The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

That's one name, Fauci. Who else? Your faith in bureaucracies composed of billions of dollars in profit motives for its "experts" might be misplaced.

You want me to look up names of scientists at the CDC who work on this?  academic medical centers?  Pharmaceutical companies?  really?  

 

As for profit motives, pharmaceutical companies have them.  But I am on an FDA panel and I can tell you I have to submit volumes of material every year to show that I do not have competing outside interests.  And government employees like Dr. Fauci, if they develop a treatment or such as a government employee, means that rights to that are the government's.

[spartacus]

12 minutes ago, SDS said:

if you are speaking about COVID-19 it is because research and analysis takes time. If you’re talking about taking zinc in general, zinc lozenges have been promoted for many years.

not by the CDC, the WHO or the media  -  during this pandemic

 

why is that?

[Reality Check]

2 minutes ago, daz28 said:

I think it would be easier to list all the doctors who believe mitigation measure don't work.  Plus they're easy to find, because they all live in Alabama, and they think Jesus is gonna solve it.  

On that note, I will leave you to your own ideology while I continue to not comply with this nonsense. I do wish the best though. I want us all to rock and roll again and get back to business with each other, and of course, have fun together again. Peace.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Reality Check said:

Your opinions are not based on the science. They are based on the opinions of scientists. A handful of scientists I might add who have a profit motive. You yourself haven't seem to attempted to quantify the situation independently for yourself. 

They are based on the data that are in peer reviewed journals.  and government employees do not have a profit motive.  I don't work in virology or infectious diseases so you are correct, I have not done independent studies.  You seem to want to tear down the entire scientific community, a community that has has discovered cures for diseases since the times of Lister and Pasteur.

[Reality Check]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

They are based on the data that are in peer reviewed journals.  and government employees do not have a profit motive.  I don't work in virology or infectious diseases so you are correct, I have not done independent studies.  You seem to want to tear down the entire scientific community, a community that has has discovered cures for diseases since the times of Lister and Pasteur.

I am not bound to the same ideology as you are in this context. "Science" is in a perpetual state of revolution, and scientists are quite often at odds with each other from theory to application. I will leave it at you do what you want to do, and I will not do what I haven't been convinced to do. Masks take away from my handsome face, so that is a nonstarter. Peace!

[shoshin]

28 minutes ago, BeerLeagueHockey said:

Yet the all cause mortality has not risen for 2020.  Running at the same rate as years past.

 

What is your source for that? Here's the CDC:

 

 

And here's a JAMA article that concludes:

 

Although total US death counts are remarkably consistent from year to year, US deaths increased by 20% during March-July 2020. COVID-19 was a documented cause of only 67% of these excess deaths. Some states had greater difficulty than others in containing community spread, causing protracted elevations in excess deaths that extended into the summer. US deaths attributed to some noninfectious causes increased during COVID-19 surges. Excess deaths attributed to causes other than COVID-19 could reflect deaths from unrecognized or undocumented infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or deaths among uninfected patients resulting from disruptions produced by the pandemic. Study limitations include the reliance on provisional data, inaccuracies in death certificates, and assumptions applied to the model.

Edited October 16, 2020 by shoshin

[spartacus]

27 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

From a national economic standpoint, how practical is what you are suggesting? How much damage economically, socially, and mentally is required to stop  this?

stop what ?

a virus from which 99.7% successfully recover

do healthy things  and get treated early

 

problem solved

 

 

 

 

[daz28]

29 minutes ago, BeerLeagueHockey said:

 

No, 200k have died (plus more that we can't quantify).  My point is why aren't we running 2-300k higher then?

Can you show me your data?  

[daz28]

32 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

Your opinions are not based on the science. They are based on the opinions of scientists. A handful of scientists I might add who have a profit motive. You yourself haven't seem to attempted to quantify the situation independently for yourself. 

Can we look at this from a practical perspective, based on what we'd all call our own anectodal evidence.  Would one be more likely to get the flu from someone standing right in front of us coughing and sneezing if they weren't wearing a mask?  I mean it seems to be basic knowledge that when a person is hacking and coughing you have an aversion to that, especially when you feel the spittle and aerosol landing on your face.  Also, you'd not want to touch what they touched, and you'd try to maintain a distance from them.  Has this all just been some wives tale, or just something we know to be true.  I mean in the end, I'd err on the side of caution that I may reduce the risk of causing someone else to die by wearing a mask, even if it's not comfortable.  It seems to be just pure stubbornness 

[GaryPinC]

On 10/14/2020 at 9:24 PM, spartacus said:

 

stopping droplets is great

except the virus travels as an aerosol - which is not covered by your charts above

 

the mask strips the virus from the droplets and passes them to the world as an aeresol

 

 

 

 

Of course it travels as an aerosol.  Which is perfectly covered by the charts above.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol

[Reality Check]

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

Can we look at this from a practical perspective, based on what we'd all call our own anectodal evidence.  Would one be more likely to get the flu from someone standing right in front of us coughing and sneezing if they weren't wearing a mask?  I mean it seems to be basic knowledge that when a person is hacking and coughing you have an aversion to that, especially when you feel the spittle and aerosol landing on your face.  Also, you'd not want to touch what they touched, and you'd try to maintain a distance from them.  Has this all just been some wives tale, or just something we know to be true.  I mean in the end, I'd err on the side of caution that I may reduce the risk of causing someone else to die by wearing a mask, even if it's not comfortable.  It seems to be just pure stubbornness 

I'm still not complying. I haven't had the flu for over 25 years. No flu shot. Been around many people with the flu over that time span every year. Call me stubborn as often as you like. Label me whatever you like if helps you. I'll pass on casting labels also. Try to have a little fun my friend. The situation is not as serious as advertised.

[GaryPinC]

On 10/14/2020 at 6:00 PM, fansince88 said:

Serious question. Have you seen anyone cough in a store with the mask on? Ones I have seen both cough and sneeze AFTER they pull their mask off

I've never seen anyone cough or sneeze pulling their mask off first.  I've seen my share of folks at the store who leave their nose exposed and randomly cough/sneeze without pulling it up.  But that's a minority here in Ohio.

 

I have also seen people cough with masks on, many also cover their mask with hand/elbow just like I continue to do (habit!)

Edited October 16, 2020 by GaryPinC

[GaryPinC]

2 hours ago, spartacus said:

cool - you used big words

 

However, According to the laws of physics (which have not been suspended during this pandemic), it is impossible for aerosol particles of .27 micron to be blocked by even N-95 masks with .5 micron holes.

 

Every breathe taken through a mask frees whatever virus was attached to a droplet and turns it into a floating aerosol , freed to venture the world 

Aerosolization involves a wide range of droplet sizes, including the sizes you are thinking of.    Go back to the pictures I provided you.  Virus will be on all sizes of droplets, the larger the droplet the more virus.  The majority of virus will be blocked and/or not go far.  Sure, some of the smallest droplets less than 0.5 micron will pass through the mask but given the mask is at least thousands of times thicker than even the smallest droplets few will have an easy path through.  

 

The small amount that manage to pass fairly freely through to project out will be in stark contrast to the majority that were flat out blocked or had their velocity reduced to almost nothing on exit.

[daz28]

19 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

I'm still not complying. I haven't had the flu for over 25 years. No flu shot. Been around many people with the flu over that time span every year. Call me stubborn as often as you like. Label me whatever you like if helps you. I'll pass on casting labels also. Try to have a little fun my friend. The situation is not as serious as advertised.

If you prefer the word reluctance, I'll use that instead.  I like to fish, so I have a Covid safe hobby to keep me from Covid blues.  I disagree with your assessment, but respect your right to your opinion.  

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

My opinions are based on the science.  If there is anything worse than the deaths that have occurred from Covid and the economic impact, it is that the pandemic has shown us that we have a society that increasingly refuses to accept things like data and fact and science.  That may be more dangerous than anything for the long term.

 

We are free men.  I express my freedom by doing what I can to help make sure my neighbor doesn't get this disease.  What are you doing? 

Bull!  If you're doing "what you can to help make sure your neighbors don't get this disease" then you would have long ago moved far away from any contact with any neighbors. It's all relative. It's like saying you're driving a Prius to save the planet while commuting 100 miles each day to get to work. Again....bull! 

[SectionC3]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Bull!  If you're doing "what you can to help make sure your neighbors don't get this disease" then you would have long ago moved far away from any contact with any neighbors. It's all relative. It's like saying you're driving a Prius to save the planet while commuting 100 miles each day to get to work. Again....bull! 

 

What do you mean by “moved far away from any contact?”  If you’re suggesting that this guy should have moved into the woods, it seems a bit absurd, does it not?  Maybe he’s doing the best he “can” — his word — in a lousy situation and his circumstances don’t allow for an extreme measure such as perfect and complete isolation. 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, SectionC3 said:

 

What do you mean by “moved far away from any contact?”  If you’re suggesting that this guy should have moved into the woods, it seems a bit absurd, does it not?  Maybe he’s doing the best he “can” — his word — in a lousy situation and his circumstances don’t allow for an extreme measure such as perfect and complete isolation. 

My brother and his wife haven't left their house since March.  How about that?  I think they're nutty....but THEY are doing everything they can.

[SectionC3]

8 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

My brother and his wife haven't left their house since March.  How about that?  I think they're nutty....but THEY are doing everything they can.

 

I think they’re nutty, too.  But they “can” do that.  My point was that what’s feasible for one might not be feasible for another.  

Edited October 16, 2020 by SectionC3

[oldmanfan]

30 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Bull!  If you're doing "what you can to help make sure your neighbors don't get this disease" then you would have long ago moved far away from any contact with any neighbors. It's all relative. It's like saying you're driving a Prius to save the planet while commuting 100 miles each day to get to work. Again....bull! 

Go read what SDS put up about what should be done with this forum.  You are a perfect example of just wanting to exist in your own echo chamber.  As a society we all have to coexist and come together to fight this thing. We can do that by all of us pitching in and doing the things the experts advise, and that the science and data support.

Edited October 16, 2020 by oldmanfan

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, BeerLeagueHockey said:

It's the fight of our lives.  We're all in this together.  Just 2 more weeks.

It’s going to be with us for quite a while unfortunately.

[spartacus]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Givread what SDS put up about what should be done with this forum.  You are a perfect example of just wanting to exist in your own echo chamber.  As a society we all have to coexist and come together to fight this thing. We can do that by all of us pitching in and doing the things the experts advise, and that the science and data support.

why are you so convinced that it is imperative to hide from testing positive?

most positives are not sick

even if sick, 99.7% successfully recover

 

there are multiple effective treatments available if you do get sick

why wallow in the fear?

 

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, spartacus said:

why are you so convinced that it is imperative to hide from testing positive?

most positives are not sick

even if sick, 99.7% successfully recover

 

there are multiple effective treatments available if you do get sick

why wallow in the fear?

 

Because it’s killed over 200k people and rising, and others who have not died will have long term effects.  And there are not multiple proven effective treatments.

[daz28]

13 minutes ago, spartacus said:

why are you so convinced that it is imperative to hide from testing positive?

most positives are not sick

even if sick, 99.7% successfully recover

 

there are multiple effective treatments available if you do get sick

why wallow in the fear?

 

Dude, why do some of you have to so horribly exaggerate everything.  Wallowing in fear.  PANICKING.  Maybe, just maybe there's a reason to be somewhat alarmed that it's the 3rd leading cause of death in America, and 1 in 7 people who die will die of Coronavirus.  You keep plugging away with your 99.9999% chance nonsense.  It's like taking the deep dive into sports statistics to prove a team doesn't suck when they're 2-12.  

17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Because it’s killed over 200k people and rising, and others who have not died will have long term effects.  And there are not multiple proven effective treatments.

Oh ya, I forgot about the long term effects that we don't even understand yet, and the fact it has a very real possibility to mutate into a much, much deadlier strain

[shoshin]

Remdesivir got some bad news (as did HCQ though it was just a side note).

 

https://www.livescience.com/remdesivir-survival-covid19-coronavirus.html

 

About 4,100 of those patients served as a comparison group and received no drug treatments, while the rest received one of four drugs, or a combination of several medications. These drugs included remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, an antiviral called lopinavir and an immune-stimulating molecule called Interferon-β1a. About 650 patients received the interferon and lopinavir, together. 

 

Ultimately, the study results suggest that no single drug or drug combination significantly reduced deaths among patients, as compared with the no-drug group. In addition, the drugs did not reduce the chances that treated patients would be placed on a ventilator, nor did the drugs reduce patients' time in the hospital.   

 

"The unpromising overall findings from the regimens tested suffice to refute early hopes" that the medications would reduce mortality among COVID-19 patients, the study authors wrote. 

[SoTier]

5 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

 

We should all do a better job with our general health.  That would be a great thing to work on for the future, but in the present we have a viral pandemic that requires all of to work cooperatively to eradicate.

 

Exactly.   The coronavirus doesn't only infect the old or the unhealthy, and not every chronic health problem is the result of  "self destructive tendencies".   It will infect whoever is within range of it when it lands.

[Gary M]

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3yYuN1c-WBix9s1ozy4NMYVEpDgBzwkVArmJNEWqgNI-K8hrOviMf56Gg

 

Reported use of cloth face covering or mask 14 days before illness onset (missing = 2)
Never 6 (3.9) 5 (3.1) 0.86
Rarely 6 (3.9) 6 (3.8)
Sometimes 11 (7.2) 7 (4.4)
Often 22 (14.4) 23 (14.5)
Always 108 (70.6) 118 (74.2)

[oldmanfan]

22 minutes ago, Gary M said:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3yYuN1c-WBix9s1ozy4NMYVEpDgBzwkVArmJNEWqgNI-K8hrOviMf56Gg

 

Reported use of cloth face covering or mask 14 days before illness onset (missing = 2)
Never 6 (3.9) 5 (3.1) 0.86
Rarely 6 (3.9) 6 (3.8)
Sometimes 11 (7.2) 7 (4.4)
Often 22 (14.4) 23 (14.5)
Always 108 (70.6) 118 (74.2)

This study was what went on in different indoor spots with a limited number of participants.  Google studies on masks and Covid and you will find many peer reviewed studies showing how masks help prevent droplet spread. 

Edited October 16, 2020 by oldmanfan

[Gary M]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

This study was what went on in restaurants with a limited number of participants.  Google studies on masks and Covid and you will find many peer reviewed studies showing how masks help prevent droplet spread. 

 

If thats the case why did Fauci at first say this?

 

'

[spartacus]

40 minutes ago, shoshin said:

Remdesivir got some bad news (as did HCQ though it was just a side note).

 

https://www.livescience.com/remdesivir-survival-covid19-coronavirus.html

 

About 4,100 of those patients served as a comparison group and received no drug treatments, while the rest received one of four drugs, or a combination of several medications. These drugs included remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, an antiviral called lopinavir and an immune-stimulating molecule called Interferon-β1a. About 650 patients received the interferon and lopinavir, together. 

 

Ultimately, the study results suggest that no single drug or drug combination significantly reduced deaths among patients, as compared with the no-drug group. In addition, the drugs did not reduce the chances that treated patients would be placed on a ventilator, nor did the drugs reduce patients' time in the hospital.   

 

"The unpromising overall findings from the regimens tested suffice to refute early hopes" that the medications would reduce mortality among COVID-19 patients, the study authors wrote. 

 

more bullcrap "studies" designed to produce fear porn -that nothing works on the vrius

 

It is accepted "science" that early treatment is critical

yet this "study" ignored early treatment as a key variable

 

from the link-

"The trial participants were treated at 405 different hospitals around the world, each with their own treatment protocols, so factors beyond remdesivir may have impacted patient survival, he noted. In addition, remdesivir may still offer benefit to patients if given early in the course of their illness, but that wasn't specifically addressed by the new study, Dr. Maricar Malinis, an infectious diseases physician at Yale University, told the Times.

 

when is "science" just marketing pushing an agenda

 

 

[ALF]

12 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

If thats the case why did Fauci at first say this?

 

'

 

Fact check: Outdated video of Fauci saying “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” 

 

 Fauci’s remarks were made on March 8, 2020 and do not represent his current stance on face coverings nor the updated guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 

As Fauci told the Washington Post  here , at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, masks were not recommended for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers and the extent of asymptomatic spread was unknown.  

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-fauci-outdated-video-masks/fact-checkoutdated-video-of-fauci-saying-theres-no-reason-to-be-walking-around-with-a-mask-idUSKBN26T2TR

[spartacus]

1 minute ago, ALF said:

 

Fact check: Outdated video of Fauci saying “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” 

 

 Fauci’s remarks were made on March 8, 2020 and do not represent his current stance on face coverings nor the updated guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 

As Fauci told the Washington Post  here , at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, masks were not recommended for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers and the extent of asymptomatic spread was unknown.  

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-fauci-outdated-video-masks/fact-checkoutdated-video-of-fauci-saying-theres-no-reason-to-be-walking-around-with-a-mask-idUSKBN26T2TR

yet Fauci's March comments  mirror accepted "science" for all years prior to March 2020.

 

[SoTier]

1 minute ago, ALF said:

 

Fact check: Outdated video of Fauci saying “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” 

 

 Fauci’s remarks were made on March 8, 2020 and do not represent his current stance on face coverings nor the updated guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 

As Fauci told the Washington Post  here , at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, masks were not recommended for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers and the extent of asymptomatic spread was unknown.  

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-fauci-outdated-video-masks/fact-checkoutdated-video-of-fauci-saying-theres-no-reason-to-be-walking-around-with-a-mask-idUSKBN26T2TR

 

In case you didn't notice, the various supporters of Covid Donnie's anti-public health campaign continually pretend that the world has stood still since March.

[oldmanfan]

12 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

If thats the case why did Fauci at first say this?

 

'

This has been covered a number of times.  This interview was, I believe, early in the pandemic.  At that time the recommendation was for the public to not wear masks because  they wanted to ensure an adequate supply of masks for health care facilities as they were hit with patients.  As the science and study of the virus and it’s mode of transmission became clearer, the usefulness of masks in helping combat spread became clear.

 

This us how science works and as a scientist for 40 years it really surprises me how many people don’t or won’t understand that process.  Take the study you quoted.  The main conclusion from the data is that you increase odds of infection in restaurants or bars/coffee shops.  Where one removes one’s mask. 

[Gary M]

12 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Fact check: Outdated video of Fauci saying “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” 

 

 Fauci’s remarks were made on March 8, 2020 and do not represent his current stance on face coverings nor the updated guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 

As Fauci told the Washington Post  here , at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, masks were not recommended for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers and the extent of asymptomatic spread was unknown.  

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-fauci-outdated-video-masks/fact-checkoutdated-video-of-fauci-saying-theres-no-reason-to-be-walking-around-with-a-mask-idUSKBN26T2TR

 

I am not questioning whether he changed his mind, but why?

 

Data shows that people are still getting covid  while wearing masks.

 

Don't give me the it protects you from me BS, people are wearing the masks, and yet people are still getting it. (virus is going to virus)

 

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202008/26/WS5f45c0bfa310675eafc558cb.html

 

Cases still climbing.

 

I thought only evil GOPers got Kung Flu

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/15/politics/kamala-harris-campaign-travel-coronavirus/index.html

 

 

Edited October 16, 2020 by Gary M

[oldmanfan]

22 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

I am not questioning whether he changed his mind, but why?

 

Data shows that people are still getting covid  while wearing masks.

 

Don't give me the it protects you from me BS, people are wearing the masks, and yet people are still getting it. (virus is going to virus)

 

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202008/26/WS5f45c0bfa310675eafc558cb.html

 

Cases still climbing.

 

I thought only evil GOPers got Kung Flu

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/15/politics/kamala-harris-campaign-travel-coronavirus/index.html

 

 

You are confusing mitigation and absolute prevention.  Fauci and all other responsible scientists changed their positions on masks as the understanding of the science and spread of the virus developed and it became clear masks helped prevent droplet transmission.  Likely reasons why they have not completely gotten rid of the virus is that not everyone wears them, some do not wear them correctly, and in crowded places with inadequate ventilation the virus spreads more easily.  

[Gary M]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

You are confusing mitigation and absolute prevention.  Fauci and all other responsible scientists changed their positions on masks as the understanding of the science and spread of the virus developed and it became clear masks helped prevent droplet transmission.  Likely reasons why they have not completely gotten rid of the virus is that not everyone wears them, some do not wear them correctly, and in crowded places with inadequate ventilation the virus spreads more easily.  

 

No I'm not, my point is and always has been that you can't stop the virus, the attempts to slow it down were wrong, and telling the public that wearing masks (while not teaching them proper handling) was giving them false hope they wouldn't get it.

 

Our county facebook page gives daily covid updates, and the Karens flip out everyday about the numbers. They believe that if you wear a mask you won't get it or give it, all the while they mishandle their mask.

 

Without a vaccine or herd immunity people are going to get covid, the more people that get it and survive, the lower the mortality rate goes.

Edited October 16, 2020 by Gary M

[ALF]

37 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

I am not questioning whether he changed his mind, but why?

 

Data shows that people are still getting covid  while wearing masks.

 

Don't give me the it protects you from me BS, people are wearing the masks, and yet people are still getting it. (virus is going to virus)

 

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202008/26/WS5f45c0bfa310675eafc558cb.html

 

 

 

Why do doctors and nurses wear masks while performing surgery ? I'm not trying to be a wiseguy 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

42 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

This has been covered a number of times.  This interview was, I believe, early in the pandemic.  At that time the recommendation was for the public to not wear masks because  they wanted to ensure an adequate supply of masks for health care facilities as they were hit with patients.  As the science and study of the virus and it’s mode of transmission became clearer, the usefulness of masks in helping combat spread became clear.

 

This us how science works and as a scientist for 40 years it really surprises me how many people don’t or won’t understand that process.  Take the study you quoted.  The main conclusion from the data is that you increase odds of infection in restaurants or bars/coffee shops.  Where one removes one’s mask. 

 

...I remember signs in Home Depot saying, "sorry out of stock....masks have been reserved for first responders and health care personnel (paraphrased)"...........hindsight we "got caught" short with a multitude of stock piles not replenished.........then again, this phenomenon is nothing like we've faced since perhaps 1917/1918.....

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Gary M said:

 

No I'm not, my point is and always has been that you can't stop the virus, the attempts to slow it down were wrong, and telling the public that wearing masks (while not teaching them proper handling) was giving them false hope they wouldn't get it.

 

Our county facebook page gives daily covid updates, and the Karens flip out everyday about the numbers. They believe that if you wear a mask you won't get it or give it, all the while they mishandle their mask.

 

Without a vaccine or herd immunity people are going to get covid, the more people that get it and survive, the lower the mortality rate goes.

Your last paragraph is somewhat correct.  A vaccine will be the best way to get herd immunity within a given population.  Your other premise, inferring that we should just let the virus spread, is both immoral and not effective.  Estimates are that at least 60% of the population would have to get Covid for the herd immunity you suggest.  Right now it’s I think about 10% and you have over 200k fatalities.  In such a scenario you would have millions die.  Do you believe that is acceptable public health care policy, that we should allow millions to die?

 

Here is what would likely happen if we just let the virus spread.  Hospitals would get over run, health care workers would dwindle, public panic would ensue as death rates go way up, people would shut themselves away in their homes, and we would have a true collapse of the economy and social structure.

 

Viruses don’t hang out and propagate on their own.  They require a host and the host’s cells to replicate.  Until effective vaccines are available, our best bet is to limit the access of the virus to new hosts, by using mitigating strategies.  They aren’t perfect and you are correct that people need to be more cognizant of proper mask usage.  But that does not mean they aren’t effective.  We know they are.

2 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...I remember signs in Home Depot saying, "sorry out of stock....masks have been reserved for first responders and health care personnel (paraphrased)"...........hindsight we "got caught" short with a multitude of stock piles not replenished.........then again, this phenomenon is nothing like we've faced since perhaps 1917/1918.....

We all have to pull together 

[SoCal Deek]

6 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Why do doctors and nurses wear masks while performing surgery ? I'm not trying to be a wiseguy 

Why do bank robbers? 😉