as well.  All our media outlets here group them together.  "Look at those crowds out on Daytona Beach today" (bike week was last week and the shots they were showing were up on the boardwalk at all the bars/restaurants/shops etc.....the actual beach was pretty empty.  

Problem is we are the same loop as a year ago about awful spring breakers going to Florida will be the end of the world.  Articles are no different then a year ago with damn pictures of people on the beach.   There wasn't a huge spike from beach goers last summer and we won't have one now due to going to beach.  The media needs to be much clearer on the risks so people are better informed and risky behavior is avoided (going to a bar) while unrisky behavioer is encouraged (like going to the beach).   If we don't do this then people who have a tendency already to underestimate the risks will ignore it all.

Example of article with picture of people sitting on the beach - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/14/health/us-coronavirus-sunday/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

on this I agree

so the people submitting the Kansas studies on the counties for and against mask mandates as "proof" the masking worked .... you'd tell them the same right ? covid is regional and in many cases completely different than other areas

obesity has a lot to do with it

elderly has a lot to do with it

being healthy has a lot to do with it

masks/washing hands/6 foot rule ......... minimal impacts IMO 

What I would say is simple. Want to stop virus transmission? Don't come into contact with people. You don't want to catch an airborne virus? Then don't breathe in someone else's germs. Same in reverse, don't put your germs into contact with another person. It's not that hard of a concept. It's not even unique to Covid. I don't want other people's germs, I don't come into contact with them. Simple.

What masks do is limit the transmission when you can't avoid being in contact with other people. In Idaho, for example, it seems that it would be easy to keep apart from people, to not get their germs. In a NYC subway? That's a problem. That's a situation where masks make sense. That's one reason why the virus impacts are regional, and in turn the mitigation efforts should be regionally based also. Look this isn't rocket science. I have a hard time understanding why people don't get this a year in other than to be intentionally difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

What I would say is simple. Want to stop virus transmission? Don't come into contact with people. You don't want to catch an airborne virus? Then don't breathe in someone else's germs. Same in reverse, don't put your germs into contact with another person. It's not that hard of a concept. It's not even unique to Covid. I don't want other people's germs, I don't come into contact with them. Simple.

What masks do is limit the transmission when you can't avoid being in contact with other people. In Idaho, for example, it seems that it would be easy to keep apart from people, to not get their germs. In a NYC subway? That's a problem. That's a situation where masks make sense. That's one reason why the virus impacts are regional, and in turn the mitigation efforts should be regionally based also. Look this isn't rocket science. I have a hard time understanding why people don't get this a year in other than to be intentionally difficult.

I see he has gone from "the government shouldn't mandate masks" to  distance and masks don't work.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Redwes25 said:

Problem is you have to live in squalor and filth.  I will personaly take the risks of deadly virus vs. living there.  Great country to visit and I would go back but saying it is disgusting is an understatement.  

I lived in Caracas VZ for about 6 months ... it wasn't much better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Redwes25 said:

Problem is we are the same loop as a year ago about awful spring breakers going to Florida will be the end of the world.  Articles are no different then a year ago with damn pictures of people on the beach.   There wasn't a huge spike from beach goers last summer and we won't have one now due to going to beach.  The media needs to be much clearer on the risks so people are better informed and risky behavior is avoided (going to a bar) while unrisky behavioer is encouraged (like going to the beach).   If we don't do this then people who have a tendency already to underestimate the risks will ignore it all.

Example of article with picture of people sitting on the beach - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/14/health/us-coronavirus-sunday/index.html

Oh, I don't disagree with the mischaracterization of "being on the beach", even from a year ago and I said it then too.  Truth is, we can never know if there's ever a spike caused by "beach goers" because these are vacation places.  They come here, then go home.  They don't hang around.  With no contact tracing, determining impact is virtually impossible.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

What I would say is simple. Want to stop virus transmission? Don't come into contact with people. You don't want to catch an airborne virus? Then don't breathe in someone else's germs. Same in reverse, don't put your germs into contact with another person. It's not that hard of a concept. It's not even unique to Covid. I don't want other people's germs, I don't come into contact with them. Simple.

What masks do is limit the transmission when you can't avoid being in contact with other people. In Idaho, for example, it seems that it would be easy to keep apart from people, to not get their germs. In a NYC subway? That's a problem. That's a situation where masks make sense. That's one reason why the virus impacts are regional, and in turn the mitigation efforts should be regionally based also. Look this isn't rocket science. I have a hard time understanding why people don't get this a year in other than to be intentionally difficult.

and that's true except

330 million people can't do that - and we certainly can't do it the rest of our lives for a virus that is still 1/5th as deadly as yearly obesity rates and right on par with the yearly deaths from smoking cigarettes 

isolate for a few days, even weeks but when you go back into the world, you're going to come into contact with covid at some point

you are not totally wrong - except you're not factoring in that nobody wears masks 100% of the time, and many masks are just pieces of cloth and horrible are germ/virus protection and, most people don't wash their masks often enough and the studies that shows masks have minimal impacts and the fact that since masks have become a part of our lives, there have been around 500,000 more attributed deaths and 20 million more attributed infections

masks have minimal effects, the numbers IMO support that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
  • Create New...