Statistical data vs emotion -

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, Boatdrinks said:

Makes sense to me. The shutdowns are far too extreme for the actual problem, creating a larger problem that is much worse. Some precautions and guidelines for those who will be around the most vulnerable should be the focus. Those who are somewhat more vulnerable than the healthy population should take personal precautions when indoors around larger groups of people. Flattening the curve appears to have been a success. It’s time to end the insanity ; the ridiculous notion that the government should trample individual rights to prevent anyone from contracting a virus. 

I obviously agree. Remember, those 1,000 nation wide deaths in the under 45 age group include NYC where the problem is more acute and include those with preexisting conditions...which almost surely make up 90% of the rest. So statistically speaking we shut down the entire country for a problem that MAYBE killed 100 people under the age of 50? Really? 

[Magox]

29 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Nobody wants to comment? You all just want to blather in about nonsense?

 

Who are you arguing with?

[oldmanfan]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

You want facts and statistics: 

 

As of one week ago since the Covid 19 story exploded there have been 600,000 American deaths in the age group of 55 and over. Of those 600,000 deaths...roughly 25,000 had been from Covid 19.
 

In that same period there have been less than 1,000 deaths of anyone under 45 years old....out of over 50,000 nation wide deaths due to all causes.

 

Can we go back to our semi-normal lives now, and be more acutely aware of our senior population? (PS: I’m a young senior!)

The comparisons to Covid and other causes of death like say heart disease is apples and oranges.  Because heart disease is not contagious.  

 

The things put into play for the pandemic, the closures and social distancing, have dramatically decreased the predicted number of deaths and has flattened the curve.  And things now will start to open up; the hospital network I work for will gradually start doing surgeries tomorrow.  My guess is most states will gradually start reopening things, with distancing and masks mandated.  We do need to start getting back to normal, but normal will be defined differently than it was a few months ago.

[Foxx]

37 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

... The things put into play for the pandemic, the closures and social distancing, have dramatically decreased the predicted number of deaths and has flattened the curve.  ...

of course this is almost impossible to prove. however, if one were to look at the curve for say Sweden, whom did not lockdown and compare it to the US, they are almost identical.

Edited April 26, 2020 by Foxx

[oldmanfan]

19 minutes ago, Foxx said:

of course this is almost impossible to prove. however, if one were to look at the curve for say Sweden, whom did not lockdown and compare it to the Us, they are almost identical.

I think they emphasized spacing?

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, Magox said:

 

Who are you arguing with?

Everyone who thinks this is a crisis impacting the general population. It isn’t! 

[Boatdrinks]

39 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I think they emphasized spacing?

That would work for some businesses. For others that operate on small profit margins and need volume ( ie bars, restaurants) people should just have to use their own discretion and maybe even ppe if they choose. Otherwise, they should stay away from those establishments until treatments or a vaccine emerge. 

[snafu]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

I obviously agree. Remember, those 1,000 nation wide deaths in the under 45 age group include NYC where the problem is more acute and include those with preexisting conditions...which almost surely make up 90% of the rest. So statistically speaking we shut down the entire country for a problem that MAYBE killed 100 people under the age of 50? Really? 

 

Are you arguing that there should never have been a shutdown? Or the shutdown should end immediately? Or both?

I’d say that shutting things down was important because nobody really knew anything about how bad this thing is.  Actually, nobody knows much even now.  

 

On the other hand, to to think that someone is going to come up with a foolproof treatment or a vaccine for a virus is foolish. Waiting for that to go back to “normal” isn’t going to work at all. 

 

The numbers and and data are important — but they can be used like you’re using them to say that this isn’t a big deal.  They can also be used like others are using them to say that the shutdown should continue if you want to see the numbers of sick and dying hold steady and decline gradually.  People are going to get sick and they are going to die, no matter if there’s a shutdown or not.  Herd immunity is extremely important and it is the opinion of most that gradually getting to that point is best so that the healthcare system isn’t crippled.  Ailments that AREN’T covid-19 haven’t disappeared off the map and hospitals need to be able to treat everyone who needs them — not be focused entirely on covid-19 patients.  There’s no cure for a virus, but there are steps which mitigate the spread and aid the system.

 

And I don’t think Sweden is a good comparison to the Northeast Corridor and other big urban areas in the US. And so if you compare Sweden only to places like western NY and the Midwest, then we with the shutdown are actually faring much better than Sweden (I could be wrong about that, I’m not much into the numbers).

 

Living in NYS, it is clear that a regional approach to opening thing up is probably best, but I honestly don’t know how that would work.  The economy is too interconnected and people from restricted areas will travel to other places for toilet paper and haircuts, etc.

 

 

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

39 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Everyone who thinks this is a crisis impacting the general population. It isn’t! 

Disagree. Once the country was closed down, this 'crisis' impacted the general population.

 

[Big Gun]

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/494034-the-data-are-in-stop-the-panic-and-end-the-total-isolation?fbclid=IwAR1QZwk5d5RsZ4ooP2d3modQ08mp5VdUvc-kqzf3JQJislDL982E80GFsA0

[SoCal Deek]

17 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Disagree. Once the country was closed down, this 'crisis' impacted the general population.

 

Correct...and now it’s passed time to fix it.

[Boatdrinks]

23 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Are you arguing that there should never have been a shutdown? Or the shutdown should end immediately? Or both?

I’d say that shutting things down was important because nobody really knew anything about how bad this thing is.  Actually, nobody knows much even now.  

 

On the other hand, to to think that someone is going to come up with a foolproof treatment or a vaccine for a virus is foolish. Waiting for that to go back to “normal” isn’t going to work at all. 

 

The numbers and and data are important — but they can be used like you’re using them to say that this isn’t a big deal.  They can also be used like others are using them to say that the shutdown should continue if you want to see the numbers of sick and dying hold steady and decline gradually.  People are going to get sick and they are going to die, no matter if there’s a shutdown or not.  Herd immunity is extremely important and it is the opinion of most that gradually getting to that point is best so that the healthcare system isn’t crippled.  Ailments that AREN’T covid-19 haven’t disappeared off the map and hospitals need to be able to treat everyone who needs them — not be focused entirely on covid-19 patients.  There’s no cure for a virus, but there are steps which mitigate the spread and aid the system.

 

And I don’t think Sweden is a good comparison to the Northeast Corridor and other big urban areas in the US. And so if you compare Sweden only to places like western NY and the Midwest, then we with the shutdown are actually faring much better than Sweden (I could be wrong about that, I’m not much into the numbers).

 

Living in NYS, it is clear that a regional approach to opening thing up is probably best, but I honestly don’t know how that would work.  The economy is too interconnected and people from restricted areas will travel to other places for toilet paper and haircuts, etc.

 

 

 

NYC is really it’s own state in many ways and needs to be treated differently. No one is driving from Flushing to West Seneca for a haircut. 

[oldmanfan]

46 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

That would work for some businesses. For others that operate on small profit margins and need volume ( ie bars, restaurants) people should just have to use their own discretion and maybe even ppe if they choose. Otherwise, they should stay away from those establishments until treatments or a vaccine emerge. 

This will be part of going forward.  I think if I were a governor I would look into mandating masks be worn by all in public, but legality would have to be determined.

 

Here’s the deal, not just with a contagious disease like coronavirus but other non-contagious diseases.  People know what they should do, it’s that they’re either too lazy, stubborn or dumb to do it.  Diabetes and heart disease are rampant in our country.  Why?  Because people don’t do things like eat properly or exercise.  Again the difference between that and the corona virus is they aren’t contagious.

 

I was at Lowe’s yesterday morning.  I would say only about half of the folks there had on masks.  And about the same percentage were staying 6 feet from others.  These are things that have been recommended and asked if the American public for weeks now, but  too high a percentage aren’t doing it.  That’s just dumb because you’re not protecting yourself, and selfish because you could spread your virus to others.  

 

As  long as people are going to behave that way, the longer it will take to get things under control.

[Boatdrinks]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

This will be part of going forward.  I think if I were a governor I would look into mandating masks be worn by all in public, but legality would have to be determined.

 

Here’s the deal, not just with a contagious disease like coronavirus but other non-contagious diseases.  People know what they should do, it’s that they’re either too lazy, stubborn or dumb to do it.  Diabetes and heart disease are rampant in our country.  Why?  Because people don’t do things like eat properly or exercise.  Again the difference between that and the corona virus is they aren’t contagious.

 

I was at Lowe’s yesterday morning.  I would say only about half of the folks there had on masks.  And about the same percentage were staying 6 feet from others.  These are things that have been recommended and asked if the American public for weeks now, but  too high a percentage aren’t doing it.  That’s just dumb because you’re not protecting yourself, and selfish because you could spread your virus to others.  

 

As  long as people are going to behave that way, the longer it will take to get things under control.

Masks should be optional in the USA. No one is going to sit in a restaurant to eat or go watch a game at a bar with a mask on, anyway. Those who wish to stay home or wear an N 95 mask can do so. Influenza is also contagious, so where does it stop ? The overwhelming majority of those who do get infected with Covid 19 will recover, and a large portion will have no symptoms. Personal responsibility and personal risk assessment win over trampling freedoms. Spacing is a reasonable concession for a time. 

Edited April 26, 2020 by Boatdrinks

[snafu]

6 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

NYC is really it’s own state in many ways and needs to be treated differently. No one is driving from Flushing to West Seneca for a haircut. 

 

No, but would you consider the Poconos too far to drive (an hour and a half)?  Get a haircut, have some lunch, do a bit of shopping and drive back to Queens. How about a train ride to Atlantic City, or driving to the shore for a weekend? Does Long Island and Westchester get put into “NYC” status?  

 

I understand and the different treatment idea.  I think regions should be defined a bit larger than “NYC”. Same goes for Boston, Chicago, DC, etc.

 

 

[Tiberius]

21 minutes ago, pop gun said:

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/494034-the-data-are-in-stop-the-panic-and-end-the-total-isolation?fbclid=IwAR1QZwk5d5RsZ4ooP2d3modQ08mp5VdUvc-kqzf3JQJislDL982E80GFsA0

Quote

The appropriate policy, based on fundamental biology and the evidence already in hand, is to institute a more focused strategy like some outlined in the first place: Strictly protect the known vulnerable, self-isolate the mildly sick and open most workplaces and small businesses with some prudent large-group precautions. This would allow the essential socializing to generate immunity among those with minimal risk of serious consequence, while saving lives, preventing overcrowding of hospitals and limiting the enormous harms compounded by continued total isolation.

Restaurants and movie theatres? How about flying on airlines? Not sure people would even come back. Schools? Sporting events? 

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Masks should be optional in the USA. No one is going to sit in a restaurant to eat or go watch a game at a bar with a mask on, anyway. Those who wish to stay home or wear an N 95 mask can do so. Influenza is also contagious, so where does it stop ? The overwhelming majority of those who do get infected with Covid 19 will recover, and a large portion will have no symptoms. Personal responsibility and personal risk assessment win over trampling freedoms. Spacing is a reasonable concession for a time. 

Again be careful with comparisons.  With the flu there is a seasonality; we don’t know that for corona.  And for the flu there are immunizations; it will be a while for that with coronavirus.  Influenza is still an issue because some refuse to get immunized, and to be fair the virus varies in effectiveness year to year.  All of these are still to be determined with coronavirus.

 

If wearing masks in public helps get things back to some sense of normality why argue against it?

[Boatdrinks]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Again be careful with comparisons.  With the flu there is a seasonality; we don’t know that for corona.  And for the flu there are immunizations; it will be a while for that with coronavirus.  Influenza is still an issue because some refuse to get immunized, and to be fair the virus varies in effectiveness year to year.  All of these are still to be determined with coronavirus.

 

If wearing masks in public helps get things back to some sense of normality why argue against it?

It’s too restrictive and we are not a society that wears face coverings. Personal choice is best. 

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

If wearing masks in public helps get things back to some sense of normality why argue against it?

 

Because the data that says it will help get us back to normal is incomplete and wearing a mask is not returning to normalcy, it's a deviation from it to the absurd.  

 

And, in this country, we have a stubborn streak of enjoying freedom in the face of tyranny. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Again be careful with comparisons.  With the flu there is a seasonality; we don’t know that for corona.  And for the flu there are immunizations; it will be a while for that with coronavirus.  Influenza is still an issue because some refuse to get immunized, and to be fair the virus varies in effectiveness year to year.  All of these are still to be determined with coronavirus.

 

If wearing masks in public helps get things back to some sense of normality why argue against it?

Why not a burka?  I always want my government mandating what I need to wear to go out in public.

 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Because the data that says it will help get us back to normal is incomplete and wearing a mask is not returning to normalcy, it's a deviation from it to the absurd.  

 

And, in this country, we have a stubborn streak of enjoying freedom in the face of tyranny. 

Wearing a mask for a while is not tyranny.  Normalcy may look different for a while until we get treatments, vaccines, etc.  

[Boatdrinks]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Restaurants and movie theatres? How about flying on airlines? Not sure people would even come back. Schools? Sporting events? 

If Lord Cuomo said it was okay, I’d go to a restaurant or sporting event tomorrow. I’ll get on a flight as soon as restrictions are lifted for travel to my favorite vacation Island . If there is more space between seats and more expensive tickets that’s fine. Not big on movie theaters, but I never have been. Couple times a year proposition for me, but others feel differently. Schools are probably okay now, but shelve it until the fall if they want to. 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Wearing a mask for a while is not tyranny.  Normalcy may look different for a while until we get treatments, vaccines, etc.  

 

Forcing people to wear masks when the data is incomplete is tyranny by any definition. 

 

Freedom isn't risk free. It never is and never will be.

[Boatdrinks]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Wearing a mask for a while is not tyranny.  Normalcy may look different for a while until we get treatments, vaccines, etc.  

It is to me,  and I wear a covering now only in protest. Face covering( not a mask) with various messages - I have a few of them. Also either a Trump hat or a **** Cuomo hat. Freedoms / rights should never be surrendered lightly imo. 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Why not a burka?  I always want my government mandating what I need to wear to go out in public.

 

 

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Why not a burka?  I always want my government mandating what I need to wear to go out in public.

 

A mask helps you not transmit the virus, and helps you be safe from others transmitting the virus to you.  I would rather our citizens use their head and help each other out, but in my rare forays out into public it is clear some folks don’t want to do so.  So governors at some point in the interest of public health may have to make a difficult call to balance opening up our communities in a way that is safe.  As I said above the legality of that would have to be addressed.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

 

A mask helps you not transmit the virus, and helps you be safe from others transmitting the virus to you.  I would rather our citizens use their head and help each other out, but in my rare forays out into public it is clear some folks don’t want to do so.  So governors at some point in the interest of public health may have to make a difficult call to balance opening up our communities in a way that is safe.  As I said above the legality of that would have to be addressed.

 

Making recommendations is fine. Forcing the issue through fiat, when the data is incomplete, is tyrannical. 

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Forcing people to wear masks when the data is incomplete is tyranny by any definition. 

 

Freedom isn't risk free. It never is and never will be.

I would much rather the public use our collective heads and help each other out.

 

So let’s say you are an asymptomatic carrier (which you could be).  You go out without a mask, transmit to someone.  Say it’s a 79 year old who then dies.  Or a 25  year old who develops a clotting disorder and loses a leg. Are you saying that your rights trample their health? 

[Boatdrinks]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

I would much rather the public use our collective heads and help each other out.

 

So let’s say you are an asymptomatic carrier (which you could be).  You go out without a mask, transmit to someone.  Say it’s a 79 year old who then dies.  Or a 25  year old who develops a clotting disorder and loses a leg. Are you saying that your rights trample their health? 

Dangerous territory. Simply existing in an area should not be considered an act of intent vs someone else’s health. Individual rights stand above all. No one has a right to perfect health. Vagaries of nature exist. Someone can get influenza and die; they certainly got it from someone else. Again not saying this is influenza, but the idea is the same. We must take ultimate responsibility for our own health, even if that means avoiding certain situations for some people. 

[Big Gun]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

A mask helps you not transmit the virus, and helps you be safe from others transmitting the virus to you.  I would rather our citizens use their head and help each other out, but in my rare forays out into public it is clear some folks don’t want to do so.  So governors at some point in the interest of public health may have to make a difficult call to balance opening up our communities in a way that is safe.  As I said above the legality of that would have to be addressed.

Governors need to open their economies, if a business owner isn't comfortable with the current state of events they do not need to open. Civilians do not need to leave their house or leave their house without a mask if they so choose not to. It's all about freedom of choice, but keeping everything locked down is hurting more than it's helping and the numbers back that up. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I would much rather the public use our collective heads and help each other out.

 

So let’s say you are an asymptomatic carrier (which you could be).  You go out without a mask, transmit to someone.  Say it’s a 79 year old who then dies.  Or a 25  year old who develops a clotting disorder and loses a leg. Are you saying that your rights trample their health? 

 

You've shifted your position. I have no problem with people doing what they feel is right. I have a big problem with the government mandating something when the data used to make that declaration is specious and/or incomplete. 

 

I'm immunosuppressed despite not having any other risk factors of age or health. I'm responsible for my own health, no one else. Thus, I take it seriously, and have/am continuing to follow the most stringent guidelines. But it's my choice to do so as a free person. I don't begrudge someone for making their own choices. Hence my point about tyranny vs freedom. Freedom is hard. It's not easy. And I'm not a fan of giving up fundamental rights and liberties just because my government is telling me to be afraid of something. 

 

That NEVER works out well for the people in the long run. Ever. 

[Taro T]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

A mask helps you not transmit the virus, and helps you be safe from others transmitting the virus to you.  I would rather our citizens use their head and help each other out, but in my rare forays out into public it is clear some folks don’t want to do so.  So governors at some point in the interest of public health may have to make a difficult call to balance opening up our communities in a way that is safe.  As I said above the legality of that would have to be addressed.

 

A N95 mask properly fitted and worn DOES help prevent the spread of the virus from you to the surrounding population.  Few in the general public have access to masks of that quality.

 

A cloth bandana strung across ones face like a 19th century train robber might reduce the velocity with which the virus expels from you but doesn't keep it out of the air.  It provides minimal reduction of transmission at best and at worst creates a false sense of security for those around the wearer.  THAT is what most places are considering effective masks.  Just because they're effectively ineffective is no reason not to wear them though, right?

[Boatdrinks]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You've shifted your position. I have no problem with people doing what they feel is right. I have a big problem with the government mandating something when the data used to make that declaration is specious and/or incomplete. 

 

I'm immunosuppressed despite not having any other risk factors of age or health. I'm responsible for my own health, no one else. Thus, I take it seriously, and have/am continuing to follow the most stringent guidelines. But it's my choice to do so as a free person. I don't begrudge someone for making their own choices. Hence my point about tyranny vs freedom. Freedom is hard. It's not easy. And I'm not a fan of giving up fundamental rights and liberties just because my government is telling me to be afraid of something. 

 

That NEVER works out well for the people in the long run. Ever. 

I agree steadfastly with your position. I also wish you the best of health and good fortune. 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Boatdrinks said:

Dangerous territory. Simply existing in an area should not be considered an act of intent vs someone else’s health. Individual rights stand above all. No one has a right to perfect health. Vagaries of nature exist. Someone can get influenza and die; they certainly got it from someone else. Again not saying this is influenza, but the idea is the same. We must take ultimate responsibility for our own health, even if that means avoiding certain situations for some people. 

Dangerous to be sure and I don’t bring it up lightly.  To me if we want our entire society to get back to normal (and again normal may look different for a while) we need arrangements that help get everyone back out there.  If we all join hands and wear masks I think that would be a key step.

 

I have patients desperate to start families I can’t see right now.  I have a daughter whose senior year in high school is ruined and doesn’t know if she will be able to start college, an older daughter who is laid off and worried if her job will be there.  We all have similar experiences.  Is it too much to ask of us as a public to unite and do some things for now that we may not like that much but that would benefit society as a whole?  I don’t like wearing a mask in public but it helps my neighbor.

[SoCal Deek]

10 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I would much rather the public use our collective heads and help each other out.

 

So let’s say you are an asymptomatic carrier (which you could be).  You go out without a mask, transmit to someone.  Say it’s a 79 year old who then dies.  Or a 25  year old who develops a clotting disorder and loses a leg. Are you saying that your rights trample their health? 

And there’s the point. Old people and those who have underlying health issues of any significance need to be careful. It’s not unlike the AIDS epidemic was. We didn’t lock down all of America for that, and there’s still no vaccine even today.

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

A N95 mask properly fitted and worn DOES help prevent the spread of the virus from you to the surrounding population.  Few in the general public have access to masks of that quality.

 

A cloth bandana strung across ones face like a 19th century train robber might reduce the velocity with which the virus expels from you but doesn't keep it out of the air.  It provides minimal reduction of transmission at best and at worst creates a false sense of security for those around the wearer.  THAT is what most places are considering effective masks.  Just because they're effectively ineffective is no reason not to wear them though, right?

The cloth masks are imperfect true.  But my understanding is they would reduce aerosol transmission from you to another.

[Boatdrinks]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Dangerous to be sure and I don’t bring it up lightly.  To me if we want our entire society to get back to normal (and again normal may look different for a while) we need arrangements that help get everyone back out there.  If we all join hands and wear masks I think that would be a key step.

 

I have patients desperate to start families I can’t see right now.  I have a daughter whose senior year in high school is ruined and doesn’t know if she will be able to start college, an older daughter who is laid off and worried if her job will be there.  We all have similar experiences.  Is it too much to ask of us as a public to unite and do some things for now that we may not like that much but that would benefit society as a whole?  I don’t like wearing a mask in public but it helps my neighbor.

If it’s an ask and not a requirement I’m all for it. I won’t begrudge anyone exercising their personal choice, whatever that is. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Is it too much to ask of us as a public to unite and do some things for now that we may not like that much but that would benefit society as a whole?

 

It might be if the data isn't complete or accurate. Making decisions based in fear is how more people end up dead or a bad problem gets much worse. 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

And there’s the point. Old people and those who have underlying health issues of any significance need to be careful. It’s not unlike the AIDS epidemic was. We didn’t lock down all of America for that, and there’s still no vaccine even today.

With HIV it was fairly quickly determined the virus was predominantly in the gay population and the transmission by sexual contact or contaminated needles/blood.  Coronavirus in comparison is spread more Asoka and in a much larger population.

[Boatdrinks]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

And there’s the point. Old people and those who have underlying health issues of any significance need to be careful. It’s not unlike the AIDS epidemic was. We didn’t lock down all of America for that, and there’s still no vaccine even today.

While that’s not spread casually ( as we know) I agree. Polio has been brought up in some threads. I wasn’t around during the time of Polio , but I’m pretty certain there were sporting events, restaurants, bars etc. Current generations have largely been shielded from infectious illnesses, and that seems to have led to mindless panic and governmental overreach in some places. 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It might be if the data isn't complete or accurate. Making decisions based in fear is how more people end up dead or a bad problem gets much worse. 

I would argue that the social distancing policies that the public health authorities have recommended have been the most significant reason we have only 50k deaths vs.  many more.  I think the public health experts would tell you that.