Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's what the doom and gloom people want to believe.
Actually, scientists (fact-based investigators, uninterested in either doom and gloom nor conveniently optimistic findings) are interested in studying how immunity to other coronaviruses have operated. This article describes studies that found frequent reinfections at 12 months and reduced antibody levels as early as 6 months in closely related diseases.
Everyone wants to have all of the answers and move on with a post-COVID life. The fact is, we don't have all of the answers yet and we aren't close to the solution. Studies like this demonstrate that layman conventional wisdom is not all that useful, and potentially deadly for the vulnerable, if embodied callously. This is especially true when laymen try to extrapolate upon novel pandemics. We should be listening to the scientists.
Actually, scientists (fact-based investigators, uninterested in either doom and gloom nor conveniently optimistic findings) are interested in studying how immunity to other coronaviruses have operated. This article describes studies that found frequent reinfections at 12 months and reduced antibody levels as early as 6 months in closely related diseases.
Everyone wants to have all of the answers and move on with a post-COVID life. The fact is, we don't have all of the answers yet and we aren't close to the solution. Studies like this demonstrate that layman conventional wisdom is not all that useful, and potentially deadly for the vulnerable, if embodied callously. This is especially true when laymen try to extrapolate upon novel pandemics. We should be listening to the scientists.
As I like to think myself as reasonably intelligent, I do read frequently the studies (from credible research journals and institutions of health, not from social media newsfeed or internet gossip among the hypochondriacs) the pattern is pretty clear. Based on my age/health COVID-19 poses an extremely minimal risk to me and to most people. It poses more of a risk to others. And for a very small minority it's a fatal risk. I don't view the virus as something that must be avoided at all costs when weighed against the opportunity cost of squirreling myself away in perpetual hibernation waiting for a vaccine that may or may not be effective.
That does not mean I disavow balanced public policy that seeks to mitigate the virus' spread to help those at most risk. And I'm happy to share in those policies, such as wearing masks and I do take care to avoid crowded spaces. But there is way too much covid fear porn that's partly driven by partisanship. The speculative talk of reinfection is now being used to justify extreme public policy that is continuing to place enormous social and economic pressures on society as everything seems to be sacrificed in the ever-shifting goalposts of managing the COVID pandemic.
That said, there's increasingly positive news out of the UK regarding a promising vaccine, so crossing fingers.
As I like to think myself as reasonably intelligent, I do read frequently the studies (from credible research journals and institutions of health, not from social media newsfeed or internet gossip among the hypochondriacs) the pattern is pretty clear. Based on my age/health COVID-19 poses an extremely minimal risk to me and to most people. It poses more of a risk to others. And for a very small minority it's a fatal risk. I don't view the virus as something that must be avoided at all costs when weighed against the opportunity cost of squirreling myself away in perpetual hibernation waiting for a vaccine that may or may not be effective.
That does not mean I disavow balanced public policy that seeks to mitigate the virus' spread to help those at most risk. And I'm happy to share in those policies, such as wearing masks and I do take care to avoid crowded spaces. But there is way too much covid fear porn that's partly driven by partisanship. The speculative talk of reinfection is now being used to justify extreme public policy that is continuing to place enormous social and economic pressures on society as everything seems to be sacrificed in the ever-shifting goalposts of managing the COVID pandemic.
That said, there's increasingly positive news out of the UK regarding a promising vaccine, so crossing fingers.
Funny you should ask, I was just reading this interesting article on the trajectory of mask wearing since the outbreak of COVID-19. It is really interesting, and yes, exemplifies that scientists do not always agree. It shows how ill-prepared we were for a pandemic (obviously we have been in catch up mode ever since). Back then, they were afraid that masks would give people the sense of some get-out-of-jail-free card re: COVID. Interesting to think how policy makers and the general populace alike were for these times. I even remember thinking to myself back in late February, "meh, how bad is it really going to get? Isn't it just like a bad flu?" I think the ongoing question of "masks" and their relation to freedom also exemplifies how out-dated and self-centered our notions of freedom can be. How about everyone's collective freedom to live in a world where COVID does not run rampant? I know you mentioned your willingness to wear a mask; I am more so making this point broadly, since you brought it up. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-expectations/
But the fact that scientists do not always agree does not mean we cannot listen to them. One can account for when majorities and pluralities agree upon findings, account for what is known and what is not known, and proceed cautiously knowing what is within reasonable doubt and what is settled fact.
So when it comes to "herd immunity," you're right, we don't know how it operates yet. When laymen act as if those of us likely to survive the disease (myself and from your account, you as well) can just share germs until we all have COVID, and then we can finally see grandma again, it is irresponsible. Because as of now, we don't know how long-term immunity works, and there is reason to believe immunity may be short-lived.
Point is, there is really no reason for laymen to speculate about herd immunity until we have the scientific data to back it up. Otherwise, we risk giving others the impression of some fast-track solution if all we "young and healthy" types just go share germs. At this point in the pandemic, that is any epidemiologist's nightmare.
Fortunately, I don't know of too many scientists asking us to squirrel away in hibernation. From all accounts I have read, more restrictive directives in states such as New York and Pennsylvania regarding physical distancing have been data-driven. When our numbers have dropped to reasonably safe levels, we have been able to partake in some semblance of "normalcy." When our rates were spiking back in March and April, "nonessential" workers either worked remotely or were able to receive just unemployment benefits. And, we of course were still permitted outside, to the grocery store, to order take out, etc. It seems like a logical, common sense (yet of course less than favorable when compared to pre-COVID life) approach to me.
Last edited by Muinteoir; 07-17-2020 at 01:59 PM..
Irritating. The camp leaders have some high demands and keep adding demands according to news sources.
The city can only do so much in a short period of time. It will come to a point when the city will have to clear it out, I don't know what the mayor is waiting for...
Also, the Barnes and other museums are re-opening over the next 1-2 weeks. Not a good look to have a tent village on the Parkway, especially with needles and trash scattered about. I've seen a few recent pictures from a friend of mine. They live behind the camp.
People, you for instance, can show us all of your leadership abilities by risking exposure by running for public office. That"s something you will never do of course.
To answer the origional question and avoid slings at the mayor (at least for the moment, since I'm from Philly and reserve my right to complain at any time--about any thing), stuff is really disturbing in the land of perpetual COVID shutdowns. I wonder what it'll feel like 10 years on, when we look back at this time. Hell, I'm curious what it'll be like a year from now. It's easy to complain about city officials acquiescing to the demands of less fortunate folks from the comfort of our homes, with internet, running water, and food. But I'll admit, in our present moment, it's kinda messed up to pretend like homelessness isn't at least in part a byproduct of a gluttonous nation state that has systemically failed its most vulnerable citizens.
Seriously. And we're complaining about potentially offending Barnes visitors, during a pandemic, when million of people are jobless and don't have healthcare and when an entire generation is losing faith in the political institutions that keep this grand expirament going. FFS. Clearly I need to go to bed.
Actually, scientists (fact-based investigators, uninterested in either doom and gloom nor conveniently optimistic findings) are interested in studying how immunity to other coronaviruses have operated. This article describes studies that found frequent reinfections at 12 months and reduced antibody levels as early as 6 months in closely related diseases.
Everyone wants to have all of the answers and move on with a post-COVID life. The fact is, we don't have all of the answers yet and we aren't close to the solution. Studies like this demonstrate that layman conventional wisdom is not all that useful, and potentially deadly for the vulnerable, if embodied callously. This is especially true when laymen try to extrapolate upon novel pandemics. We should be listening to the scientists.
People who are discounting what the science is telling us seem to lack an understanding of the scientific method. It is more about learning than knowing. When presented with a scientific challenging phenomenon, scientists take stock of what they know, form an hypothesis about what they don’t, test the hypothesis and measure the result. It’s more or less lather-rinse-repeat until most of the mystery is understood.
One canard the anti-science crowd crows about is the initial guidance to not wear masks. While part of the explanation was to ensure a supply for those on the front lines, anyone who thinks the American public were intentionally misled about mask wearing resemble the folks on street corners in tin foil hats. The truth: more was learned and more was shared.
We can expect more discoveries as we go along. Knowledge of the virus is barely 7 months old. More to come.
It was some bar and restaurant owners themselves who were quoted in the Philly media as being upset that more restrictions were being place on all -- when they say, it's just some establishments that are NOT following restrictions.
They want more enforcement, and say shutdown those places that aren't following mandates. And let those that are stay open. But, then you get into a debate about whether that would be a no-win situation for politicians and police. For example, would news stories cover closures from the POV of this is what needs to be done....or...more protestors would come out and say "the gov/mayor are trying to keep honest biz people from making a living." No politician wants those "optics."
Even if it were a matter of principle to close establishments that were not compliant. How many politicians are willing to stand on principle, when they're getting creamed in the media.
So, how do we get more restaurants -- and businesses in general -- to follow corona guidelines?
Maybe, promote those that are....free advertising? But then again how would that work when a bar could be in compliance one day, and not in compliance the next?
I'll ask these questions:
-- IS there an INCENTIVE that would NOT ultimately cost city taxpayers money?
-- How much would YOU be willing to pay out of YOUR pocket to help out?
Is it a matter of how much we should all contribute to the greater good? OR is it just the fact that life isn't fair, and those who are lucky enough to have jobs and work for companies that haven't been affected, can't be expected to prop up -- help -- those that are.
We can't save every business in the city that may close due to coronavirus.
But then again maybe it's a pay later situation no matter what. Because if the businesses go, then the city will raises taxes anyway on those -- businesses AND residents -- that remain.
People who are discounting what the science is telling us seem to lack an understanding of the scientific method. It is more about learning than knowing. When presented with a scientific challenging phenomenon, scientists take stock of what they know, form an hypothesis about what they don’t, test the hypothesis and measure the result. It’s more or less lather-rinse-repeat until most of the mystery is understood.
One canard the anti-science crowd crows about is the initial guidance to not wear masks. While part of the explanation was to ensure a supply for those on the front lines, anyone who thinks the American public were intentionally misled about mask wearing resemble the folks on street corners in tin foil hats. The truth: more was learned and more was shared.
We can expect more discoveries as we go along. Knowledge of the virus is barely 7 months old. More to come.
Your post illustrates the healthy role of skepticism in science itself. Skepticism is an important component of the inquisitive mind that is the foundation of scientific exploration. It is not anti-science to express skepticism about a certain claim or finding. There are, after all, plenty of disagreement within the field of science on just about everything. Merely pointing this out doesn't make someone anti-science, which in itself has become a terminology primarily wielded to try to delegitimize someone's differing views, usually by people who have little understanding of what science really is all about, and perhaps more relevant, how the boundaries between science and politics have become blurred and some of the decisions taken in regards to COVID is driven mostly by politics rather than science.
The schooling situation is a good example of a topic that has a lot of disagreement within the "scientific" community but despite this the pro-closing factors frequently latch on the "guided by science" mantra as if they owned the entire scientific debate and there no dissent. A great deal of school closing is driven by politics more than science these days. After all, day cares have been open across the nation and continue to be open and yet there's virtually no COVID spread associated with daycares....
And the politicians who claim to be "guided by science" have made policy decisions that were disastrous. In Pennsylvania, "guided by science" Tom Wolf (like his Cuomo counterpart in New York) ordered nursing homes to take COVID-19 residents back, which was disastrous and led to many more unnecessary deaths. They did this despite abundant scientific knowledge at the time that COVID was highly lethal to elderly and frail residents and it was a virus that was extremely contagious and being spread via asymptomatic carriers. All this sensibly pointed to a conclusion: keep COVID patients out of nursing homes insomuch as possible. But these "guided by science" politicians ignored this particular piece of science, eh?
It's understandable why some people keep talking about being guided by science. They take comfort in it, there are "experts" out there, just listen to them and the problems will be solved and all is well. There's security, perhaps false, perhaps not, in wanting to be "guided by science." Unfortunately, this is rarely the case. Science itself doesn't tell us what good public policy is. Science doesn't tell us we must sacrifice everything to save every life. Science doesn't tell is it's right to throw tens of millions into unemployment and shutter thousands of businesses and subject tens of millions of schoolkids to another year of remote learning. All these are public policy decisions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
