Exactly what I’ve been telling people all along, yet I’m told I only care about myself when I choose to walk around sans-mask.
1 Like
That makes sense, it just seems to me that where people are at a high risk (elderly, nursing homes) is where strict measures are necessary. All I can really say at this point is that places like Ontario are being excessively cautious, and it’s causing other issues.
Is Kansas a Republican state?
They opened up testing to everyone in Ontario, anyone can get tested if they want. Way more people are getting tested than a couple months ago and numbers are still way down.
The way I see it, unless you are at a high risk for complications or death there really isn’t much to fear. I had the virus (tested positive) but no symptoms, I was stuck at home for two weeks with my wife and kids and none of them had any symptoms either. I don’t want to catch the flu either, but I’m not going to live in fear because of it. Just protect who needs to be protected.
They say drug use is at an all time high.
The fact that next to nothing was done to prevent outbreaks in nursing homes accounts for the majority of deaths, so you could say so. Aside from that it’s debatable, but that is where everyone seems to have fucked up badly.
They keep changing their story. And now that the outbreak is basically over in Ottawa they say you will have to wear a mask to use public transportation, while before we were told not to wear masks. Incompetence is a significant factor in all of this.
And yet, you didn’t know this. Finding out things about a novel virus takes time. You’ve been telling people all along something that may or may not have been true, because you wanted it to be true. This doesn’t make you ‘right all along’, it confirms that you’ve been selfish.
Every time something new comes out and organizations have to update their policies, people jump up and say “LOOK! I WAS RIGHT!” or “LOOK! THEY DONT KNOW WHAT THEYRE TALKING ABOUT!”
SCIENCE IS ABOUT CHANGE. Science is about finding new things, and having the COURAGE to knock down old theories in the face of new knowledge. From a public health perspective, you implement prophylactic measures and adjust them over time as you find new things out.
Having one theory from the beginning and standing by it, then yelling out how you were always right when you had no idea what you were talking about is just ignorance and stubbornness.
3 Likes
Finally, the Ontario government plans to make a step in the right direction:
It’s odd that the headline in the link mentions Quebec, but in the actual article Quebec is not mentioned at all.
Time to get back to normal and do what we’ve done for most every pandemic: quarantine the sick.
This is historically inaccurate. Look up the origin of the word quarantine.
Seems I’ve confused quarantine with isolate. We should isolate the sick and get back to normal.
Agreed. But we’re talking about a shit ton of people depending on how we define high risk. Everyone over 50 and those with certain pre-existing conditions of which we aren’t exactly sure who has it and what? We’re just going to remove these people from being around other people until a vaccine is done? Like I said I’m not saying other options don’t exist, but it would still be a nightmare imo to try and figure out how to do some of this and still satisfy these people’s needs. I’m not convinced it would be less expensive and better for the economy either. You’re going to take out a lot of workers and people who could purchase goods just so we can say “well now people can be free to not wear those stupid masks.”
If we knew exactly who had the shit we could limit its exposure to high risk. Except we’re not sure who has it. We’re not even sure who all the high risk people are. Which pre-existing conditions exactly? All? Damn that’s a shit ton of people.
Kansas is a Republican state yes. But I don’t think it’s phased reopening is vastly different from most other states.
I still think things need to go back to normal as best as possible but limit the risk of mass outbreaks that would lead to a second shutdown. And I’m still not fully convinced that much of what we could do in the short term will lead to some type of economic explosion. I don’t think it’s as simple as “yeah if we let a few more people in a restaurant at once Coronavirus economic issues are over.”
I believe we have already gone over this a few times. People over 60 years old and those with any one of a list of health conditions that have been correlated with a high risk of death or complications. Back in March or maybe early April we didn’t know nearly as much as we know now.
Or until the odds of getting infected are very low or nonexistent, which appears to right now be what they are waiting for to proceed to the next phase of reopening. It’s inconvenient and costly, but it can’t possibly be as much as what is currently being done. As for the exact details, it’s debatable and I’m not going to come up with a comprehensive plan because the government isn’t going to listen anyway, but something coherent and logical could be worked out.
Not really, they could still have things delivered or have other people shop for them. As for the number of workers, I can’t really confirm one way or another but look how many people are out of work for various reason related to the shutdown (remember no schools or daycare in many places) and how many people over 60 are working. I would be surprised if the former is less than the latter.
Yeah but now the WHO is saying that asymptomatic people aren’t a significant risk for spreading the virus. That makes it way easier, if you are sick then stay home.
I was asking because had the impression that generally speaking the Democrat states were much more cautious and the government pro-lockdown than Republican states.
Over 90 percent of Singapore’s cases are asymptomatic.
But did they get infected from other asymptomatic people or from those with symptoms?
I don’t know. That’s the point.
What do you do when you don’t know? You take simple precautions. That’s it.
I think some of the confusion is the situation being different in your part than mine. The overwhelming majority of schools in the US aren’t in session from typically mid May to mid-late August. They are “shutdown” already.
Most daycares in my area have reopened and some did a while back even.
I wouldn’t say this is the case in the US by any means. We’re still hitting around 20K cases daily regularly and this is even still lacking massive testing. I live in a county with about 26,000 people and I want to say last I checked with had less than 1,000 people tested during this entire time. Some of this is of course we haven’t been a known hot spot or anything, but it’s still indicative of the lack of testing being done. This is probably (top of my head) over 100 days since our President falsely stated if you want a test anyone can get one.
…Haven’t you been saying the WHO is incompetent and should be ignored? That looks like a quote and not an official position but I could be unaware. Either way it’s being met with a lot of skepticism and criticism by other health professionals. I’ll maintain that we still don’t know much about the virus. Loads more than we did initially, but far from consensus on most items related to it.
1 Like
This is true. Yes, they changed their stance. No, it’s not universally agreed that they’re correct.
Sometimes being slow to change a stance means you collected a lot of evidence and have a lot of supporting documents. Sometimes it just means you’re slow, not better. I’m not sure which this change by the WHO is, but my jury is out given the disagreements on it and what we believe we know so far.
Science, as flappinit put things, is indeed about change. It is an advantage to continue to evolve opinion and responses based on new evidence. And it shows that you’re open to change and more interested in the truth than in being “right”. Both positives. BUT changes as usual need to be hashed out over time (read: battled out with data), and one of the disadvantages of the 24/7 news cycle is that this nuance is lost on the majority every time a new or different headline comes up.
1 Like
Actually, it confirms my statements from the beginning. Instead of reacting on emotion, I critically think, and called bullshit right off the rip. Meanwhile, others simply obeyed because the government inundated them with predictions of doom and gloom.
So, no. I wasn’t selfish. I was acting with sound mind.
113k dead so far and 1k / day is not “doom and gloom”?
It’s not all coronavirus, not even half, so no, not doom and gloom.
You have absolutely no data to support your random assertion
Check out how many people died as a result of heart attacks, strokes, cancer, etc., but were also diagnosed COVID-19 positive. Death certificate will read “Cause of death: coronavirus”.