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.
My concern is that America (and the world, too) is going to suffer from what I'll call Near Miss Syndrome. Something really bad almost happens, but it isn't as bad as you think, so the next time something similar comes along, possibly far far worse, we'll just say "Oh, we dealt with this before - no big deal." Think about people that evacuate from a hurricane that winds up missing and causing just heavy rain and some gusty winds. Those same people are more likely to ignore evacuation orders the next time because "well, they got it wrong once! I'm not leaving!"
In a decade or so, a Stephen King The Stand-type virus might spread across the world. And we will take no appropriate action whatsoever because "remember 2020 when only 300,000 people died from some virus!? Surely this one won't be any worse since you know, they must all be the same."
Absolutely correct. It's the same type of person that listen to the meteorologist report that a huge snowstorm is coming, and to be prepared. This person takes the necessary precautions, such as stocking up on some essentials for a couple of days and avoiding driving. The heart of the storm misses the area by about 15 miles, and only about 2 inches of snow ends up falling.
The next month, the meteorologist reports another storm coming. The same person says "to hell with that; they were wrong the last time" They go about their normal activity, and their car ends up sliding off the road.
Am I understanding you to say that they should follow (or ignore) what the medical experts say, without considering other inputs? That seems to be what happens on some days, and then on other days, the economic experts weigh in, and they act on that. Next day, the governors speak, and he bends to them, the next day his base rages, and he reverses again.
My point was, and remains, he needs to have the ability to take ALL inputs in, have command of the situation, and make an informed policy, yet have the ability to evolve as facts and information evolve.
As I said, he either can't, or won't. Either way, it's just not happening. And yes, that's an opinion. Yours certainly may vary, and I respect that. (My wife's opinion is the exact opposite, and I respect hers too.)
List who the other inputs should be besides medical "experts" ? the media? politicians? who else should be providing input about a virus that our best and brightest medical experts clearly don't understand to generate policy? Fauci is telling us the CV was nothing we had to worry about in January and in March he's telling us we don't need to wear masks? Yet here we are.
Who should Trump be listening to? Be specific, gimme some names.
This is a perfect post of what was going to happen and the attitude that would be demonstrated if shutdowns were to occur to stop the upward trajectory (sorry I'm tired of the Flatten the Curve words) this virus was taking to make sure we didn't become an Italy. It has slowed down, most certainly because of our reactions. Now whether or not this was a good or bad thing to do to save some lives and not overwhelm hospitals in the short term was a good decision, well, that depends on your perspective. But I think we are doing ourselves a disservice to say this was the wrong thing to do.
What, exactly, do you base that conclusion on? In crowded, densely packed, cities, it spread anyway. 25% of NYC, some 2 million people, were found to be infected when antibody studies were done-back in mid April. This well after the lockdown started. With 25% of the population infected, your "lockdown" was an utter failure. Especially in a city like NYC that is so crowded-1 of every 4 people you come across has had it (again, more than a month ago-undoubtedly more now!). In a crowded city, it's going to spread, with or without a lockdown.
Yet other states initiated NO lockdowns. Most of them had minimal transmission (on the order of 1/30th of what NY State had). In a dispersed area, it's not spreading quickly, with or without a lockdown (a handful of isolated employers/meat packing facilities excepted). Oh, those meat packing facilities? "Essential businesses"-they would have been open even with a "lockdown" in those states. Something the FUD-packers ignore.
So how do you conclude that "our reactions", aka "lockdowns" did anything? I agree that when things first started getting bad, they were the right thing to do. We simply didn't know any better-and as bad as this is-it COULD have been a lot worse-by a factor of 20 or more as the "experts" told us. But it's been obvious for weeks now that the lockdown, if it accomplished anything, had a minimal impact. Especially now, as the weather is warmer and sunnier, it's time for them to go away, at least for those that aren't elderly or with other negative conditions.
Because people were showing up to emergency rooms and presenting with severe respiratory symptoms; a lot were spiraling towards death very quickly, and doctors couldn't figure out what it was. When you're dealing with something novel, you really can't afford to wait to gather more data, test hypotheses, and research. It could have been Bubonic plague level. And if it were, if we would have waited till people were dropping dead left and right, it would have been much too late to do anything and we would have all been completely screwed, even the ones that managed to survive.
Thankfully, it's not Bubonic plague level, but scientists were able to hypothesize correctly that it was leagues above flu. Almost 100,000 dead since March with shelter in place, and people are still arguing we went too far. We don't even have a placebo in any other part of the world to see how truly bad this could have been if we had done absolutely nothing and proceeding on with life as usual. Every county in the world that has the virus has had some form of mitigation to contain the virus, even Sweden.
Mitigating a pandemic is a lose/lose, but it has to be done. The same people complaining now about scientists and experts revising guidelines as they get more information are the same people who would've b***** and moaned about scientists' lack of knowledge had nothing been done and we had millions dead. Either way, they would have sown distrust in science because the way they look at it, both outcomes are bad.
Like I said, it's a lose/lose.
So its ok to lie and just make **** up because you dont know? Thats what your saying.
Not everyone believes its leagues above the flu. We all know that a big percentage of deaths counted were not a result of covid 19. So no the scientist have not hypothesized correctly, at all.
As you are now hypothesizing shelter in place prevented millions of deaths.
List who the other inputs should be besides medical "experts" ? the media? politicians? who else should be providing input about a virus that our best and brightest medical experts clearly don't understand to generate policy? Fauci is telling us the CV was nothing we had to worry about in January and in March he's telling us we don't need to wear masks? Yet here we are.
Who should Trump be listening to? Be specific, gimme some names.
I think what the person is saying that you can't just listen to one set of experts. A competent leader takes input from all sides to guide them to come up with a comprehensive plan to mitigate the infection while hurting the least amount of people economically.
Medical experts know the health related risks while economic experts will weigh in on the economic risks. Neither side should be chiming in on the other. The leader's job is to take all this information presented from various experts into account and weigh them accordingly to figure out how to proceed. It needs to be a cohesive response.
So...just what have the "experts" gotten right on this virus?
-No human to human transmission
-No need for tests from foreign countries, our own industry or universities-the CDC has this (and banned all other tests). Only to screw the pooch hard and waste a month at the start of this pandemic
-If you touch anything another person has you're going to die.
-We NEED 500,000 ventilators
-2-5 million Americans will die
-Masks bayd
-We need to "lockdown" for a couple of weeks to "flatten the curve"
-You can't go outside without a mask on
-We need to "lockdown" for a few years until there is a vaccine
If it wasn't so serious, our "experts" would be a damn joke. Just what have they gotten right during this whole thing? These "experts" are responsible for 30 million Americans losing their jobs, hundreds of thousands of businesses destroyed, life's savings lost.
They have to come clean... It is all being exposed for the HOAX it was made to be.
So its ok to lie and just make **** up because you dont know? Thats what your saying.
Not everyone believes its leagues above the flu. We all know that a big percentage of deaths counted were not a result of covid 19. So no the scientist have not hypothesized correctly, at all.
As you are now hypothesizing shelter in place prevented millions of deaths.
So, what would you have had them do with them not knowing how severe the virus was? Take a risk and just let it be? And if it were a multitude of degrees worse?
It's not lying and making s*** up at all! It's using preventative measures when they don't know important information yet. The amount of deaths from Covid 19 are most likely understated. You're repeating conspiracy theories.
If you don't think it's worse than the flu at this point when this information has been available and has been repeated for months at this point, there's nothing left to say to you. No amount of evidence or data will convince you.
List who the other inputs should be besides medical "experts" ? the media? politicians? who else should be providing input about a virus that our best and brightest medical experts clearly don't understand to generate policy? Fauci is telling us the CV was nothing we had to worry about in January and in March he's telling us we don't need to wear masks? Yet here we are.
Who should Trump be listening to? Be specific, gimme some names.
That is a great question, thank you.
How about titles (not names)? He should be listening to:
Medical Experts
Epidemiologists
Economist, or people who understand the eonomy
Business owners: Small, Medium, Large
Law Enformcement
Certainly local and state governors from all areas of the country
Possibly logistical experts
I'm sure I missed a few.
And to address a few concerns with my response that I anticipate you MAY have:
-I did not offer an opinion on his expertise on ANY of these subjects. He may be knowledgeable, he should still seek more opinions.
-Yes, that is a lot of people. A good "Chief Executive" knows how to create a pipeline for the information without speaking to 1000's of individuals.
All these people in this thread, and others, suggesting that he is, or should be listening to only Fauci, or only the CDC (or only Fauci and the CDC) are just wrong.
This problem affects, and is affected by all the groups I mentioned above, and more. A working solution can't be made without taking them into consideration.
They have to come clean... It is all being exposed for the HOAX it was made to be.
Why is the rest of the world shutting down to support an American Hoax? If this is about Dem's taking power, what's in it for Spain, Korea, Italy, Saudi, Bahrain, Jordan, and all the other countries that are shut down. I speak to people regularly from those countries, and they are on tighter lockdown than the US.
Are you saying their gov'ts are all in the HOAX to get rid of Trump?
This is a serious question.
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.
