Coronavirus in Massachusetts (weddings, schools, calculation)

[tribecavsbrowns]

Originally Posted by suzy_q2010

Because the circulating flu viruses change from season to season. The pre-existing immunity is not universal, but it is not zero the way it was with covid.

It wasn't zero; that is just another lie. There was a SARS-Cov-1, for Pete's sake!

[suzy_q2010]

Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns

It wasn't zero; that is just another lie. There was a SARS-Cov-1, for Pete's sake!

There were only 8 confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-1 in the US. No deaths.

https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/c...fact_sheet.htm

"Through July 2003, a total of 192 SARS cases had been reported in the United States, including 159 suspect and 33 probable cases; of the 33 probable cases only 8 had laboratory evidence of the SARS virus. No SARS-related deaths occurred in the U.S. SARS cases reported in the U.S. occurred primarily among people who traveled to SARS-affected areas; a small number of people became ill after being in close contact with (having cared for or lived with) a SARS patient while in the U.S."

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns

Why do the psychopaths and liars and useful idiots, when they goad you to get your flu shot every year, not say "it's a novel virus, you have no immunity to it?" Because most of the time they are not executing a program designed to send the populace into panic. But with Sars-Cov-2, that is what they were doing. Which is why all hell broke loose.

Why were they doing this? I don't know. But I am glad this iteration of it is over. Well, mostly over -- at least two C-D accounts are dutifully repeating the lies as if it's still May 2020, not May 2023.

I can think of a few reasons:

1. To push UBI;
2. To change the then-current resident of the White House;
3. To express their guilt over Western lifestyles, that we "can't go on living like this," sort of like the arguments on "climate change"; and/or
4. Being infantilized, the way much of society is now.

[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns

Why were they doing this? I don't know. But I am glad this iteration of it is over. Well, mostly over -- at least two C-D accounts are dutifully repeating the lies as if it's still May 2020, not May 2023.

The same CDC you're quoting, also states that Covid was the 4th leading cause of death in 2022. Covid basically went from nonexistent to 3rd leading cause of death in 2021. The same camp who was downplaying its seriousness then, are still acting like it was overblown. Who's lying now?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/healt...ath/index.html

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

The same CDC you're quoting, also states that Covid was the 4th leading cause of death in 2022. Covid basically went from nonexistent to 3rd leading cause of death in 2021. The same camp who was downplaying its seriousness then, are still acting like it was overblown. Who's lying now?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/healt...ath/index.html

Do the stats distinguish between dying of and dying with Covid? And even if accurate, was locking down society worth it, and for little gain?

[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

Do the stats distinguish between dying of and dying with Covid? And even if accurate, was locking down society worth it, and for little gain?

As others have mentioned here, let's face it, we never really "locked down" for more than 2 weeks. It's a really skewed perspective vs. what other countries did. And as far as in-person school closures, which seem to be a big source of heartburn, hindsight is great. Besides, measures like ventilation and air purification take time to install and could not have been put in place instantaneously.

[jbgusa]

I respectfully disagree.

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

As others have mentioned here, let's face it, we never really "locked down" for more than 2 weeks. It's a really skewed perspective vs. what other countries did.

The societies that had true "lockdowns" were not fully open countries to begin with. Our version of lockdown was plenty disruptive. Do you remember lines to get into stores? Canceled weddings, coming of age events and, most heartlessly, funerals? Basically, civil society was gutted. However, society apparently believed that rioting over the death of a drug addict was more important than COVID mitigation.

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

And as far as in-person school closures, which seem to be a big source of heartburn, hindsight is great. Besides, measures like ventilation and air purification take time to install and could not have been put in place instantaneously.

These measures were, at best, cosmetic. It's sort of like expecting a rail fence or state border to control the virus.

In short, I'll state my view. Sometimes the best thing to do is nothing. In this case, maybe, find ways to allow the vulnerable to self-isolate while the world continued its business and pleasure.

[msRB311]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

As others have mentioned here, let's face it, we never really "locked down" for more than 2 weeks. It's a really skewed perspective vs. what other countries did. And as far as in-person school closures, which seem to be a big source of heartburn, hindsight is great. Besides, measures like ventilation and air purification take time to install and could not have been put in place instantaneously.

We didn't 'lock down' but as has been mentioned life was far from normal for over a year.

Did you have small children when the schools were shut down, not to mention the next year was hybrid for most? I personally didn't mind that much but many others seemed to have a mental breakdown. People felt isolated and weren't seeing each other. Kids weren't having playdates or any type of get togethers. That might mean nothing to you but it was hard for many.

[suzy_q2010]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

I respectfully disagree.The societies that had true "lockdowns" were not fully open countries to begin with. Our version of lockdown was plenty disruptive. Do you remember lines to get into stores? Canceled weddings, coming of age events and, most heartlessly, funerals? Basically, civil society was gutted. However, society apparently believed that rioting over the death of a drug addict was more important than COVID mitigation.

These measures were, at best, cosmetic. It's sort of like expecting a rail fence or state border to control the virus.

In short, I'll state my view. Sometimes the best thing to do is nothing. In this case, maybe, find ways to allow the vulnerable to self-isolate while the world continued its business and pleasure.

Weddings and funerals became super spreader events.

It took a while for the definition of "vulnerable" to become apparent.

The rail fence analogy does not work. The virus is not spread a single particles but in aerosols and droplets that are trapped by a a mask, which needs to be properly fitted, properly worn, and properly handled. They do not completely prevent transmission, but they do reduce it.

What would have happened if "nothing" had been done? How many schools would have closed if too many teachers were sick? How many businesses would have closed because too many employees were sick? How many hospitals would have shut down because too many health care workers were sick? Your assumption is there would have been less disruption. I think there would have been more, especially with the health care system, creating more collateral damage due to lack of access for people with non-covid conditions.

[suzy_q2010]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

Do the stats distinguish between dying of and dying with Covid?

There are criteria for certifying a covid death. It requires signs, symptoms, and laboratory evidence of the disease covid-19, not just a positive test for the virus.