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.
The videos and editorials speak for themselves. If you can't be bothered to actually read and listen, you are not qualified to make a judgment - and that's on you.
The models have been revised yet again. Now it says 147,000 deaths in the US by August. Seems that they should have just kept it at 100k to 200k as their earlier model said.
Well, the reopenings will definitely put the curve on an uptick. Americans are not going to stay home much longer. The best we can do now is try to mitigate that uptick w/public awareness, social distancing, disinfecting - and ramp up to deal with the inevitable increased hospitalizations and deaths.
I've repeatedly said, new therapies are continually coming to the fore - see Coronavirus Science thread on Current Events - and we are getting better at managing the hospitalizations, less use of ventilator, more use of less potentially damaging therapies. We need to find a way to live with this as we work our way through it because this virus will be with us for years.
I dont have an answer sadly I can understand what you have presented but what can we do? IDK? And the whole of it all is very sad.
And that is why we will see people die when we reopen. We need a plan that protects them. We don't because some politicians think we are spending too much right now. There are some states that are asking for people to be reported to the Department of Economic Security by their employer, if they turndown returning to work (no idea if it includes worry about the comorbidity of themselves or people they live with.) We need some sort of safety net since this situation is so dangerous. We don't even know what will happen if people with have reoccuring medical issues related to exposure to Covid-19.
And that is why we will see people die when we reopen. We need a plan that protects them. We don't because some politicians think we are spending too much right now. There are some states that are asking for people to be reported to the Department of Economic Security by their employer, if they turndown returning to work (no idea if it includes worry about the comorbidity of themselves or people they live with.) We need some sort of safety net since this situation is so dangerous. We don't even know what will happen if people with have reoccuring medical issues related to exposure to Covid-19.
It's not "so dangerous." The data says that the mortality rate is less than 0.5%. Or doesn't the "science" matter to you?
And that is why we will see people die when we reopen. We need a plan that protects them. We don't because some politicians think we are spending too much right now. There are some states that are asking for people to be reported to the Department of Economic Security by their employer, if they turndown returning to work (no idea if it includes worry about the comorbidity of themselves or people they live with.) We need some sort of safety net since this situation is so dangerous. We don't even know what will happen if people with have reoccuring medical issues related to exposure to Covid-19.
RNA viruses are self limiting due to coding errors so they don't last long. They capitalize on hosts so that would support your conclusion that more "hosts" will be present... But that only works if the virus is static in it's attributes -which it is not. So over the past 3 months it could have moved onto new hosts found new sites and left the human species alone. At least that is the hope. Either way, yes people will become ill and some will die. While that is tragic, life is tragic and finite. We cannot live in fear.
The models have been revised yet again. Now it says 147,000 deaths in the US by August. Seems that they should have just kept it at 100k to 200k as their earlier model said.
The problem is this was Trump. A sane president would think it could be fine until we get a far better hold of data. Trump is clearly not sane and we have seen it in this crisis. Trump is a narcissist and cannot take negative feedback. In the mind of Trump especially when he is up for re-election is that 100K to 200K is not a good thing. He wanted to look like it was working even if it wasn't. I imagine he encouraged to use the kinder models. He had dismissed the more extreme models that have been done.
Most epidemiologists believe, when all is said and done, mortality as a rate of overall population willbe 1%. 0.5% cannot be evidenced at this point in time by anyone.
For most of us, if we get COVID, we want to know what are our chances based on experience thus far - experience thus far means confirmed cases. We know younger are less vulnerable than old, those without comorbidities are less vulnerable than those with. Talking about best case once we're through this "0.5%" is meaningless at this point.
Last edited by Ariadne22; 05-12-2020 at 06:09 PM..
The problem is this was Trump. A sane president would think it could be fine until we get a far better hold of data. Trump is clearly not sane and we have seen it in this crisis. Trump is a narcissist and cannot take negative feedback. In the mind of Trump especially when he is up for re-election is that 100K to 200K is not a good thing. He wanted to look like it was working even if it wasn't. I imagine he encouraged to use the kinder models. He had dismissed the more extreme models that have been done.
It is unfathomable to me that people blame a person for the behavior clinically of a viral illness. It's like a cult.
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.