Coronavirus in DFW - News & Discussion (Dallas, Austin: place, grocery stores)

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by calgirlinnc

This young girl was one of those 200,000 people just "living her life". Her mental condition deteriorated because of the pandemic/quarantine.

Who are you to say that some people deserve compassion but others don't?

I've read lots of horrible comments on this forum, but this is a new level of cold heartedness. I'm not the one who needs some compassion.

You've presented this line of reasoning several times in this thread, and it's been pointed out several times that the issue is quantity. No one is making a qualitative assessment and saying that girl's life doesn't matter. But the number of lives lost to Covid by returning to normal life right now would dwarf the number of increased suicides. It's not even close.

[Tigerbait73]

Originally Posted by calgirlinnc

This young girl was one of those 200,000 people just "living her life". Her mental condition deteriorated because of the pandemic/quarantine.

Who are you to say that some people deserve compassion but others don't?

I've read lots of horrible comments on this forum, but this is a new level of cold heartedness. I'm not the one who needs some compassion.

I was using your logic...

Originally Posted by calgirlinnc

Except people will *still* die AND they won't have their freedoms. They will just die from different things.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by LeavingMA

So you are still living in the "we can contain this" phase.

Yes, as are most actual epidemiologists. I'd prefer to go the route of having 100,000 people die in the first six months of the virus than two million. That means we need to limit human interaction, and when we do have interactions, limit exposure via masks.

You seem to be advocating that we just accept the 1-2 million people who would die if everyone got it. That's extremely premature, and it is in conflict with what nearly every epidemiologists recommends.

And yes, I think case numbers are understated, but I think they're understated by a factor of 5-10x. That means we likely have 5-10 million positives in this country of 300 million. So it's hardly the case that we are anywhere near herd immunity.

[hbdwihdh378y9]

Originally Posted by Sunbather

My take since early April: When we are at <10 new cases per million, have a significant number of tests on hand (I don't know the target number, but way, way more than we have now), and have teams available to help contact trace.

NPR has a good article on this today. They suggest 1 new case per million, which their referenced estimated was June 8th for Texas as a whole.

One new case per million? What does that even mean? Is there any frame of reference like a particular amount of time, as in one new case per hour? And how is a case defined?

[calgirlinnc]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

You've presented this line of reasoning several times in this thread, and it's been pointed out several times that the issue is quantity. No one is making a qualitative assessment and saying that girl's life doesn't matter. But the number of lives lost to Covid by returning to normal life right now would dwarf the number of increased suicides. It's not even close.

It has also been pointed out that deaths to this crisis are not an either/or situation. It is not deaths from CV or no deaths. This is what I and many others have been concerned about. I will not sit quietly by and be accused of lacking compassion.

There are possible huge impacts from the economic fallout, with the UN warning just this past week that millions are facing starvation:

"While dealing with a COVID-19 pandemic, we are also on the brink of a hunger pandemic," David Beasley told the council. "There is also a real danger that more people could potentially die from the economic impact of COVID-19 than from the virus itself."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill...biblical%3famp

While you are concerned about the details of the pandemic and focusing on numbers, others are concerned about the bigger picture. That does not make us wrong and you right, as you like to claim. It means we have a different perspective.

[PACman2521]

Originally Posted by DPatel304

I'm curious as to when people here think would be a good time to start re-opening.

Realistically, we can't shut the world down until there is a vaccine, so we will have to start taking some risks at some point, right?

It's not about when, or what opens, but also who. What was the point of shutting down, what have we learned in the past 6wks-3mos, and what do we have to believe to be true before we expand openings??

WRT 1. shutting down was to prevent overwhelming the hospital system via limiting exponential growth vs linear growth and buying time. 2. we took a timeout and what did we do with it? still not enough testing and maybe never will be, d/t many things esp supply chain and some of the serological studies seen elsewhere suggesting magnitude of true infections and its implications, and 3. what has to true before we open?? hospitals/ICU/fatality cases have to be manageable, confidence that those returning to work are at less risk than previous thought, and that guidelines will continued to be followed.

Example proposal. Under 45 w/no comorbidities, capacity limits for indoor spaces based on square footage per person, outdoor spaces less stringent but still limited, in addition to continued hygiene/masks/protective barriers and temperature checks where indicated.

Not all encompassing, but starting off point. If we can get more testing, contact tracing, etc all the more better but not holding my breath...

[hbdwihdh378y9]

Originally Posted by zhappybird

At this situation, the conventional concept of “freedom” is challenged by the COVID19. Before covid19, every one pursue freedom: freedom of shopping, freedom of speech, freedom of play..., now freedom means death, more freedom, more death, less freedom, less death.

You're conveniently overlooking the millions of young men conscripted into the armed forces at various times in this country's history. This is nothing compared to what they experienced.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by calgirlinnc

It has also been pointed out that deaths to this crisis are not an either/or situation. It is not deaths from CV or no deaths. This is what I and many others have been concerned about. I will not sit quietly by and be accused of lacking compassion.

There are possible huge impacts from the economic fallout, with the UN warning just this past week that millions are facing starvation:

"While dealing with a COVID-19 pandemic, we are also on the brink of a hunger pandemic," David Beasley told the council. "There is also a real danger that more people could potentially die from the economic impact of COVID-19 than from the virus itself."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill...biblical%3famp

While you are concerned about the details of the pandemic and focusing on numbers, others are concerned about the bigger picture. That does not make us wrong and you right, as you like to claim. It means we have a different perspective.

1. The pandemic is the bigger picture. The economic fallout is a symptom of the bigger picture.

2. There is no possibility of a normal economy if a million Americans are dying from this virus. Do you honestly believe people are going to go out to restaurants or get their hair done or sit in a coffee shop if they know that they will almost certainly get a virus that will kill their parents and could place them in an under-staffed ICU that is now completely overrun due to massive demand?

3. I'm not arguing that there is no economic fallout or other terrible effects from this virus. I haven't argued that a single time. I disagree that the conclusion is that the economic restrictions should be lifted. Whatever economic fallout there is right now, it would be worse if the virus was ten times as bad as it is right now, which it would be.

[As Above So Below...]

There’s two crises at hand: health and economical.

We talk a lot about the health crisis but rarely of the economical one. It’s hard to create a timeline for the health crisis but we must have one for the economical crisis. How long can we afford to live like this? If the economy dies but we save every life, is that really a victory?

Bottom line is that this virus isn’t going away. We’re going to have to learn to live with it. That means exposing ourselves to the risk of getting it. The government has shown itself to be inept at getting resources to those who need them so trusting in them is foolish. We have to find a way to co-exist with this virus.

[calgirlinnc]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

1. The pandemic is the bigger picture. The economic fallout is a symptom of the bigger picture.

2. There is no possibility of a normal economy if a million Americans are dying from this virus. Do you honestly believe people are going to go out to restaurants or get their hair done or sit in a coffee shop if they know that they will almost certainly get a virus that will kill their parents and could place them in an under-staffed ICU that is now completely overrun due to massive demand?

3. I'm not arguing that there is no economic fallout or other terrible effects from this virus. I haven't argued that a single time. I disagree that the conclusion is that the economic restrictions should be lifted. Whatever economic fallout there is right now, it would be worse if the virus was ten times as bad as it is right now, which it would be.

Your contention seems to be that by shutting down the economy, we have saved millions of lives.

My contention is that by shutting down the economy, millions will die anyway, AND millions have lost their freedoms.

Frankly, I don't care if you agree with me or not.

This is not about coffee shops and hair salons. This is about potentially millions of people facing starvation and homelessness and destitution. I have read elsewhere your argument that the economy would tank anyway, because people wouldn't be going out. It's possible we could have "flattened the curve" on that too, instead of throwing 30 million people out of work in the span of two weeks.

As it is, more people are opening up their businesses in defiance of orders to stay closed because some people would rather die trying to live life than live a life of fear, isolation and despondency.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/26/nyc-ta...al-and-im-not/

"Rabin said a handful of customers have trickled in since Wednesday’s re-opening, and he’s fielding requests for suits for future events like bar mitzvahs and weddings. “Some [clients] ask, ‘Do you think you’ll get in trouble?'” he said. “If I do get in trouble, it will be for the right reasons. What are they going to do? Yell and scream at me? Fine me $500? It would be worth it, for me to be able to open my mouth and say this is not equitable. If they try to arrest me, I’ll say, ‘Am I in a police state now?’ They’re not going to arrest me.”"