quote:

The range of effects could take decades to play out. Some epidemiological studies and lab experiments with other viruses severe infections could set in motion molecular events that might increase the risk of developing neurodegenerative disorders, like Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s, many years later. The links are a matter of debate among neurologists and neuroscientists.

So we are supposed to wait decades to study and research, etc??? I know that is not what you are suggesting but we can not wait months and months (much less the decades to study, and study and wait) like so many officials and even some here want. Without a vaccine that may take years to get, we are better off trying to gain immunity and letting people and business who wish to.....get back to their lives while trying to protect those most at risk, and restoring our economy and rights that are being trampled on every day.

I feel bad for Trump...this is a no win situation...but I guess he's used to that.

It's quite the pickle...

No matter how you do it, someone will lose.

Letting younger people or lower threat classes return to normal will still expose the more vulnerable. Younger people "taking it home" to parents and grand parents will likely happen. Everyone says we can still protect them...but you can't...not if people restart mingling. Offices open...touching starts...yadda yadda.

And if you keep things closed, the economy will get much worse.

I think everyone agrees that a stepped approach will be best...but man, that tightrope is THIN in getting this right.

I don't think there is a right answer in that balance...you just hope for the best when you execute.

quote:

My posting that article is a small attempt to help dispel some of that ignorance among those who are still willing to consider the facts.

This is not a fact:

quote:

Internet experts: “It’s just the sniffles for anyone who isn’t old or fat or otherwise of no use to society.”

Nobody said that. Way back on page 48, I'm the first person to have used the word "sniffles" and you seem to have taken great offense to it. As more information comes out, I was wrong that the world was going to be shutdown for something most people would get the sniffles from. It seems most people with COVID-19 do display any symptoms at all.


What percentage of those infected display the effects the article you posted is talking about; 10%, 1%, .1%, .01%? When trying to determine a course of action, makes a difference, does it not? Should we shut down the world because .01% will have some neurologic effects? How about at 10%? Where does the line get drawn? Enlighten the ignorant, what action should we take based on the facts presented in the article you posted?

I've said in multiple posts the actions I would support and backed them up with facts. It's your turn.

quote:

Originally posted by Patriot:
this is a no win situation

To my knowledge, no one blamed Woodrow Wilson for the effects of the “Spanish” flu a century ago. Then, of course, what the “government” could do to mitigate its effects was far less, and it didn’t have the same economic effects on the country. Nevertheless, the right in this country has never been as effective with its propaganda as the left, and one of the things that everyone who supports the President should keep in mind is that neither the pandemic nor the effects were/are his fault. There are things that should be done in a crisis like this, but we must keep in mind that there are literally no precedents for knowing what they are and what their consequences will be.

Early on in this discussion the crisis was described as being a “war,” and I agree. We must never forget, though, that nothing in warfare ever goes exactly as we’d like it to. All we can hope for is good faith efforts based on the best ideas at the time, and the perseverance to see them through. I believe the President is making that effort. Regardless of the inevitable mistakes and the incessant “shoulda, woulda, coulda” carping that accompanies such a crisis, I hope to be able to continue to support him because without that support things will only get worse.

Betsy McCaughey warns that the death toll from the virus will ultimately pale from those who died as a direct result of the lockdown:

...The academics and public-health officials who have concocted models of the virus' spread are telling us that we have to continue the shutdown to save thousands of lives. It's too bad none of their models considers the deaths that will be caused by unemployment...

Job losses cause extreme suffering. Every 1 percent hike in the unemployment rate will likely produce a 3.3 percent increase in drug-overdose deaths and a 0.99 percent increase in suicides, according to data from the National Bureau of Economic Research and the medical journal Lancet.

These are facts based on past experience, not models. If unemployment hits 32 percent, some 77,000 Americans are likely to die from suicide and drug overdoses as a result of layoffs. Deaths of despair. Then add the predictable deaths from alcohol abuse by caused by unemployment. Health economist Michael French from the University of Miami found a "significant association between job loss" and binge drinking and alcoholism.

The impact of layoffs goes beyond suicide, drug overdosing and drinking, however. Overall, the death rate for an unemployed person is 63 percent higher than for someone with a job, according to findings in the journal Social Science & Medicine. Now do the math: Layoff-related deaths could far outnumber the 60,400 coronavirus deaths predicted by University of Washington researchers. This comparison isn't meant to understate the horror of the coronavirus for those who get it and their families. But heavy-handed state edicts to close all "nonessential businesses" need to be reassessed in light of the predictable harm to the lives, livelihoods and health of the uninfected...

We must count the deaths from shutdowns as well as from coronavirus
https://nypost.com/2020/04/14/...as-from-coronavirus/

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Nobody said that.

True, not in those words, and I have been accused of making “straw man” arguments before, which is what you’re in effect doing. I have neither the time and inclination nor am I foolish enough to keep track of which members said what exactly in discussions like this and then rub their noses in it later. I don’t know who all the posters are who have thus far tried to minimize concerns about this disease, but that has been extremely common throughout this thread. The third post on the very first page was a dismissive comment about the fact that four—count ’em—four people had died from the disease at the time.

Countless subsequent posts have been in a similar vein from references to all the other things that can kill us to strongly expressed doubts that the percentages of deaths in different locations are anywhere near as high as they’re reported by the media and various authorities. There are also innumerable references to the ages and health conditions of those who have died. All those statements are clearly intended to express the posters’ opinions that concerns about the seriousness of the disease are overblown and that the measures to contain it are excessive. And I don’t even necessarily disagree with the latter. Perhaps we should just let things play out and see what happens. But that, fortunately, isn’t up to me to decide.

The possible seriousness of the disease to the individual, however, is another matter. As with all “novel” diseases, we are still learning the full extent of that. That was the reason for my posting the article and the reason for my comment about “sniffles.” (I don’t believe, BTW, that you are the only person here who ever used that word, but if you were my comment was not directed at you personally.)

Our discussion here is unlikely to have any influence whatsoever on governmental policy and actions. What we can as individuals do on a forum like this, though, is point out when ignorance and diseased thinking can contribute to bad individual decisions. I have avoided doing that as much as I could have throughout this discussion, but every now and then I believe it’s justified.

quote:

The possible seriousness of the disease to the individual, however, is another matter. As with all “novel” diseases, we are still learning the full extent of that....

Our discussion here is unlikely to have any influence whatsoever on governmental policy and actions. What we can as individuals do on a forum like this, though, is point out when ignorance and diseased thinking are contributing to bad individual decisions.

sigfreund: I agree.
The important distinction is between governmental policy (force) and individual decisions.
I'm perfectly willing to restrict my own activity without imposing my personal choice on others.

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:
I talked to a friend of mine Sunday that lives in Bro, Sweden just north of Stockholm. He said all the reports that you’re seeing where the media is saying Sweden is completely open are lies. Many bakeries and restaurants and other places are temporarily closed or are takeout only and many people are staying at home. He says Sweden has basically a “soft lockdown“ as he put it.

"Soft" insofar as the government issued mostly recommendations rather than orders, trusting in responsible behavior of most citizens. Which I find a more sympathetic approach, though I'm not sure whether it's "better" in an overall sense. As usual, it's hard to make direct comparisons; Sweden currently has more than double the deaths per million inhabitants as neighboring Denmark, and more than four times as Norway, both with about half as many people. Then again that's still less than in Switzerland with its roughly equal population and very strict and early measures, and two thirds of the UK and Netherlands which initially went with a hands-off approach, then changed tack and clamped down.

There is the point that some countries which went tough early now feel confident enough to carefully ease up again. Denmark reopened daycares and elementary schools today (which have remained open in Sweden throughout). Austria lifted the ban for small shops this week and intends to follow with bigger ones and outdoor sports facilities at the start of May; hotels, restaurants and schools from mid-May. All with appropriate limitations, and public events are to remain banned until the end of June.

Locally, reports on draft agreements between the federal and state governments are that shops with up to 800 square meters and some businesses like garages, bike and book shops will be allowed again from next week. Contact restrictions and border controls to remain until at least 3 May, after which barbershops, some schools and cultural institutions like libraries may be reopened, again with appropriate precautions. Major public events to remain banned until the end of August.

The hospital where my wife works in the radiology dept, stopped supplying anyone that is not a Dr or a nurse with PPE of any kind. Even if they have to scan a Covid positive patient

I found a local sign company that is making face shields and bought some for her and her dept.

Here's a big FUCK YOU to HCA, fuckin assholes.

They are only concerned with keeping their lips firmly attached to the Government teat.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
....

I for one hope you continue, unabated.

quote:

To my knowledge, no one blamed Woodrow Wilson for the effects of the “Spanish” flu a century ago.

That is what the leftists (which Wilson was) and their propaganda media are already doing and will continue to do …..blame Trump, no matter what.
Let some business open back up and let them put precautions in place for employees who wish to return to work, limit the number of people in the store if they like and we can still stop large gatherings like sports etc. for just awhile longer. What I have seen seems to show we have reached the peak so let things start to return to more normal beginning May 1.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...ood-tests-this-week/

Abbott Laboratories announced on Wednesday that it will ship one million coronavirus antibody blood tests this week.

The Illinois-based global health care leader is the first to market with this test that many medical experts say is a key element of a plan to reopen the country while a coronavirus vaccine is under development.

“Abbott is significantly scaling up its manufacturing for antibody testing and is expecting to immediately ship close to 1 million tests this week to U.S. customers, and will ship a total of 4 million tests in total for April. The company is ramping up to 20 million tests in the U.S. in June and beyond as it expands the tests to run on its new Alinity™ i system,” Abbott said in its statement.

“Antibody testing is an important next step to tell if someone has been previously infected. It will provide more understanding of the virus, including how long antibodies stay in the body and if they provide immunity. This type of knowledge could help support the development of treatments and vaccines,” the statement noted.

The company described the test as “a lab-based serology blood test for the detection of the antibody, IgG, that identifies if a person has had the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).”

While molecular testing detects whether someone has the virus, antibody tests determine if someone was previously infected.

Abbott’s SARS-CoV-2 IgG test identifies the IgG antibody, which is a protein that the body produces in the late stages of infection and may remain for up to months and possibly years after a person has recovered. Abbott’s IgG antibody test will initially be available on its ARCHITECT® i1000SR and i2000SR laboratory instruments*. More than 2,000 of these instruments are in use in U.S. laboratories. These instruments can run up to 100-200 tests per hour.

100s if not thousands protesting the Governor of Michigan's edict!

LOVE IT

https://wwjnewsradio.radio.com...test-stay-home-order

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Orive 8,

Hooray Abbott Laboratories!

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
All those statements are clearly intended to express the posters’ opinions that concerns about the seriousness of the disease are overblown and that the measures to contain it are excessive. And I don’t even necessarily disagree with the latter. Perhaps we should just let things play out and see what happens. But that, fortunately, isn’t up to me to decide.

You know, the whole virus thing has me thinking along the lines of the same meta-thought that comes to mind with the whole guns thing: There really are two ways to look at the issue, either trusting folks to act like thinking adults, or assuming the vast majority of people are children who can’t be trusted.

I feel like we should have constitutional carry everywhere, that children should be taught firearm safety in school, probably starting somewhere around twelve or fourteen (I started my kids at 8 with .22lr pistols, but that’s me and mine), not necessarily with real firearms with live ammo but learning the four fundamental rules and safe, responsible handling. Everyone ought to know how to safely handle and unload a firearm of any common action type. And most everyone ought to be able to legally carry most anywhere. Where do the penalties come in? When people misbehave, you punish people.

I kinda feel like the big argument on the last several hundred pages hasn’t been as well expressed as it could be. I think a lot of folks are arguing that the cure is much worse than the disease (and if we aren’t there yet, we sure seem to be headed that way), which I don’t disagree with, but muddying their argument by downplaying the disease.

If I had a magic wand, serological testing would be instantly available to everyone (and everyone would be urged to get tested). Individual results would be given as quickly as possible to the individual (you’ve not been exposed - please be careful; you’ve been exposed and recovered - congratulations, you are contributing to herd immunity; you have been exposed and are currently infected - please go home and self-quarantine, here is pamphlet on how best to avoid infecting those close to you, and here is a list of resources in your community to help you by bringing what you need.). Individual results would by law not be available to anyone else (.gov, etc), but statistics would be gathered and published. Communities would have an idea of the relative risks in their area, but there would be no scarlet Vs on anyone’s door or forehead.
The government would make recommendations for what businesses and individuals ought to do, noting that they are based on currently available best information and understanding and subject to change as more information becomes available. Businesses and individuals would be free to protect themselves and their customers as they see fit.

Of course, that sounds like a total pipe dream in a world where too many people think of nothing but themselves, assume that others do the same, and run crying to “Mommy government” to protect them from everyone else.

Whatever happens is going to happen. As you stated, we are unlikely to be able to affect government handling of this cluster. I only hope that we can try to be civil with each other while we rail at how the .gov is getting it all wrong and what they really should do is <x>. If we can come out the end of all this craziness as the same community of friends that we went into it, we will have done better than a lot of folks.

Michigan

https://www.washingtonexaminer...s-stay-at-home-order

'Operation Gridlock': Thousands gather at Michigan Capitol to protest Democrat governor's stay-at-home order

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
'Operation Gridlock': Thousands gather at Michigan Capitol to protest Democrat governor's stay-at-home order

Wow! Thanks for that.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
'Operation Gridlock': Thousands gather at Michigan Capitol to protest Democrat governor's stay-at-home order

Wow! Thanks for that.

From what I'm hearing, the bitch went too far. Closing the home depots and such, they can't even buy seed for their gardens

As a Michigander, I support you all from afar

A Democrat thanks the President

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ng-her-life-n2566917

"If President Trump had not talked about [hydroxychloroquine], it would not be something that's accessible" in Michigan "because of an order that was put down in my state," Whitsett explained on Fox News last week.

On Tuesday, Trump invited Whitsett to the White House to talk about her ordeal and her recovery, where she was able to thank him in person.

Then, in another warm gesture, he offered his own White House physician to treat her Lyme disease if he was available.

"Ask the White House doctor - seriously," he said. "Because Lyme disease can be very, very bad...Is it legal for me to let her use the White House doctor? If it's not, I'll suffer the repercussions, I don't care."