I ain’t working.
1 Like
Your entire line of reasoning from the badly written article quoted above is horribly flawed.
70% getting infected this year is not a preventive measure nor it it indeed to be for this year.
It will prevent a serious return of this disease next season whoever which is why it is necessary to let it spread now.
More importantly if we do so while continuing to protect those who are most vulnerable and at highest risk, we significantly reduce t heir risks of serious/critical illness or death before a vaccine is approved.
Those we need to protect are already sequestered/quarantined and identified. We not only don’t put them at increased risk with the rest of us going back to work, we significantly reduce the risks to them and the length of time they suffer under the pressure of living in fear of contracting it.
2 Likes
What do you like about a post where I say “I ain’t working”?
I was talking to a local business owner today. He said “I did it because they said it was the right thing, I’ll never do it again.”
Consent of the governed. This epidemic has brought to light a lot of things. It would be nice if we remembered them when it’s over.
We might have taken a step back towards being a republic again because of it.
You may be right…i don’t know.
And we said we’d remember a lot of things after 911. Our government and representatives forgot how well they worked together after that. They have forgotten…
I don’t want them working together.
Maybe that’s a problem, maybe it’s not.
Any time they “work together” it’s nothing but BOHICA for us.
3 Likes
Are your rights more or less secure today than they were on 9-10-01?
2 Likes
What if there is no vaccine available in the foreseeable future? And this just keeps swinging around seasonally infecting mass amounts of people.
We’d be utterly screwed as the only possibilities then that remain are blowing up the economy repeatedly with each return or simply letting it run it’s course until we eventually build herd immunity naturally.
I vote we do it as soon as possible to eliminate as much pain, suffering and death from both a human misery/health standpoint as well as economic standpoint.
If I was a doctor working in a COVID ward I probably wouldn’t agree with this post.
1 Like
We don’t have “Covid Wards” so that’s pretty much nonsense.
Even completely uncontrolled less than 20% of all those who contract it will ever need to be hospitalized to start with.
If we protect the most vulnerable and at highest risk of serious/critical illness from the disease we can cut that remainder down to less than 5%.
Not an issue and we’ll never overrun capacity with that approach.
How we will overrun capacity is to have another mass outbreak in the future absent effective vaccines and treatments.
1 Like
We don’t have COVID wards? We just mix 'em in with everybody else? I didn’t realize that.
1 Like
No, we’re not treating patients in wards period. Mostly they are in individual/double rooms under quarantine or the sever cases are in ICU’s under quarantine.
less.
wouldn’t a hospital put all those individual/double room on the same floor, to you know keep them away from the other sick people.
Most big hospitals have specific wings dedicated to infectious disease where they can control transmission risks with segregated ventilation etc.
We haven’t done the large group ward thing in the US for about fifty or sixty years though with a few emergency exceptions mostly for trauma cases.
We haven’t done big open wards for infectious diseases since probably the fifties with the last big polio outbreak where you might have 20-50 people in iron lung wards all together. By that point in treatment most or all were no longer a risk for transmitting it anyhow, they were in recovery.
You want to know why I don’t?
I can remember being told that closing businesses and all was necessary because hospitals could be overrun like they were in Italy. We couldn’t be in a situation where people would be sent home to die because there weren’t enough ICU beds or respirators.
It seem like the talk now is more like we can’t open up because we don’t want one person to die. A criteria we never used for closing highways or for the flu.
When did this switch from not having hospitals overrun to we can’t allow anyone to die? Or am I reading it wrong?
4 Likes
