Blues COVID email

notintheface said:
Just so I'm not hypocritical here: my number is 300k. Another 300k people are going to die of this virus before it's under control, and that's with the current restrictions that we're all living under. The moving average of daily deaths from Covid, with our current restrictions, runs at about 800 people per day. Multiply that by a year and you're at 300k. If we open things up, that number goes up, plain as day. I'm not willing to sacrifice more than 300k more people.
Click to expand...
Interesting number.....
 
chiefs said:
What do you do when the annual flu comes around, which stats show it’s much worse for kids then COVID? SDSU has had over 1000 kids diagnosed with COVID; Zero hospitalizations; all recovered. Open up all sports and schools. Simple.
Click to expand...
Dude, are you actually going there? In what way is this not denial? We already know how dangerous the virus is, it's on tape how dangerous it was despite what were told. That is a fact that you can't dispute. Another fact you can't dispute is that there was hospitalizations at SDSU. This is a public health emergency, I'm not saying some of the stuff you're saying isn't true, not everyone dies of it, but we already know it's way worse than the flu and it spreads and that kills people and we as a country have given up on fighting it, so if we just get pissed and say "open it up", it's a hollow statement without considering what happens if we do that. Also, of all those kids that got it, how many suffered through it and are still dealing with the long term affects of it? That's not reported. Does that matter to you?
 
12 days old....

www.nytimes.com

Tracking the Coronavirus at U.S. Colleges and Universities (Published 2021)

College campuses, like the rest of the country, are enduring a coronavirus surge.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

88k cases...60 deaths, most in the spring, and most were school employees, not students per the article. That’s a very, low rate if you do simple math. Kids doing stupid things, being kids, parties, gatherings etc. Not minimizing this. Just pointing it out.

I don’t think anybody denies it is contagious and deadly for some. As far as school goes for K-12...If your kid gets it...numbers say they will most likely be fine. I can tell you it has been the healthiest our family has been during this time. Parents are not sending sick kids to school spreading stuff around, and they should implement similar health protocols, temp checks going forward even after the Covid subsides in both schools and work places.

I certainly would not want you making health choices and decisions for my family. I’m sure you feel the same. We asses risk and the situation differently. I respect your perspective, just don’t agree with it. Good luck.
 
notintheface said:
Just give a number. Any number. Don't be afraid. I don't care about any relationship between X Y Z alpha beta whatever. Just give me X. How many people are you willing to have die of the virus?
Click to expand...

At this point I really think you are my son trolling me because I gave him a hard time about algebra. I keep telling him something doesn't make sense and he keeps insisting that it does. If that's you, you have a practice test you are supposed to finish for tomorrow, so what are doing on the internets?
 
Woobie06 said:
Parents are not sending sick kids to school spreading stuff around, and they should implement similar health protocols, temp checks going forward even after the Covid subsides in both schools and work places.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that:

www.boston.com

A Massachusetts teenager tested positive for COVID-19. His parents sent him to school anyway.

Six students tested positive for COVID-19 days before Attleboro High School reopened its doors for the first day of school this week. Only five of them stayed home, the city’s […]
www.boston.com

I'm pretty sure @Grace T. pointed this out at some point somewhere that the incentives are bit whacky right now.

I still don't get why we're not focusing on outdoor activities first. I mean I get it...capitalism and all.
 
notintheface said:
Just so I'm not hypocritical here: my number is 300k. Another 300k people are going to die of this virus before it's under control, and that's with the current restrictions that we're all living under. The moving average of daily deaths from Covid, with our current restrictions, runs at about 800 people per day. Multiply that by a year and you're at 300k. If we open things up, that number goes up, plain as day. I'm not willing to sacrifice more than 300k more people.
Click to expand...

If that's your number then assuming we have a bad mutation or a bad winter and the thing accelerates notwithstanding the controls you want (e.g., see Peru), you'd be willing to engage in Australian style lockdowns damn the cost or rush out an untested vaccine to avoid hitting your number at al costs. Those include: suspension of the Constitution, a hard shut of the border even to citizens (which in our case likely means the deployment of the military and a shoot on sight order), restrictions on press and speech including violent suppression of all forms of protest, forced testing, severe lockdowns, forced separations from families, ankle monitors on confirmed positives, shutdown of interstate travel and the deployment of the military to assist keeping order.
 
Grace T. said:
If that's your number then assuming we have a bad mutation or a bad winter and the thing accelerates notwithstanding the controls you want (e.g., see Peru), you'd be willing to engage in Australian style lockdowns damn the cost or rush out an untested vaccine to avoid hitting your number at al costs. Those include: suspension of the Constitution, a hard shut of the border even to citizens (which in our case likely means the deployment of the military and a shoot on sight order), restrictions on press and speech including violent suppression of all forms of protest, forced testing, severe lockdowns, forced separations from families, ankle monitors on confirmed positives, shutdown of interstate travel and the deployment of the military to assist keeping order.
Click to expand...
We could do all that.

Or, we could simply enforce the existing public health orders against indoor gatherings. With fines, not prison camps.

I know it's easy to say that jackbooted thugs are the only option. But it isn't true.
 
dad4 said:
We could do all that.

Or, we could simply enforce the existing public health orders against indoor gatherings. With fines, not prison camps.

I know it's easy to say that jackbooted thugs are the only option. But it isn't true.
Click to expand...

It is if you are wedded to a fixed number, because short of Australia nothing else has worked in the world. If you are on team mitigate (which both you and I seem to be, even if we disagree on the scope of the mitigation steps and what works), then you are doing a cost benefit analysis for every intervention in the hopes of reducing things on the margins, knowing if you compare Peru and Brazil it may not be enough to do anything.

The hypothetical I bring up all the time.....masks (y). There's split scientific evidence over whether they work but there's been no study definitively showing they do anything with coronavirus. Masks have failed to bend any of the curves anywhere (though arguably they may have stopped them from peaking too high in certain areas of the world). There's no correlation between how well places have done and mask orders. There's a split of scientific consensus on them. Much like my position on HDQ, I say use em, but only indoors and make exceptions for the very young and ideally give everyone really good masks. Why? The cost (z) is (some minimal intrusiveness, cost of manufacturing in the scheme of things is small if there is some benefit however minimal, so long as we aren't kicking off screaming babies from AirCanada flights or tormenting Downs or autistic people), the benefit (x) is unknown but there's some evidence there may be some, particularly indoors particularly if we use good masks....enough to overcome the cost at least indoors not out....what's the harm at least until it's proven definitively otherwise that they really have no benefit whatsoever. But also everyone wear a mask for 4, 8 12 weeks and the virus will be gone is not a realistic policy and not one worth aiming at particularly at the cost of young children and the severely handicapped.

The other question is how far you willing to go to enforce your no indoor gatherings? 10 years in prison, 1 year, $100,000 fine, $1000 fine, turn off power, deploy the military to forcefully disperse?
 
Grace T. said:
It is if you are wedded to a fixed number, because short of Australia nothing else has worked in the world. If you are on team mitigate (which both you and I seem to be, even if we disagree on the scope of the mitigation steps and what works), then you are doing a cost benefit analysis for every intervention in the hopes of reducing things on the margins, knowing if you compare Peru and Brazil it may not be enough to do anything.

The hypothetical I bring up all the time.....masks (y). There's split scientific evidence over whether they work but there's been no study definitively showing they do anything with coronavirus. Masks have failed to bend any of the curves anywhere (though arguably they may have stopped them from peaking too high in certain areas of the world). There's no correlation between how well places have done and mask orders. There's a split of scientific consensus on them. Much like my position on HDQ, I say use em, but only indoors and make exceptions for the very young and ideally give everyone really good masks. Why? The cost (z) is (some minimal intrusiveness, cost of manufacturing in the scheme of things is small if there is some benefit however minimal, so long as we aren't kicking off screaming babies from AirCanada flights or tormenting Downs or autistic people), the benefit (x) is unknown but there's some evidence there may be some, particularly indoors particularly if we use good masks....enough to overcome the cost at least indoors not out....what's the harm at least until it's proven definitively otherwise that they really have no benefit whatsoever. But also everyone wear a mask for 4, 8 12 weeks and the virus will be gone is not a realistic policy and not one worth aiming at particularly at the cost of young children and the severely handicapped.

The other question is how far you willing to go to enforce your no indoor gatherings? 10 years in prison, 1 year, $100,000 fine, $1000 fine, turn off power, deploy the military to forcefully disperse?
Click to expand...
Who said anything about 10 years in prison? Violations of public health orders seems more like a speeding ticket to me.

The insane exaggerations just makes it hard to take you seriously. Kind of like your persistent mask-doubting position that seems stuck in late March.
 
dad4 said:
Who said anything about 10 years in prison? Violations of public health orders seems more like a speeding ticket to me.

The insane exaggerations just makes it hard to take you seriously. Kind of like your persistent mask-doubting position that seems stuck in late March.
Click to expand...

Well if you are going to slap them on the wrist at this point it won't do anything to deter people considering an ever increasing amount of people are joining team reality and taking the red pill. They don't do anything to slow people on the freeways either.
 
Grace T. said:
At this point I really think you are my son trolling me because I gave him a hard time about algebra. I keep telling him something doesn't make sense and he keeps insisting that it does. If that's you, you have a practice test you are supposed to finish for tomorrow, so what are doing on the internets?
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you are afraid to say the number of people you are okay with dying in order to open up the economy. This is not a hard question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top