|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On September 15 2021 06:23 Slydie wrote:
I have to say that Norway is increadibly priviliged for dealing with Covid-19:
-The largest city has less than 700k inhabitants, 2 other have more than 200k and only 3 more have over 100k.
-A spread out population of only 5 million, broken up by fjords and mountains.
-Located in a corner of the continent with only 2 highways crossing the border.
-Generally bad infrastructure.
-A healthy political landscape where covid was mostly avoided as a political weapon.
-Very high trust in authorities.
-A well organized healthcare system with clear responsabilities at the local level.
-Social distancing as an integrated part of the culture.
-A cold climate where a lot of time is spent at home.
Finland has a lot of the same advantages and also did very well.
It would have been fun to run some simulations to see how little Norway could have gotten away with. The initial lockdown was almost certainly overkill, but at least the overall results were very good with the total deaths under half of a bad flu season.
I mean, Norway also shares a large land border with the early poster child for laissez-faire covid policy, and has a huge number of essential workers who cross it constantly.
Norway had advantages and disadvantages like everyone else. They did remarkably well in the circumstances. It's silly to try and downplay it like Bart Simpson going "I could do that but I don't wanna".
Their biggest advantage is a high level of social responsibility and mutual trust in government.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25475 Posts
@DroneofFluidForm yeah 100%, for the most part.
Although, in some respects lockdown sucking to me was in ways is indicative of wider underlying malaises.
Depends on the severity of a lockdown of course, but a lot of us appear to be one or two creature comfort or coping activities away from being profoundly unhappy, which would tell me that our collective baseline contentedness isn’t too hot to begin with.
|
On September 14 2021 21:30 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2021 20:58 BlackJack wrote:On September 14 2021 20:37 Gorsameth wrote:On September 14 2021 20:29 BlackJack wrote:On September 14 2021 20:00 Magic Powers wrote:On September 14 2021 19:28 BlackJack wrote:On September 14 2021 19:16 Zambrah wrote:
We live in a warped and twisted world where preventing human death and suffering isnt a good reason to do something.
That should be just about the best god damned reason to do something. It's so easy to just look at the pros of something and ignore the cons, eh? Why do you think that Dr. of the WHO's special envoy on COVID-19 recommends against lockdowns as the primary control method for preventing COVID-19 when we already know this is far and away the best way to prevent death? Do you think he is just fucked in the head and doesn't care about preventing human death and suffering? ... Since he didn't "advise against lockdowns" contrary to your claim,? ... Bro, my post is practically 1 sentence long, are you really going to misquote it in such a ridiculous way? I said he "recommends against lockdows as the primary control method for preventing COVID-19." Here is his quote "We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus." No one outside of arguably Australia is using lockdowns as a primary means of control. Everyone is using it as a last resort after the other measures failed to contain it. What are you even arguing at this point? Did you see my response to Zambrah that started this quote-chain? I said there are pros and cons to lockdowns. Lockdowns are by far the BEST way to stop the spread of COVID and therefore prevent death. Yet you rightly point out that almost no country is using lockdowns as a primary control method for COVID. So do does that mean we live in a warped and twisted world where preventing death and suffering isn't a good reason to have lockdowns? No, it means there are cons to lockdowns that have to be considered as well. JimmiC and others can tell you all about how many ICU beds are occupied in a state he lives >1000 miles from, but I'd wager he probably hasn't spent more than 5 minutes researching what the ramifications are of millions of children missing school, hundreds of thousands of businesses closing down, millions losing their health insurance that is tied to their employment, millions being one eviction moratorium away from being homeless, etc. Yes I know where this started. With you saying Florida was doing fine without lockdowns and that the doomsayers were wrong. When confronted with Florida's record deaths you moved to the point that lockdowns shouldn't be the primary way of dealing covid, which they aren't because everyone else is only turning to lockdowns when all else has failed. (again, outside of maybe Australia). With no counter to that you have seemingly now moved on to the consequences of lockdowns on education and the economy. And yes lockdowns do damage there 300+ people dying every day also does a lot of damage. I'll take a child remote learning for a year over one of its parents or the child itself dying, but hey, that's just me I guess. And the economy, well good thing all the people in favor of lockdowns also tend to be in favor of government assistance to help companies and families make it through the period of lockdown until everyone is vaccinated and society can open up and go back to a semblance of normal. So, is your point that Florida's current (well, more like a month old death count cause lol shoving deaths into the past) death count, when compared to how the rest of the western world is doing, is acceptable? And is Florida actually doing better in educational and economic numbers then the rest of the country? Because I keep seeing reports of school classes closing and teachers dying over there. Imagine that is also disruptive to the children's education. ps. How many businesses and schools in Florida are trying to implement measures on their own without the state government? Lots of that damage your worried about is happening anyway because 'shocked' turns out companies don't like it when their staff gets sick and died or becomes disabled from long covid.
Yes, my view is that Florida's current death count is acceptable. My view is that lockdowns should only be used to prevent a catastrophic collapse of the healthcare system, e.g. hospitals running out of oxygen, people dying of treatable illnesses because they can't get seen by a doctor, etc. I think it's stupid to use lockdowns just so 0.05% of the population dies instead of 0.1%. Frankly I have no idea why anyone would disagree with this.
I'd also take a child remote learning over their parent dying. Unfortunately that's a choice that doesn't exist in reality. I've heard estimates of 1.4 Billion with a B children missing out on school. So you're really opting for thousands of children to miss school than to have 1 of them lose a parent.
To answer your last question, yes, Florida's economy is rebounding fantastically. In some instances their tourism numbers are even better than in 2019 which was pre-covid. I personally know 9 different people that visited Florida from California in the last 4 months, with 3 of them going more than once and one of them getting engaged there.
|
On September 15 2021 09:19 BlackJack wrote:
Yes, my view is that Florida's current death count is acceptable. My view is that lockdowns should only be used to prevent a catastrophic collapse of the healthcare system, e.g. hospitals running out of oxygen, people dying of treatable illnesses because they can't get seen by a doctor, etc. I think it's stupid to use lockdowns just so 0.05% of the population dies instead of 0.1%. Frankly I have no idea why anyone would disagree with this.
Without lockdowns, the number of deaths would've been far greater. You're judging things from the point after going through lockdowns, arguing that lockdowns aren't required, when lockdowns are the main reason that the pandemic didn't get completely out of control in the first place.
Your argument is like saying "see, I didn't need a napkin because clearly I didn't stain my shirt" after you're done eating with a napkin and didn't get your shirt stained, but there are stains all over the napkin.
You refusing or being unable to see the stains on the napkin doesn't mean there are no stains on it.
|
On September 15 2021 10:17 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 09:19 BlackJack wrote:
Yes, my view is that Florida's current death count is acceptable. My view is that lockdowns should only be used to prevent a catastrophic collapse of the healthcare system, e.g. hospitals running out of oxygen, people dying of treatable illnesses because they can't get seen by a doctor, etc. I think it's stupid to use lockdowns just so 0.05% of the population dies instead of 0.1%. Frankly I have no idea why anyone would disagree with this. Without lockdowns, the number of deaths would've been far greater. You're judging things from the point after going through lockdowns, arguing that lockdowns aren't required, when lockdowns are the main reason that the pandemic didn't get completely out of control in the first place. Your argument is like saying "see, I didn't need a napkin because clearly I didn't stain my shirt" after you're done eating with a napkin and didn't get your shirt stained, but there are stains all over the napkin. You refusing or being unable to see the stains on the napkin doesn't mean there are no stains on it.
The context of the discussion is the Delta wave that just went through Florida. They didn't go through lockdowns. You seem to be talking about lockeowns from over a year ago.
|
A good breakdown of vaccine rollout for teens across different countries.
China just one step ahead of everyone else. Kids as young as three getting jabbed! So much for the Western world leading the charge...
Covid: Which countries are vaccinating children and why? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58516207
|
On September 14 2021 21:41 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2021 20:53 Zambrah wrote:On September 14 2021 20:02 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 14 2021 19:16 Zambrah wrote:
We live in a warped and twisted world where preventing human death and suffering isnt a good reason to do something.
That should be just about the best god damned reason to do something. Lockdowns cause a lot of suffering. They prevent deaths, which I agree is a worthy cause, but I'm not sold on them reducing suffering. Mortality rates are not the primary determiner of how good a society is to live in (I mean, a really high rate is obv a bad indicator). I've read that Norway has had a lower mortality rate than normal during covid (other deaths are down by more than what covid deaths are up by), but it has certainly been a very tough year and a half for many. With how few people have died and become seriously ill, I think there is no question that the anti covid measures have caused more suffering than what covid has. (Of course, that equation would be entirely different with fewer measures, and I'm not disagreeing with the measures taken. ) The point however is that people that are anti lockdown have not reached that conclusion because they are pro suffering, rather they've reached it through thinking lockdowns cause more suffering than otherwise. The fact that there’s an argument to be made about whether they reduce suffering points to them being better than just rampant death, if both have suffering at least one cuts down heavily on the death portion... Incidentally I think whether or not you think anti COVID measures have been worse than COVID comes from whether or not you were particularly affected by COVID. The people who died and their loved ones probably think getting COVID was worse than having to wear masks, or get vaccinated, or skip out on eating in at restaurants for a little while. I spent two weeks in bed getting maybe two hour chunks of sleep at a time because I’ve wake up chokingon myself, and I’m comparatively lucky given I didn’t die or anything. We also still don’t fully understand the long term implications of COVID, so we’re not really looking at a complete picture on the suffering COVID has caused beyond killing over 600,000 people. Lockdown definitely didn’t cause as much death or real suffering as COVID has imo, especially given how incredibly sparingly lockdowns even went down in the US compared to the well over a year of having COVID going down. Like everyone else says though, wouldn’t have to lockdown if dumb shits would wear a mask and not insist on doing their damnedest to spread disease, a lot of the suffering could easily be prevented or minimized, but instead people would rather not. Frankly I’m not sure if I’d attribute suffering to COVID prevention measures as much as I’d attribute suffering to anti vaxxers, anti maskers, and all of their ilk given their refusal to actually adhere to COVID prevention measures necessitates the extended benefit of COVID prevention measures and lockdowns. I get that outside Norway/countries with similarly low death/infection rates, the equation is entirely different. But in Norway, it's not close. I literally don't know any person that has been significantly affected by them or someone they know contracting the virus - I think I know ~5 people who have tested positive (students of mine), but 0 of those 5 suffered more than say, the amount of suffering them getting the flu would constitute. (0 hospitalizations.) I also don't know anyone who has lost close relatives or friends - and that includes grandparents. The US has more than twice as many deaths per capita than we have hospitalizations per capita. However, nearly everyone I know has in some way been negatively influenced by the measures to combat covid, and while the more introverty internet aficionados like myself have been less bothered, I've seen others increase their alcohol/drug consumption (and without the social benefits they'd normally experience), and I'm guessing my 20 closest friends would report an average bmi increase of ~2. Many youth have received an inferior education, mental health has deteriorated for the same group, elderly have been even more lonely, organized sports for youth was put on a long pause.. I get that the flu comparison is off in countries experiencing 20-30+ times the death count of a bad flu season, but in Norway, we're at like.. 2x just that. I think it's entirely conceivable that say, if we hadn't had any measures (not talking about masks here - rather about all types of 'social distancing') but our death count was 5 times higher, that the 'overall suffering relative to covid' would have been less than what it has been now. (Again, 5 times higher than Norway, especially Norway outside Oslo, is still a lot fewer than the American numbers.) Now, I know this is the USpolitics megathread (edit oh nvm apparently I was totally off on this), and we're talking about the US. I'm just bringing up Norway as an example because while we're an example of a country that has escaped Covid largely unscathed, we have not escaped the negative side effects of successfully combating it. I haven't thought that our measures have been particularly harsh (the only one I've disagreed with was I thought they paused organized sports for children for a few months too long + I've disagreed somewhat with how some 'stimuli packages' have been targeted), and I recognize them as a success. They've still caused damage. I also agree with everyone that it sucks that the American population (and in many other countries, but especially yours) has been so non-compliant, both in terms of social distancing and in terms of vaccinations. It's an unfortunate consequence of living in a particularly fractured society. There's no quick fix to that. You can't mandate trust in government - any attempt might just have the opposite effect. You can use force to vaccinate, I guess, but damn, that sounds really dangerous in a population where the combination of 'insane' 'armed' 'conspiracy anti-vaxxer who think they are injecting you with devil semen' is so prevalent Anyway, myself, being double vaccinated (as of 2 hours ago), I don't want to have to socially distance anymore. (Tbh, I largely stopped after the first one.) I also understand that other vaccinated people don't want to. I'm totally fine with requiring some type of vaccine passport for various activities and various types of sticks and carrots to increase vaccination rates, private business is free to (or encouraged to) do whatever they want. Main point I'm making is that social distancing is a plague of its own, I guess - I'm not gonna pretend that I know how to fix the problem in the US.
You definitely have the benefit of living in a sane country of people who care about others, Norway may very well be fine to basically stop any and all COVID measures (Im completely unfamiliar with the situation but given Im generally biased towards that whole Scandinavian area, I'd bet the job was done well, thoroughly, and with a general populace willing to do whats best for others.)
My problem is that trying to calculate harm of COVID regulations and lockdowns vs. damage done by COVID is very hard to calculate and I'd wager the death and long term injury staved off COVID regulations have warded off has been left the world better off than if we had all done an America or worse.
Thats not to say that its good, or that its harmless or what have you, I just think when looking at countries like mine its easy to see how much death and likely suffering is prevented by COVID prevention measures and lockdowns and the like. I mean, we even did some of these things and we're probably going to end the pandemic eclipses seven digit deaths, and Im not even sure we're counting people who die because hospitals are full.
I just want places where the pandemic is so clearly not under control to stop the bullheaded determination trying to insist that the pandemic is as good as over and we should keep trying to reopen. It feels like gambler's fallacy where they've put money on the reopening and just keep putting more and more money on it because they've gone so far, they can't stop now.
Different places should do what they need, if your society is the kind of society that takes things seriously and can be relied on to manage itself without serious stuff like lockdowns, then thats great, you don't need them and people are probably not going to be earning themselves any Herman Cain Awards, sadly places like the US ain't that and I seriously think we need to consider lockdowns and going back to taking COVID seriously because it really feels like people want COVID over regardless of whether or not we've actually got a proper handle on COVID.
|
On September 15 2021 13:41 RKC wrote:A good breakdown of vaccine rollout for teens across different countries. China just one step ahead of everyone else. Kids as young as three getting jabbed! So much for the Western world leading the charge... Covid: Which countries are vaccinating children and why? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58516207
Ok, but is sinovax safe for young kids? The Western world isn't being slow with vaccinating children because they don't have their shit together, but rather because it is unethical to just vaccinate children if safety and benefits have not been adequately demonstrated.
And insofar as I know, it's problematic because only very few children that young are getting adverse effects from covid, so even the slightest chance of myocardia or some other negative side effect is a big problem for vaccine safety in the youngest age groups.
That said, I know very little about sinovax. Maybe it's safer in young children than moderna, Pfizer or AZ.
|
|
|
Geisterkarle, could you, please, put exclamation marks after question marks? We're not barbarians.
|
On September 15 2021 11:44 BlackJack wrote:
The context of the discussion is the Delta wave that just went through Florida. They didn't go through lockdowns. You seem to be talking about lockeowns from over a year ago.
Delta is currently getting out of control in several states. To say that lockdowns would be an overreaction would be highly contentious to say the least, and if you're not aware of that then there's key information that you're missing. It can always be debated at which point lockdowns start to make sense. Your stance is that even in a state like Florida it wouldn't make sense, is that correct? Deaths and hospitalizations are currently climbing there to unprecedented levels.
|
On September 15 2021 18:55 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 11:44 BlackJack wrote:
The context of the discussion is the Delta wave that just went through Florida. They didn't go through lockdowns. You seem to be talking about lockeowns from over a year ago. Delta is currently getting out of control in several states. To say that lockdowns would be an overreaction would be highly contentious to say the least, and if you're not aware of that then there's key information that you're missing. It can always be debated at which point lockdowns start to make sense. Your stance is that even in a state like Florida it wouldn't make sense, is that correct? Deaths and hospitalizations are currently climbing there to unprecedented levels. He just said that the deaths in Florida are acceptable to him. So yes his current stance is that Florida does not need a lockdown and that everything is fine.
|
The results for the trials on children aged 5 years to 12 years will likely be revealed this month. These doctors who inject children before approval are personally responsible for side effects. They accept this "risk" because they've read the results and they see that the Pfizer vaccine is safe for this age group.
In case it's unclear what I'm saying: the phase 1/2/3 trials are being performed on children who's parents give full consent. This means there are thousands of healthy children who have received the Pfizer vaccine and are being monitored for efficacy and side effects. Nothing of worry has been found.
In other words, as long as properly trained health professionals perform the injection and subsequent monitoring, the only ethical question is in regards to accountability. Since the trials have advanced this much, it's obvious why some doctors accept the minuscule risk to themselves (yes, to themselves. This is mainly a matter of reputation from wild accusations), as that is exactly the same risk as in the phase 1/2/3 trials. Except those trials were in fact slightly more risky, because they don't have the privilege of hindsight that doctors have now, after seeing the results.
Trials have also begun (I believe in March) for children aged 6 months upwards. Nothing about this is controversial. If I had kids between the age of 5 and 12, I'd have already sent them to get vaccinated by Pfizer, too.
|
On September 15 2021 19:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 18:55 Magic Powers wrote:On September 15 2021 11:44 BlackJack wrote:
The context of the discussion is the Delta wave that just went through Florida. They didn't go through lockdowns. You seem to be talking about lockeowns from over a year ago. Delta is currently getting out of control in several states. To say that lockdowns would be an overreaction would be highly contentious to say the least, and if you're not aware of that then there's key information that you're missing. It can always be debated at which point lockdowns start to make sense. Your stance is that even in a state like Florida it wouldn't make sense, is that correct? Deaths and hospitalizations are currently climbing there to unprecedented levels. He just said that the deaths in Florida are acceptable to him. So yes his current stance is that Florida does not need a lockdown and that everything is fine.
Right, and he's also spreading misinformation again while he's at it. Delta is not under control, the wave is moving as we speak. He says "went through", past tense. The wave is still high, and it's unclear at which point it can be considered over.
BJ does this all the time. He tries to find ways to paint things in as biased of a light as possible. Obviously he has to ignore a lot of data for that, so he uses linguistic tricks rather than precise descriptions, and in this way he hopes to make an ongoing wave sound like a wave that's already over.
|
When you're fine having between 0.1 and 1% of your population dying, the current numbers in fl don't seem alarming at all
|
On September 15 2021 18:53 maybenexttime wrote:
Geisterkarle, could you, please, put exclamation marks after question marks? We're not barbarians.
I need a DIN ISO Norm to check that :D
Also, who says I'm not a Barbarian!? (marks intended)
@MagicPowers:
Didn't we make fun of these people that are taking "horse medicine against worms", hahaha? And that is even a drug that is approved for humans! (I didn't find an age clause, but didn't searched too much)
Oh well, vaccination is important, so ignore any official checks... Why exactly do we need FDA and similar agencies, if it only "on yourself"? This a very narrow view on the case!
|
On September 15 2021 22:16 Geisterkarle wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 18:53 maybenexttime wrote:
Geisterkarle, could you, please, put exclamation marks after question marks? We're not barbarians. I need a DIN ISO Norm to check that :D Also, who says I'm not a Barbarian!? (marks intended) @MagicPowers: Didn't we make fun of these people that are taking "horse medicine against worms", hahaha? And that is even a drug that is approved for humans! (I didn't find an age clause, but didn't searched too much) Oh well, vaccination is important, so ignore any official checks... Why exactly do we need FDA and similar agencies, if it only "on yourself"? This a very narrow view on the case!
So once again you didn't understand a single thing in my comment.
|
|
|
On September 15 2021 09:19 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2021 21:30 Gorsameth wrote:On September 14 2021 20:58 BlackJack wrote:On September 14 2021 20:37 Gorsameth wrote:On September 14 2021 20:29 BlackJack wrote:On September 14 2021 20:00 Magic Powers wrote:On September 14 2021 19:28 BlackJack wrote:On September 14 2021 19:16 Zambrah wrote:
We live in a warped and twisted world where preventing human death and suffering isnt a good reason to do something.
That should be just about the best god damned reason to do something. It's so easy to just look at the pros of something and ignore the cons, eh? Why do you think that Dr. of the WHO's special envoy on COVID-19 recommends against lockdowns as the primary control method for preventing COVID-19 when we already know this is far and away the best way to prevent death? Do you think he is just fucked in the head and doesn't care about preventing human death and suffering? ... Since he didn't "advise against lockdowns" contrary to your claim,? ... Bro, my post is practically 1 sentence long, are you really going to misquote it in such a ridiculous way? I said he "recommends against lockdows as the primary control method for preventing COVID-19." Here is his quote "We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus." No one outside of arguably Australia is using lockdowns as a primary means of control. Everyone is using it as a last resort after the other measures failed to contain it. What are you even arguing at this point? Did you see my response to Zambrah that started this quote-chain? I said there are pros and cons to lockdowns. Lockdowns are by far the BEST way to stop the spread of COVID and therefore prevent death. Yet you rightly point out that almost no country is using lockdowns as a primary control method for COVID. So do does that mean we live in a warped and twisted world where preventing death and suffering isn't a good reason to have lockdowns? No, it means there are cons to lockdowns that have to be considered as well. JimmiC and others can tell you all about how many ICU beds are occupied in a state he lives >1000 miles from, but I'd wager he probably hasn't spent more than 5 minutes researching what the ramifications are of millions of children missing school, hundreds of thousands of businesses closing down, millions losing their health insurance that is tied to their employment, millions being one eviction moratorium away from being homeless, etc. Yes I know where this started. With you saying Florida was doing fine without lockdowns and that the doomsayers were wrong. When confronted with Florida's record deaths you moved to the point that lockdowns shouldn't be the primary way of dealing covid, which they aren't because everyone else is only turning to lockdowns when all else has failed. (again, outside of maybe Australia). With no counter to that you have seemingly now moved on to the consequences of lockdowns on education and the economy. And yes lockdowns do damage there 300+ people dying every day also does a lot of damage. I'll take a child remote learning for a year over one of its parents or the child itself dying, but hey, that's just me I guess. And the economy, well good thing all the people in favor of lockdowns also tend to be in favor of government assistance to help companies and families make it through the period of lockdown until everyone is vaccinated and society can open up and go back to a semblance of normal. So, is your point that Florida's current (well, more like a month old death count cause lol shoving deaths into the past) death count, when compared to how the rest of the western world is doing, is acceptable? And is Florida actually doing better in educational and economic numbers then the rest of the country? Because I keep seeing reports of school classes closing and teachers dying over there. Imagine that is also disruptive to the children's education. ps. How many businesses and schools in Florida are trying to implement measures on their own without the state government? Lots of that damage your worried about is happening anyway because 'shocked' turns out companies don't like it when their staff gets sick and died or becomes disabled from long covid. Yes, my view is that Florida's current death count is acceptable. My view is that lockdowns should only be used to prevent a catastrophic collapse of the healthcare system, e.g. hospitals running out of oxygen, people dying of treatable illnesses because they can't get seen by a doctor, etc. I think it's stupid to use lockdowns just so 0.05% of the population dies instead of 0.1%. Frankly I have no idea why anyone would disagree with this. I'd also take a child remote learning over their parent dying. Unfortunately that's a choice that doesn't exist in reality. I've heard estimates of 1.4 Billion with a B children missing out on school. So you're really opting for thousands of children to miss school than to have 1 of them lose a parent. To answer your last question, yes, Florida's economy is rebounding fantastically. In some instances their tourism numbers are even better than in 2019 which was pre-covid. I personally know 9 different people that visited Florida from California in the last 4 months, with 3 of them going more than once and one of them getting engaged there.
"My view is that lockdowns should only be used to prevent a catastrophic collapse of the healthcare system, e.g. hospitals running out of oxygen, people dying of treatable illnesses because they can't get seen by a doctor, etc."
So you're ok with lockdowns then, bc that is exactly what is happening.
"I've heard estimates of 1.4 Billion with a B children missing out on school." Source? The entire population of the world under 18 is ~2.4 billion. I call bullshit.
Out of curiosity, which of the people you know are you ok with condemning to death? You might want to let them know how you feel about them. I don't care if YOU die, but in general I prefer if my acquaintances remain amoung the living.
Please continue to let me know about anyone who visits Florida so I can do my best to avoid them. (Tbh I thought they were doing better than nine tourists a year before Covid, but I admit I do my best to ignore Florida whenever possible).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
