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 liberal position is to close down all businesses so that they can impose socialism. Good, hard working, God fearing Americans must oppose the liberal socialist agenda.
So you quite strongly believe freedom lies in increasing your chances of getting COVID-19? But if you die from it you lose ALL freedom or just temporarily if it just gets you too sick to go to work.
So you quite strongly believe freedom lies in increasing your chances of getting COVID-19? But if you die from it you lose ALL freedom or just temporarily if it just gets you too sick to go to work.
Or maybe permanent physical damage. Broadway star Nick Cordero had his leg amputated due to coronavirus complications
wouldn't it be good to have some tiny exposure to virus, such as that we might get walking a few feet behind him and breathing in his expelled air/surface cells, which are now diffused through the air), and allowing our bodies to build antibodies to attack this small viral load? I'm not saying it's a smart idea to have an infected person sneeze in your face, but really, is it wise (or even possible) to avoid total exposure to this virus?
Yes, that's literally the definition of a vaccine. Injecting a dead virus into your body so your body can build up antibodies for any future expose.
Herd immunity is the only thing that can save civilization. We can't hide from this virus until there's a possible vaccine.
Location: Somewhere gray and damp, close to the West Coast
20,955 posts, read 5,545,098 times
Reputation: 8559
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie
So you quite strongly believe freedom lies in increasing your chances of getting COVID-19? But if you die from it you lose ALL freedom or just temporarily if it just gets you too sick to go to work.
Because, as we all know, exposure=infection=death.
The "healthy under 50" percentage of the population isn't large enough to achieve "herd immunity."
Moreover, "herd immunity" without a vaccine is a chimera. It's what humanity had before there were ever vaccines--back when polio, small pox, and other diseases ravaged populations for centuries.
Without a vaccine to safely immunize 80-90 percent of the population, "herd immunity" just means the disease failed to become an actual species extinction event.
But it's certainly not satisfactory. Nobody in his right mind--or who has any concept of the carnage he's talking about--thinks herd immunity without vaccination is a solution.
I think we need to rely on science to make the call, not emotional sentiment.
Agree. Staying at home will not help the economy. And NOT staying home will result in more deaths sooner.
Those are the options.
By "cases aren't going downhill" - I pretty much take that to mean: The number of dead people is not falling. While they may point to tests (and increased tests lead to increased results, no doubt) - the real number to watch is dead people.
If it spikes in a few weeks - this is why. It may not change anyone's mind about the economy - but the gov't. is in a tough situation. At an individual level they will be blamed for bankruptcy - and they will be blamed for gramma's death. It's a tough tightrope to walk. Sure, the economy is more important for the masses - but dead people don't pay taxes. Well, not more than once. I'd hate to be a politician right now - ya can't win.
Nope. Not staying at home will ultimately save lives. The longer people stay in lockdown, the longer they spend washing their hands and living in a disinfectant bubble, the weaker their immune systems get. Meaning that when they eventually do go outside, they are more susceptible to every virus and microbe. Lots of people apparently slept through science class.
The bug is highly infectious, the number of cases, even with a lockdown, shows how much of a failure the lockdown has been. NYC had 25% infected a week ago, undoubtedly more now. In just a few weeks it's spread to every state and nearly every county (in fact, undoubtedly every one based on antibody tests). The best thing to do? Get outside in the summer, when the virus is weakened by sunlight and our immune systems are at their strongest. Most people aren't going to get sick enough to even know they have had the bug, others will have minor systems. The only people that should stay inside, weakening their immune systems even further, are those that are the extreme elderly and those with underlying conditions. Frankly, the rest of us would be doing those people a huge favor by getting out immediately, getting exposed, as will inevitably happen anyway, and drive us to herd immunity.
I think we need to rely on science to make the call, not emotional sentiment.
Good idea.
I'd recommend you do more research on what "herd immunity" actually is, as described by scientists, and how it is achieved.
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.
