Is America Doomed?

Jump to Last Post 1-12 of 12 discussions (96 posts)
  1. crankalicious profile image94
    crankaliciousposted 14 months ago

    Memorial Day Weekend 2020 might go down in history as the end of America.

    I can't think of a time where I was less confident that there was a chance that we could come together to defeat COVID-19 because there appears to be a major gap between those that understand how the virus spreads and those that don't and those that care about it and those that don't.

    I saw reporting, perhaps fear-mongering to some degree, about people at pool parties in Missouri violating all manner of social distancing and mask requirements and of beaches in Alabama where people didn't seem to care one iota about the virus.

    When interviewed, the crux of their response was this: "I'm not afraid of this virus" or "I'm not worried". They seemed not to understand that while they might not be at great risk, it was the spread of the virus to the most vulnerable people we are trying to stop. They seemed to lack the basic understanding of the risks and the mathematical certainty of the virus spreading as a result of their behavior.

    Those interviewed about not wearing masks said they weren't concerned they would catch the virus, but seemed not to understand that wearing a mask wasn't about their protection, but about the protection of others. It was truly disheartening.

    And then there was Fox News, making fun of Joe Biden for wearing a mask. And then there was President Trump, retweeting Fox's comments. It would seem that the point of those comments was simply this: wearing a mask is unmanly, embarrassing, unattractive, weak. So the message, conveyed to millions of Americans, was that if you wear a mask, you're a sissy.

    Seems like everything we've worked for to make this virus go away was undone in a weekend and like many people have been saying, we'll just let it run its course and those who die will die and those who survive, which will be most of us, will survive.

    It's a self-fulfilling prophecy - if people are going to behave this way, what's the point of even trying to follow the guidelines?

    1. profile image0
      PrettyPantherposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      I feel ya. All we can hope is that the smart will outlive the stupid. Of course, the stupid will take a bunch of innocents with them. Sadly.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image84
      Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

      Everyone has different opinions about opening up the country. Some are fearful, those are the ones that have every right to stay home, and continue to do what they feel is right for them as individuals. They have rights.   Those that are ready and willing to get back to work, go on with their lives, they have rights too.

      You say you worry about those that are most vulnerable to contract the virus. Please keep in mind these you speak of have rights too...  No one is voicing the opinion that those most vulnerable do anything other than what they feel is prudent to be safe. They can make their own decisions on when and whether to leave their homes, wear masks, etc.   

      For instance --- I am an older woman, very healthy,  I go out daily, do not wear a mask, I do social distance and don't touch my face, that's my choice.     

      We will be dealing with the virus for some time. No one knows what fall will bring. The strain may weaken, it very well may not reoccur. or we may have a herd we are unaware of. At some point we will have a vaccine. However, the fact is many can't afford to wait for that day. Many like me am not at all willing to stay in, put life on hold, and await that day.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

        Of course we all have the same rights, but how far can (should) they go in a society of people living in close proximity?

        Do those wishing to drink and drive have the right to do so?  Anyone that doesn't like it can stay home - their choice!

        Do restaurants have the right to keep a dirty kitchen?  Those that don't like it don't have to eat there!

        Do employers have the right to a dangerous workplace?  No one is forcing employees to work there!

        The point being that we are all here together, and have a nation chock full of laws intended to protect us from each other (all three of those examples).  Are social distancing and face masks, designed to protect us from the infected,  so different?  After all, public health departments inspecting kitchens have shut down more than a few businesses, as has OSHA looking for safety hazards.  We don't shut down the business of a drunk driver - we take away their very freedom.  Are the actions being taken to combat the pandemic really that different?

        1. Credence2 profile image82
          Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          So, we can and do see eye to eye on certain concepts like the one you expressed here.

        2. blueheron profile image95
          blueheronposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          Wilderness, the bottom line here is that one does not deprive people of their liberties without due process and proof of guilt. In order to justify depriving a person of his liberties in relation to covid, you would have to prove, in court, that that person was infected with covid, and knowingly and intentionally contacted a vulnerable person with the intent to infect them. AND you would have to prove in court that they actually did so.

          You are proposing that it is okay to incarcerate or confine innocent people on the presumption that they MIGHT harm others--merely by going about their business. I.e., this is analogous to the placing of Japanese-Americans in internment camps on the presumption that they MIGHT have undermined the American war effort during WWII.

          I would say that the same is true of drunk drivers. They should not be punished merely for driving drunk, but only for violations of traffic laws, and punished if they cause damage to persons and property--just as with people who text and drive. (My perspective on this is partly because I am old enough to remember when nobody drove sober. The 1950s view of drinking and driving was that that was what cars were for.)

          The analogy to the cleanliness of restaurants in relation to covid is not disallowing people from "keeping a dirty kithcen." A more appropriate analogy would be the banning of restaurants altogether, on the theory that the MIGHT keep a dirty kitchen. Also, I really see no reason why restaurant patrons could not choose where and where not to eat, based on cleanliness. There is no effective way to police restaurant cleanliness anyway, since one of the biggest sources of food poisoning is employees not washing their hands after using the can. And you will never know if the brisket was dropped on the floor on the way to the smoker. You could insist on seeing the kitchen and storage areas before dining--and decline to dine there if refused. And, of course, despite the many regulations, food poisoning is still quite common. (I've gotten it a couple of times at Chinese buffets, where I guess no one knows you shouldn't put the mussels mayonnaise under the heat lamps.)

          With hazardous workplaces, the correct solution would be severe civil penalties in cases where employer negligence resulted in an injury.

          It is well to remember that there are ways to manage various social ills that don't involve jack-boot methods. One good example is Prohibition--which was instituted as soon as women got the vote. An alcoholic husband was a life sentence--of non-support, beatings, and seeing their children abused--for women. As we all know, Prohibition didn't work. What DID work was divorce. The reason there is no longer any strong female movement in favor of Prohibition is because it is now acceptable to kick your alcoholic husband to the curb; you aren't stuck with him, and you no longer care if he drinks, as long as he's not around.

          With epidemic diseases, the correct approach is to quarantine those who are ill. It would also be helpful to assist the vulnerable to self-quarantine. Quarantines are for sick people, not healthy people.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            "You are proposing that it is okay to incarcerate or confine innocent people on the presumption that they MIGHT harm others..."

            Is that not exactly what we do with drunk drivers?  They MIGHT harm others so we lock them up - an action that I wholeheartedly approve of as it has been shown over and over that the probability of inadvertently harming others skyrockets with alcohol in the system.

            I'm not seeing the difference, really, between a dirty kitchen and blowing water droplets laden with the virus onto other people.  There is no "might" in that - you WILL exhale water, and water with the virus if infected.  Just as a restaurant that doesn't clean properly WILL have a dirty kitchen, and if employees are careless WILL carry grime to customers in the food.  Inspections are made to prevent that, not fine the business after people get sick or die.

            OSHA - again, we do not wait for an injury/death to assign penalties.  We do it before a death occurs - a penalty is scant comfort to one that has died on the job but might convince a business to operate safely before the accident, preventing the death completely.

            Quarantine for all those infected would be great and of far more value than anything else we might do.  Now, how do we find all the sick people before they can infect others?  Do we test every person in the country every other day or so?  Given the long incubation period I'm not seeing any other method.

            1. Credence2 profile image82
              Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Affirmative......

              While living in California, dining establisment had swat style unannounced inspections by the county. The results of those inspections were recorded and graded A-C, less than that, you were probably out of business.

              The grade placard had to be prominently displayed at the Establishment. Customers that saw even a "B" rating may decide to go elsewhere.

              So, in Riverside County, Public health and safety was to be a priority if you wanted to stay in business.

              So, this idea that we wait for people to get sick or rely on customers to determine if this is a "dirty restaurant" with most not knowing that what you don't see can hurt you, ignoring cleanliness standards that are beyond visible observation is Not a very good idea.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                Just so.  And that is but the tip of the iceberg - we have an absolute plethora of laws designed to protect us from the actions of others, whether it is shooting guns in city limits, letting dogs run free or pouring oil onto our own land.  Restaurant inspections, OSHA and all the other workplace safety laws and driving laws are but the tip of it all.

        3. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          "Do those wishing to drink and drive have the right to do so?  Anyone that doesn't like it can stay home - their choice!"

          Yes, drinking and driving can lead to harming another citizen. And we have laws that punish anyone that chooses to drink too much and drive. The laws are to deter someone from drinking and driving. There is a choice involved. If I have a glass of wine, and I make a well thought out decision that I am fine to drive, should I be penalized for having a drink and driving?  Should I be punished due to some get smashed and make a decision to drive? Should I have my right to make a logical decision in regard to having a drink and driving?  I think your reasoning in comparing mask-wearing to any of your examples oversimplifies the matter.

          In my view, most individuals have been provided information on the need to wear a mask when in close proximity to others, as well as the need for social distance. Will some disregard the common sense, and just ignore the suggestions to wear a mask or social distancing, yes... Should we pass laws to assure everyone is forced to comply with wearing a mask and social distancing? I prefer that I reserve the right to make my own decision, and not give up my right to THINK and make a prudent decision. Not willing to give up my rights due to some citizen's inability to make logical decisions to protect others or that some citizens prefer to have government overreach to blanket the population.  Just not willing to have that occasional glass of wine and driving, due to some having very poor decision-making skills.

          My point, should we have blanketing laws about wearing masks and social distancing that affect millions, when only a few might be drunks? I  do realize your point, but it seems to me to be taking away the rights of many citizens that would be good citizens and do the right thing anyway. Sort, of works to insult one's intelligence, just because some have a lack of intelligence.

          I want to share my own experience with design making in regards to wearing a mask. Yesterday I had a doctor's appointment. I wore a mask as I waited in the Doc's office due to being in close quarters, I kept it on when examined also due to close quarters.  After my exam, the Doc invited me into his office to catch up.  He took off his mask as did I. His office was suitable for social distancing.  The doc made his choice to remove the mask due to the distance between us, I followed up for the same reason. We both had the right to make a prudent decision. If we had a law in regards to wearing a mask when in the presence of others, both of us would have been breaking that law. Our rights to make an informed decision would have been taken away. 

          In my opinion, any laws that daily blankets every citizen to wear a mask is dangerous, and impinges on our human rights.   More dangerous than any virus.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            "I prefer that I reserve the right to make my own decision, and not give up my right to THINK and make a prudent decision."

            Unfortunately I have actually met people that think they drive better when drunk: they say they drive slower and take more care.  I've also met people that say they are quite capable of using a cell phone while driving - that it makes no difference in their driving ability.  Both are patently false, but it is an excuse that gives them permission (in their own mind and in their own judgement) to do what raises the probability of harming others.

            And that takes it into a different position.  Your example of a glass of wine has nothing to do with driving drunk; the laws permit that.  They don't permit driving drunk.  Similarly, many people find wearing a mask to be foolish and do not do so when shopping; when walking down aisles in the store, when waiting in line, etc.  You may quickly put your mask on when passing people in the aisle, but they don't.  And, IMO, that means that we all must be forced to follow prudent procedures, whether we personally think they are foolish or not.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              I was trying to point out it just might be stepping on the majority of citizen's rights. Just my view, I think in the case of making laws that require our entire population to wear a mask would be an overreach. Yes, I agree there are and will be those that do not see the importance of social distancing and putting on a mask when appropriate.

              Guess, I am willing to put up with this to protect my rights. Sorry, this makes me squeezy thinking of having anyone dictate I wear a mask in public. Nothing to do with vanity just insults my intelligence. Not willing to give up my right to decide when to wear a mask. I am willing to just stay clear of those that might cause me a problem in public.

              I guess on this subject we may have to agree to disagree. I think being a nurse has me viewing the crisis differently than some.  Perhaps I would look at it differently if I were not a nurse.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                Absolutely it steps on our rights.  That's what happens with ANY large group of people; a few make it difficult for the many.  My whole point is that there will always be a few who put their desires and wants above truth and fact; we cannot depend on everyone to do what is right unless we force the issue, and that means taking the right of decision making away from the group because of those few.

                As to when to wear a mask; my philosophy is that I should wear one when I may come within 10' of others (a sneeze will carry water droplets at least that far and perhaps further).  In my car, no.  In my home, no.  Walking my neighborhood sidewalk, no (I go into the street when meeting someone, or cross it entirely).

                But in a store, absolutely.  A parking lot, probably.  Even a sidewalk downtown where there are others, yes.  An interesting question though - I am scheduled for a medical test Monday, and must have a swab taken on the prior Friday.  Do I wear a mask for the test?  I think so, even after the swab and COVID test.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image84
                  Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  Sounds like you have a good method to decrease getting or spreading the virus. I am promoting all to get the titer test if it's available you might want to have a titer test.

                  And no we cannot depend on everyone to do the right.thing in regards to making a prudent decision on many problematic aspects of life.  And we do make laws to protect us from drunk drivers. To me being forced to wear a mask under Government restrictions would take away my right to make an intelligent decision. It would feel punitive. I in no way want to be put in the same category as someone that can't make an intelligent decision. I really think any form of law that blankets all citizens to wear a mask would be government overreach.

                  It may just border on Communism. We will always have those that won't follow rules. But, do we want the government to make blanketing rules on health safty.  I can't imagine where this could lead. Food for thought --- When we have a vaccine for COVID, would you approve of being forced by law to get it? Think about this, a vaccine that appears won't be tested for the appropriate length of time. This would be a good time to do a bit of research on vaccines and some of the side effects.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    I'm not making my point very well.  You want to make your own decision, and so do I...but then I want everyone to decide the same as I do.  I don't want them making their decision that varies with mine.  And I don't think you do, either, whether it be about drunk driving or wearing a mask.  You surely have loved ones - children, parents, spouse, friends - do you want infected people in close proximity to them without a mask?  Should those people never venture out of home because others have made the decision to ignore any virus safeguards? 

                    Not reasonable, IMO, which means we need something applicable country wide.  And it means that I don't get to make my own decision and neither do you.  None of us like it, but the alternative is to leave it all to the individual people and we as a nation and society choose not to do that when it comes to safety and protection from other people.

                  2. crankalicious profile image94
                    crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    Government laws to protect society are not Communism. Please go look up the definition of Communism.

                    We have tons of laws to protect public safety and a mask law would not be permanent. We have tons of laws about food safety. We have tons of laws about air quality. Speed limits. All sorts of things.

                    If we do not require people to wear masks, should we then hold them responsible if they spread the virus to others because they didn't wear a mask?

                    Should we ticket people for not wearing a mask in a contained space? If not, how is ticketing a person for not wearing a mask any different than ticketing a person for speeding? Shouldn't we get rid of all speed limits? People can make intelligent decisions about how fast they should drive, right?

      2. crankalicious profile image94
        crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

        You say you want the country to open, but you don't seem to realize that your behaviors are going to destroy it.

        Is it really so bad to wear a mask and social distance? I realize you are doing the latter, but by not doing the former, you and others are going to decimate American businesses. You are actually working against the very thing you say you want. In order for people to have the confidence to go to restaurants and amusement parks and gyms, people will need to wear masks, not to protect themselves, but to protect others. Business that do not enforce these rules will basically be saying to those that value their safety: "Don't come here. You are not welcome." And they'll go out of business.

        Wilderness is right. When it comes to the public safety, you are not allowed to do whatever you want. There are speed limits. There are rules about drunk driving. There are rules about yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. If somebody knows they have a transmittable disease, they cannot run around giving it to people.

        It's a scientific fact that this disease can be reduced considerably through social distancing and mask wearing. The U.S. is nearing 100,000 dead. Countries with a combined population equal to ours in Asia have 1,200 deaths total because they have contact tracing and testing and social rules that people follow.

        I guess it's just a question of what we think is important as a society. We have to move forward and open the economy, but we can do so in a smart way and prevent the virus from getting worse.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          "If somebody knows they have a transmittable disease, they cannot run around giving it to people."

          I could be wrong, but isn't it a crime (attempted murder or some such) to have unprotected sex while knowingly infected with HIV?

          1. crankalicious profile image94
            crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Wilderness, I believe you are correct. It is a crime to knowingly give somebody else HIV. Now, people who don't wear masks probably aren't knowingly doing something, but they are also being warned that they may be asymptomatic, so ignoring that mask rule would almost be equivalent.

        2. profile image0
          PrettyPantherposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          You and wilderness both make good points. I personally believe it is thoughtless and disrespectful to not wear a mask when receiving services from those essential workers who have been exposing themselves to risk this entire time. They are out there daily, sometimes not by choice, keeping things going so I can keep my creature comforts. I feel it would be rude and entitled of me to accept the fruits of their labor and not show them the care and respect of wearing a mask in their presence. It's such a small thing, but it can make a huge difference.

        3. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          As I mentioned I do the social distance. I am well educated in regards to when a mask is necessary. I am also educated in the protocol to decrease one's chances of contracting a virus and the fact that this virus will most likely be around for some years. We will have to, unfortunately, live with COVID, get back to work, and yes some will have to make decisions to be very cautious, and wear a mask, stay home, and out of crowds.

          The healthy would get back out and return normal.  Yes, as you said it's time to move forward, some can, and for a while, some can't.

          The only way to curb COCID is a vaccine. Soon it will be on a list of viruses that can pop up at any time in the future, just like H1N1.  Our 2019 flu shot was for A(H1N1) and B. This too will pass. And yes, we can all take precautions as individuals to decrease our chances and those around us contracting COVID. Those that feel they need to stay home, it is wise to stay home.

          Perhaps you should realize, I know the importance of when to wear a mask, and if appropriate to protect someone or myself in the case of being around any contagious diseases. I take care to be aware of my surroundings, and if a mask is necessary. A mask can actually become a problem if one does not realize how to remove it properly or can cause respiratory infections, and build-up of carbon dioxide in one's bloodstream.

          I respect you concern about people wearing masks, I can assure you I am respecting others need for space, and respecting my own health as well.

          1. profile image0
            PrettyPantherposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            So, are you saying the CDC recommendation to wear a mask around others, in addition to maintaining a distance of six feet, is wrong?

            1. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              I am not in conflict with the CDC in regard to the policy they put out. I social distance As I said, I know the importance of when to wear a mask, and when one is actually not needed.  Again,  I use social distancing, I take care to be aware of my surroundings, and if a mask is necessary.

              I do not wear a mask if I am in a situation that I can social distance. I am aware of those around me and make every effort to keep a distance. If I find I must be in an area I can't social distance (which at this point is rare) I will put on a mask momentarily. This morning I had a doctors appointment, I wore the mask due to close quarters.

              CDC --- " This means that the virus can spread between people interacting in close proximity—for example, speaking, coughing, or sneezing—even if those people are not exhibiting symptoms.  In light of this new evidence, CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies) especially in areas of significant community-based transmission."

              The CDC recommends wearing a mask if one can't social distance.

          2. crankalicious profile image94
            crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            The precise problem with our society is people deciding they "know better" than the experts or finding a random link on the internet that support their position.

            "Oh look, Johnny on Youtube said it was okay not to wear a mask."

            And the mask issue is two-fold. You may know when to wear a mask, but how do you know you aren't asymptomatic? What is so hard about protecting others from something you might be carrying? And what is wrong with projecting that importance of wearing a mask to others who may not have your expertise, but are certainly getting the message from you and others that wearing the mask should be a matter of personal preference?

            1. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              As I explained I at this point am social distancing. This is much more protective of those around me than a mask. If I  were ill at this point I would not be going around anyone.

              An I said as a nurse I am well educated in when to wear a mask, and what protection a mask actually can provide.

              And as I pointed out, everyone should be responsible for making their own decision on whether to go out in public, wear a mask or take whatever precautions they feel comfortable with. I truly feel anyone that has an underlying health problem or are very elderly should stay in, and wait a bit before going out into public. In my opinion, healthy should get on with their lives. Ultimately, this will aid in getting rid of this virus. Just my opinion. 

              I respect your opinion, and I think it is wise of you to continue to do what you feel comfortable doing.

      3. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

        Snarlee, as a nurse, you may well be familiar with techniques to protect yourself and others.

        What concerns me are the people marching around complaining about lockdowns saying that just because they are asymptomatic, they are "healthy". The problem with this pandemic is the reality that you can infect others over a period of time and not be aware that you are a carrier. That is what makes this dangerous and something to not underestimate.

        Until there is a vaccine, people should continue to apply safe distancing and wear masks even if it is not "macho".

        As Panther says, people should be considerate of others over being caveliar and licentious in regards to the lives of others. We all have to adjust and compromise, if this going to work.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          I can see your point, and respect your right to have an opposing opinion. I probably should not have jumped into the conversation. To me, the entire subject of COVID is complicated, and I think due to my being a nurse, and having friends in the medical field has given me a different perspective on how a long term virus may need to be handled. Just a very complex subject.

          1. Credence2 profile image82
            Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

            I never really thought that my opinion was opposing yours, so much.

            It is complicated, but as a "front line" professional, I saw you as someone in a position to know what is going on.

            Who says that you should not contribute just because we see things differently? That does not make your opinion irrelevant.

            Do I understand correctly? Are you saying the precautions proposed by Governor  are currently over the top?

            I have come in to the conversation late. Can I be confident that everybody would take the precautions that you do and therein lies the danger.

            1. crankalicious profile image94
              crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Masks can cut transmission of the virus by half. Do your medical friends wear masks while working? If so, why?

              Why does a cohort of Asian countries with the same population as the U.S. have 1,200 deaths while we have 100,000?

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                Because they aren't reporting correctly?  Because they don't know how many deaths they have?  Because we over report?  Because their population density is very low?  Because their diet is different?  Because they are different genetically?  Because they have some immunity from earlier versions?

                I could go on for a hundred possible reasons, but if you have pre-determined that the reason is masks and distancing there isn't much reason to.

                1. crankalicious profile image94
                  crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  Sure, there could be hundreds of reasons, but if you compare how the countries responded and what they did and look at the differences, that is more likely the explanation.

              2. Sharlee01 profile image84
                Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                Yes, Physicians and all hospital staff do wear masks due to being in close contact caring for patients. Otherwise, social distancing is the best way to prevent contracting COVID. If one can't social distance a mask is the next best thing.

                I have no idea why they would have a lower death toll. I  actually have no idea how Asian countries monitor deaths.

                1. crankalicious profile image94
                  crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  Masks, testing, contact tracing, social distancing.

                  It's not about monitoring deaths or counting. It's about their response to the problem.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    It is my understanding that some (some) Asian countries have been doing more testing per capita than the US, although that is changing.  They began wearing masks earlier.  The contact tracing is new and cannot begin to account for the difference in death toll.

                    I doubt that more testing (and presumably quarantining infected people) and masks result in a 100 fold increase in deaths.  There is more to the story than that.

              3. Credence2 profile image82
                Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                Say, you are preaching to the choir, Crankalicious.

            2. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              I was on call on a voluntary base. I was called for a couple of shifts a few weeks ago. I have not had a shift in over ten days. Hospitalizations are down in Michigan. To be truthful what here is what I  gleaned from my peers at work about the crisis  --- it was only slightly worse than a typical flu season Which I can tell you gets very hairy...  The virus seems to spread more quickly. Most Docs felt it would be back in the fall, due to we did not develop a herd.  Most deaths were of the elderly with other health problems. The majority that came to the ER were sent home due to not needing hospitalization. So, I can honestly say all of the above have contributed to my opinion in regard to the crisis.

              I feel Michigan's governor proposals have been over the top. She put blanket orders on the state. Many of the counties have had 1 or  2 deaths and just this week restrictions have been only slightly loosened. She has gone too far and the state will suffer badly economically.

              In regard to what precautions I practice -- I am not in conflict with the CDC in regard to the policy they put out. I social distance As I said, I know the importance of when to wear a mask, and when one is actually not needed.  Again,  I use social distancing, I take care to be aware of my surroundings, and if a mask is necessary.

              --- I do not wear a mask if I am in a situation that I can social distance. I am aware of those around me and make every effort to keep a distance. If I find I must be in an area I can't social distance (which at this point is rare) I will put on a mask momentarily. This morning I had a doctors appointment, I wore the mask due to close quarters. After my appointment, we sat in his office, we were distance, we both took our masks off. As I left, I put my mask on until I was out of the building.

              1. Credence2 profile image82
                Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                I certainly do not want a "police state" where people are mandated to wear a mask or be arrested.

                But, public accommodations ( a restaurant) should have the option to request that customers wear a mask as part of health and safety, maybe akin to wearing shoes and shirts?

                It may not be appropriate to blanket the entire state with similar shutdown orders because at the county level some areas require greater attention than others.

                Like I said, it will be a while before things return to what they were prior to the virus outbreak.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image84
                  Sharlee01posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  I agree with not only restaurants but any owner of a business at this point has the right to ask their customers to wear a mask in their business and set their own rules in regard to masks. Especially if their space will not accommodate social distancing.

                  I agree with Dr. Fauci at this point. We have many states that are opened to some extent and are using precautions to decrease a spike in new cases.  Naturally, we will have cases, and be made aware of them due to increased testing. especially in states that are more densely populated.  I feel these states need to be monitored, and new cases traced to curb a widespread outbreak.  Hopefully, we can keep the numbers down while building a herd. If we have a better herd the fall cases may be fewer. 
                  Yesterday my Doctor pointed out an interesting point. Michigan has free testing for all, and each day test about 15,000 a day with about 400 -500 new cases daily,  many nonsymptomatic, all being contact traced.  He claimed our hospitals are not seeing many admissions of COVID cases.  He also felt this indicates we have a herd and a growing herd. I am staying hopeful he is correct. I was tested when I returned to work for COVId and titer. I had a positive titer which indicates I had COVID without ever really realizing it. I am hopeful that the titer test becomes free for all. This would give us a better idea of how many people have had the virus.
                     
                  .I will leave it up to the Governor at this point to follow her plan to open the state entirely. And, I too believe it will take some a long time to feel comfortable in public again. I also feel many will just step back into their lives as they knew them. It comes down to individuality, and how one chooses to live their life.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    Might want to back off that titer test some; the latest report I heard (TV news) was last night and 50% of those tests are a false positive.  That's completely unacceptable and not something to base any actions or conclusions on.

    3. peterstreep profile image83
      peterstreepposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      My opinion:
      Like any country, there are living amazing people and people filled with aggression and negativity.
      America is a great country, with lots of great people in the arts, science, and nature. (subjects I'm interested in.) And just ordinary people working for their community.
      But it is also a country ruined by a bad form of capitalism.
      Amazon not paying taxes. Companies like Uber with millions of dept but not going bust.
      And racism is still a social item that is never dealt with properly.
      It saddens me deeply to see the downfall of the US. China would have taken over the world-leading position anyway within 50 years, no matter who wins the presidency. But as Trump is promoting an America first policy, it shows that it has given up on leading the world already. That's a sad thing as I prefer the US above China.
      The rift between Europe and the US has never been greater. And the trust between the two never at such a low. Due to American politics.
      Yes, America is losing itself. Just as Communism died, So is American Capitalism dying.
      Now about the COVID thing.
      Wearing masks in the open air does not make sense. There are hardly no cases known of people who got infected in the open air. Most people got infected when inside buildings. (Work, commuting, shops etc.)
      But what kills you is stupidity. And going to parties, demonstrations or fairs is a stupid thing, done in ignorance.
      The anti-science attitude supported by the president and vice president is just fueling ignorance. And ignorance is not bliss, it's deadly.
      As today we need science more than ever. Nobody ever got healed by praying. And science for everybody, not just a cure for those who can pay it.
      There is a lot to say. But to me, the bottom line is: The US has the wrong president in the wrong time of history. But the voting for a businessman as a president instead of a statesman was a long way in the making.
      Take care you all in the US. As the recession has arrived, and the epidemic is still not under control, mix this with the brutal killing of Floyd and you have dynamite. An unresponsible Tweeting president does not help either.

  2. Credence2 profile image82
    Credence2posted 14 months ago

    On the subject of masculinity associated with the wearing or not wearing of the mask, this article may shed some more light as to what is driving all of this....

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi … nt/612031/

    1. profile image0
      PrettyPantherposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      I read the whole thing. It is so depressing to me that people make excuses for the boorish, incompetent, cowardly man-child.

      I cannot laugh about it any more. People are literally dying because of this idiot and his enablers.

      Sick, sick, sick.

      1. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

        So, it is true that rather than complain about those that "bash Trump", perhaps we need to review how it is that Trump continually bashes himself?

        1. profile image0
          PrettyPantherposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          Lol, I figured all this out years ago, but I have TDS, doncha know?

    2. GA Anderson profile image93
      GA Andersonposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      Well, damn Cred! That is one of the best links you have provided.

      Like PrettyPanther, I read the whole damn thing, (it was a bit lengthy).

      I liked it so much I even looked up a few of the author's other efforts.

      But best of all was this:

      " Is Trump a man your father and grandfather would have respected?"

      Since I agreed with so much of your author's description of "masculinity" as I see it. that question says it all for me. (understanding of course, that the answer is a resounding "No!").

      GA

      1. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

        I am pleased that you liked the article, GA.

        The Atlantic Monthly although left leaning has a lot of great articles.

        I have to say "NO" as well.

  3. Readmikenow profile image97
    Readmikenowposted 14 months ago

    "a major gap between those that understand how the virus spreads and those that don't and those that care about it and those that don't."

    I view it as a bit difference.  I think the gap exists between those who are gullible enough to believe everything the government tells them, and those who know better.

    I have provided a list of articles showing how the number are off. You don't have to be tested to prove you have the virus.  If a person has the symptoms or dies having the symptoms, they are listed as having the Corona virus or having died from the Corona virus.  So, the numbers provided of people having it or dying from it are bogus.

    Then there is the fact in New York that the majority of people hospitalized had been staying home.

    "Early look at data from 100 New York hospitals shows that 66% of new admissions related to the virus are people who were at home, Cuomo said."

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/06/ny-gov- … -home.html

    Guess staying at home didn't do all that much good.

    So, there are those of us who are not gullible enough to believe everything we're told by the government and refuse to live our lives with daily fear.

    Seeing people live their lives in fear is what breaks my heart.

    1. crankalicious profile image94
      crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately, most of us can't base our decisions on those who peddle in conspiracies. I'll follow the scientists every day of the week.

      Your assertion that the "numbers are off" displays a serious misunderstanding of science. The role of science is to get the numbers correct with the data they have and to work honestly to produce numbers as accurately as possible, changing them when the data changes.

      Ironically, you are arguing for universal health care. As you have pointed out, many hospitals, being businesses, are motivated to attribute more deaths to COVID-19 than may truly be the case because they receive funding for them. If hospitals were run by the government, they would not have the motivation to do that.

      And most scientists estimate that the cases and deaths are probably underreported. Nevertheless, the assertion that the "numbers are wrong" is an assertion meant to distract from the truth.

      If there's gullibility, it is certainly among those who pedal in conspiracy theories and look for any reason to find alternative explanations for their unsafe behavior. I'm sure the same reasoning was used to explain away having unprotected sex and various other things.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

        There is much here that I don't agree with, although it is opinion based rather than fact and data based.

        For instance, "The role of science is to get the numbers correct with the data they have and to work honestly to produce numbers as accurately as possible, changing them when the data changes."  This is absolutely true...but all too often has little to do with science as we know it today, for "scientific" conclusions and "proofs" are very often based on political reality and continuing funding rather than facts and data.  Our "scientists" have been captured by the politicians of the day (just as Galileo was in his day, or Darwin) and held hostage by purse strings (or worse) to "conclude" what politicians and giant corporations want to see.

        Likewise, the idea that a government run hospital won't have a reason to run up their bills (and funding) is false to fact in my (admittedly limited) experience.  Government programs always want more money, from NASA to university research to health care facilities.  If nothing else, that extra money might buy a new CT scanner or other equipment that hospital wants but does not have the funding for.  It's the nature of the beast, and it is the nature of ignorant politicians to grant money without understanding the "why's" of the request...money they have taken from the public.

        1. crankalicious profile image94
          crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          Wilderness, we're not that far off.

          There is some science that is subject to political whims, but if you dig a bit, it's not usually the case. Certainly, if you watch Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, there's no question that there must be political influence swaying them. However, usually the science is good and you can confirm it by looking at the data and peer-reviewed studies. That's what peer-reviewing is for.

          However, you're not wrong either. Seed oils, for instance. Used to referred to as "toxic waste", but lo and behold, some massive funding and everyone is eating seed oils, which aren't good for you. The science has been very wrong on seed oils and it's probably due to who was paying the bills.

          I generally like our hospitals the way they are. I'm just saying if you don't want hospitals to be influenced by profit, then you need another model and you can't expect them not to be concerned with profit.

          Perhaps we agree that wearing a mask is not "living in fear", but is simply smart behavior and respectful of others. It's a demonstration that you respect other people.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            It's not unusual that we are not too far apart.  I think I'm a little more jaded, a little quicker to question and distrust, but that's about it.

            For instance, that peer review concept.  It's a great one, it's necessary for true science...but it isn't being done as it should be.  We both know there are studies and conclusions indicating that human caused global warming is not true - where are not only those articles but the peer reviews of them?  The only thing you can find today is the politically approved view that we are causing global warming and it's not because it is a set-in-stone fact...except the political/corporate fact that wants it to be so.  I don't think you could find a respected scientific journal anywhere that would publish a "no warming" conclusion regardless of the testing, study, data or anything else.  It would immediately remove that "respected" part from their resume.

            Likewise, when I wrote my article on gun ownership vs homicide rates there was data to be found and other articles on the same topic.  All gone now - I don't think I could do the research to find raw data anywhere, and any article that doesn't "prove" more guns = more homicides is gone as well.  Even the Australian government article I quoted and linked to is gone from the web (or buried behind pay walls or other obstacles)...it did not agree with the political necessity of defending the gun confiscation there.

            (Yes, we agree on the masks - it is both smart and respectful without being more than a very minor annoyance.)

            1. crankalicious profile image94
              crankaliciousposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Well, we're far apart on global warming. The science is very simple: more carbon dioxide the atmosphere = global warming. Human populations are producing more carbon dioxide. I believe, like the vast majority of scientists, there is simply no question about this and there are very few legitimate studies saying otherwise.

              However, where people like you have legitimate gripes about the politicization of such things is when people say it's the end of the world in an effort to gain funding for this or that. One thing is for certain, nobody can predict the future. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere though, that's a proven fact.

              I'm still driving my car (though it's a Prius) and I understand our reliance on oil and I'm probably no more willing than most people to change my habits.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                But Crank, I didn't address global warming.  Only that there are no available reports or reviews of any conclusions different than that human cause it, and that we both know that such reports and studies are out there.  The question is why we can't find them, and can't find their peer reviews (is that one because it would ruin a career to review such obvious falsehoods?).

                I'm driving a Chevy Volt, with a lifetime mileage figure of 150 MPG.  I use an electric lawn mower and all my power garden tools are battery.  The only fossil fuel tool left is a chain saw that hasn't been started in nearly a decade.  My home is total electric - no gas or oil to burn.  And I like that I'm doing it - one day I may even break even on the cost!

      2. Readmikenow profile image97
        Readmikenowposted 14 months agoin reply to this

        "I'll follow the scientists every day of the week."

        Which scientists?  Ones that disagree with you or only the ones who agree with you?  They are on both sides of the discussion.

        The bottom line is the numbers of deaths and infections of Corona virus are way off.  That had nothing to do with science, it has to do with faulty record collection.


        So, why are the numbers being fudged?  What is the motivation?  Why can people who have not been tested for Coronavirus be listed as having had it or having died from it? 

        Simply having symptoms does not make someone have Coronavirus.  That is simple logic.

        What would be the reason to produce such numbers?

    2. profile image0
      PrettyPantherposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      I am sick of hearing that wearing a mask or practicing safe behaviors is "living in fear." It sounds super stupid when my punk 30-something, gun nut, MAGA-hat-wearing, neighbor says it in the presence of my husband, who survived three tours in Vietnam, has been shot, stabbed, and had bones broken, and who, at the age of 72 could knock that idiot out.

      My husband just walks away because he is a man, not a pretend patriot like that fool.

      You might think about what you say. Or not.

      1. blueheron profile image95
        blueheronposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I'm kind of sick of hearing that there is a flu going around. Covid is an illness that is no more severe than a bad seasonal flu, as demonstrated by statistics. Around half of all deaths, nationwide, have been of people residing in nursing homes, and most of the rest have been elderly people with co-morbidities. It is not, and never has been, a general-population epidemic. I am astonished that there are still people around who have not noticed this by now, when it was obvious a couple of months ago.

        My county of 32,000 has had 80 cases since January first--that is, 80 cases in five months. Our total number of covid deaths over the last five months has been ONE, and it was a guy in hospice care. I know NO ONE in this county who has been sick. I have known a total of five people living elsewhere who have been sick with the flu since January first. One or two of them tested positive for covid. The others just reported that they had had a flu bug of some kind.
        In addition,scarcely anyone in my county wears a mask in public, though they were fairly common a month or so ago--and then only for a one or two weeks. While I still see about half of the people in suburban areas wearing masks, I would estimate that only about one in ten people in the nearby major city wears a mask in public places. My assumption is that, like me, most people have noticed that no one is ill with anything at all and very few people ever have been.

        I could MAYBE approve the closure of businesses and the banning of public gatherings if there were in fact a serious epidemic of an infectious disease whose spread could be halted by such measures. Coronaviruses (that is, flu viruses in general) do not fall in this category. Their spread is halted only by herd immunity. Perhaps equally to the point is that this was never a serious disease for the general population to begin with, as the data have demonstrated going back to the end of March or early April.

        It was clear from very early-on that the appropriate measures would have been to quarantine nursing homes and take measures to protect the vulnerable.

        This supposed "pandemic" has scarcely any real existence. You've been had. Deal with it.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Perhaps you never understood that the reason for shutdown was not to halt the spread, but only to slow it to something the health care industry could handle? 

          And, given that you said the spread can be only halted by herd immunity perhaps you do not understand how immunizations work, or perhaps do not believe that it works at all?

          Perhaps you don't understand how many additional people would have died without the intervention of massive hospital quality care, including ventilators?  Perhaps you haven't listened to those people that report they have "never been sicker in their life" or "thought they were going to die" from the virus?  And don't understand that such things indicate that it IS a "serious disease for the general population"?

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Perhaps you never understood that the reason for shutdown was not to halt the spread, but only to slow it to something the health care industry could handle? 

            And, given that you said the spread can be only halted by herd immunity perhaps you do not understand how immunizations and vaccines work, or perhaps do not believe that they work at all?

            Perhaps you don't understand how many additional people would have died without the intervention of massive hospital quality care, including ventilators?  Perhaps you haven't listened to those people that report they have "never been sicker in their life" or "thought they were going to die" from the virus?  And don't understand that such things indicate that it IS a "serious disease for the general population"?

  4. TessSchlesinger profile image94
    TessSchlesingerposted 14 months ago

    The general consensus outside America is that America is done for - finished.

    America Really is Screwed. Why Economics Says America’s Collapse is Probably Irreversible Now.
    https://eand.co/im-not-that-i-m-negativ … b47653e4ed

    How the American Idiot Made America a Failed State
    https://eand.co/how-the-american-idiot- … 56fde925b7

    America isn't just a failed state. It's a failed experiment.
    https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opini … 26075.html

    Trump Team is driving America to failed state status.
    https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1186913.shtml

    Of course, nobody really knows the future, but that is the general consensus.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      Or at least the general consensus of liberal socialists the world over.  They all hate that America hasn't joined them and so publish nonsense in an effort to convince others that a lie is true.

  5. blueheron profile image95
    blueheronposted 13 months ago

    You have perhaps forgotten that no such events ever occurred; hospitals were not overwhelmed and in fact had very few covid cases. It was also a quite clear from the very beginning, from a statistical standpoint (should anyone in authority have troubled to examine the data), that they never would be overwhelmed. The hospital where my daughter works as a respiratory therapist never had more than five or six cases at any given time. Other area hospitals were in the same boat.

    Sure you also realize that putting covid patients on ventilators is/was pretty much a death sentence and in most cases a very poor treatment choice.

    Reports that some people became quite ill from covid are not an indication that there is a deadly pandemic in progress. People become quite ill from many causes. (I had a friend who died from dropping a can of peaches on her foot.) It is childish of you to present such an argument.

    No highly effective or long-lasting vaccine has ever been developed for any flu virus. The CDC itself admits that flu vaccines are only about 50% effective. None can provide long-term immunity because viruses mutate so rapidly. ALL flu epidemics end when--and ONLY when--herd immunity is achieved due to about 70% of the population becoming infects and (for almost all) recovering. That is the way viruses work. They have never ended any other way. That's the way that works. Your lack of knowledge of these facts in no way changes reality.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Your little chunk of heaven is NOT indicative of the big cities.  NYC, Seattle, LA, etc.  To pretend that it was is you've seen locally everywhere in the country does a great disservice to the medical staff at hospitals that WERE crammed with COVID patients, to those doing triage and choosing which ones were too far gone to save and giving the ventilators to someone a little less bad off.  When nurses commit suicide over the deep depression of watching COVID patients die day after day, when hospitals bring in a dozen refrigerated trucks for the bodies, while you sit comfortable in a tiny area with an epidemic and exclaim that it isn't happening...well, you are again doing a great disservice.

      No, that some became extremely ill is not an indication of a pandemic...but it IS an indication that it is a serious disease and that it can and does attack everyone, of any age or state of health...which you have denied.

      And therefore no vaccine is possible or useful for any virus that seems even vaguely flu-like.  I disagree.

      From your own statement no "herd immunity" is possible for any flue virus because it changes.  And although you deny this, even as saying it is true; we will never see herd immunity to a flu virus.  But that is no reason not to use vaccines, for they are very effective (50% is far more than 0%).

      You appear to be one of those desperately claiming there is no disease, that people are not dying, that no one gets seriously ill, etc. because you don't like being quarantined, even to the small degree we all are.  For shame - we ALL, even you, know there IS a pandemic going on, we all know otherwise healthy people ARE dying from it, and we all know it is extremely easy to spread.

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Excellent response, wilderness.

      2. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I am appalled, we actual agree in this instance, great comment.

      3. blueheron profile image95
        blueheronposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Well, since actual excess mortality is around zero, the actual effect of the virus was to kill some people in nursing homes a few weeks before they would have died anyway--and much of that was due to people like Cuomo ordering nursing homes to accept infected covid patients. (Shades of smallpox blankets.)

        I am not sure how it is possible to believe in this virus without first shedding any semblance of an interface with objective reality.

        The only epidemic we have here is an epidemic of lip-flapping.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Again, ask the health care workers if the virus only killed "some people in nursing homes a few weeks before they would have died anyway".  Walk through the trailers filled with dead and see if they are all nursing home residents (or were - now they exist in a refrigerated van).

          THEN make the claim again.  Until then you're spouting complete nonsense.

      4. crankalicious profile image94
        crankaliciousposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Wilderness, a great response.

        I know we disagree on a lot, the hyperbole of which is accentuated by this format. However, pardon me for extrapolating on your comment and doing what I fear you will see as Trump-bashing.

        I just think that when your President calls journalists the "enemy of the people", says this virus is beaten, refuses to wear a mask and regularly implies that those who do are sissies, and just generally lies to the degree that he does, his sheep follow. And you get people calling the virus a hoax and endangering us all.

        These attitudes are a natural extension of our President. Everything is a hoax. There's no truth. My reality is all that matters.

  6. blueheron profile image95
    blueheronposted 13 months ago

    Actually, all the statements I made can be corroborated statistically. One of these is that there has been virtually ZERO excess mortality over prior years.

    There were dead bodies in trailers because the dead were not allowed to be buried, so they had to put them somewhere.

    Health care workers have been suffering from layoffs for over a month now, due to lack of cases.

    Do you not know any actual people (friends, neighbors, family members, health-care workers)? If you did, I would think you would have noticed a conspicuous absence of illness and death among them.

  7. blueheron profile image95
    blueheronposted 13 months ago

    People who are interested the truth can discover it by looking at the data. There is no excess mortality. What this means is that covid is a pure fabrication. An "epidemic" in which the death rate does not exceed prior years' death rates is...not a real thing.

    As for mask-wearing, I know a few people (two couples) who are either immune-compromised or who are elderly and in frail health. One of my oldest friends was diagnosed with leukemia a few years ago, and his long-time partner is HIV positive. One elderly woman friend of mine has a husband who is in very frail health, and she worries for him. These people have self-quarantined as much as possible, and I presume they wear masks when they must go out. I do not automatically assume that people wearing masks are nut-jobs, though I think their benefit is largely--or completely--imaginary.

    Few people in my rural area wear masks, nor do people shopping in the nearest major city to me. There is one suburban city near me where I see a lot of masks, but it seems like an outlier. I really can't account for these differences. Well--except that my experience with living in snooty suburbs is that the women, in particular, are highly conformist, even to the point of being rather infantilized--quite comfortable with doing what Daddy says. Back when I lived in one of those places, I noticed that they talked baby-talk when they called on the phone. I once (quite innocently) asked one of these ladies if I could speak to her mother. I'm not saying they're morons necessarily, just strangely infantilized.

    If I were to take a guess, I'd say that mask-wearing is mostly a peer-pressure thing and depends on how many people you know named Karen--and whether you ever had any regard for their opinion.

    1. crankalicious profile image94
      crankaliciousposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      People who don't wear masks when they are going to be near other people, particularly for an extended period of time (and indoors) are stupid. There's just no other way to say this. Completely and utterly stupid. Well, perhaps stupid isn't exactly the right word. Unconcerned about the well-being of others? Selfish? Uncaring? I suppose it's a combination of things.

      Very likely, at least according to expert medical opinion, all we need to do to stop the spread of Coronavirus is for 60-70% of the population to wear masks while near other people. But we can't even do that.

      And this is not a reaction, as far as I can tell, split along ideological lines. It's liberals. It's conservatives. Americans just don't want to comply and/or sacrifice a little comfort. We're lazy and spoiled.

      1. Readmikenow profile image97
        Readmikenowposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I always at amazed when people don't realize science can prove and disprove the same theory.  People tend to agree with what agrees with their feeling.  Not all scientists believe masks are necessary.

        "Dr. Brosseau is a national expert on respiratory protection and infectious diseases and professor (retired), University of Illinois at Chicago.

        Dr. Sietsema is also an expert on respiratory protection and an assistant professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. the science that agrees with their feelings. "

        "Data lacking to recommend broad mask use

        We do not recommend requiring the general public who do not have symptoms of COVID-19-like illness to routinely wear cloth or surgical masks because:

        There is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

        Their use may result in those wearing the masks to relax other distancing efforts because they have a sense of protection

        We need to preserve the supply of surgical masks for at-risk healthcare workers.

        https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspec … sound-data

  8. blueheron profile image95
    blueheronposted 13 months ago

    The whole thing puts you in mind of Orwell's ""1984," in which Winston Smith in finally conditioned to see what he is told to see, rather than what is before his eyes. Or a society that has become so infantilized that they are incapable of independent thought or observation.

  9. blueheron profile image95
    blueheronposted 13 months ago

    Crankilicious, your basic premise is a falsehood. Masks cannot "stop the spread" of the virus. Viral epidemics end when, and only when, herd immunity is achieved due to around 70% of the population having become infected. End of story.

    The whole premise of mask-wearing and social distancing was NEVER to "stop the spread" of the virus, but to "flatten the curve." Flattening the curve merely means SLOWING the spread, and has no impact whatsoever on ultimate infection rates.

    This virus has almost no existence at all outside nursing homes, prisons, and other institutional settings. About half of the--rather few--reported cases in my county were in a juvenile detention center where, if one person gets sick, they can involuntarily test the entire population--at which point they discover many "cases," though without discovering any actual illness.)The only way they can even find any significant number of cases" to involuntarily test captive populations.

    The real purpose of masks and the various other appurtenances that have appeared is mere PR intended to continually reinforce in the minds of the public the completely false idea that there is an epidemic. It is very similar to putting up signs everywhere telling people there is an epidemic--except that you get to be the sign.  It's a mere brainwashing technique.

    Where is the horror at the abrogation of our civil liberties and the staggering economic dislocations? The millions of people who are out of work? The millions of people who could not obtain medical care, or even go to the dentist?

    I don't know a word bad enough for the people who perpetuated this fraud--or for their supporters.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      "This virus has almost no existence at all outside nursing homes, prisons, and other institutional settings."

      This is manifestly false, even if we ignore that millions that have had the disease without ever reporting, or often even knowing it.  It may be true that the worst of the cases, ending up in the ICU, come primarily from institutional settings, but even that is only "mostly", not even close to being 100%.

  10. blueheron profile image95
    blueheronposted 13 months ago

    You make an interesting point, in that we seem to have an epidemic that is heavily concentrated among people who never even know they are sick (because they aren't).

    If I were to guess as to why covid is almost non-existent in my county, my guess would be that there have been many, many asymptomatic cases. Likely most people have had it, and we were at herd immunity quite early in the game--maybe as early as the beginning of March. The absence of illness could be explained by cross-immunity from prior years' flu epidemics. The flu epidemic of 2018 struck very hard in this area. Among my relatives and acquaintances, I was constantly hearing that whole families were down with the flu, and even the schools were half empty from so many kids out sick. Facebook was lit up with requests for natural and over-the-counter remedies and related advice. The elderly couple across the street from me--who had both been in very bad shape for years--both died that year.

    That flu season was quite real and very severe. I suspect that almost everyone in this area has since enjoyed a very high level of cross-immunity as a result.

    Nursing homes in this county seem to have been interestingly unaffected. Our death count (in a county with a population of 32,000) stood at ONE (a guy in hospice care) for many months. It is now up to two--a very good indication that the residents of our many nursing homes and senior apartment complexes are faring quite well. Here again, the reason could be cross-immunity, or it could be that these facilities are unusually clean and well managed, or both.

    Our total confirmed cases are now up to 86--up by about ten from a month ago. Around 30 of these were in a juvenile detention center. The way it works in such places is that everyone is involuntarily tested, whether they are sick or not, which results in a good sized data dump of confirmed cases. I would guess that most of the other confirmed cases were discovered through involuntary testing (of the not-sick) in a very large local state facility for the mentally disabled. That's the way you juice the numbers when no one is sick and hence not going in to be tested: You involuntarily test large institutionalized populations.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      I would strongly suspect that if we check the white blood count of those people that you say are "not sick" we would find that they ARE sick.  Lack of obvious symptoms does not mean that a person is not sick; COVID (and many other) diseases are infections long before symptoms appear - you cannot transmit a disease without alread being infected with it yourself.

      As far as juicing the numbers, that is not always necessary.  I have family in little Union County, Oregon - they have very few cases until recently when the numbers ballooned suddenly, to the point that they are now the hot spot in Oregon.  It wasn't from testing, as that big increase was traced to a single church that decided to hold services without any precautions.

      https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavirus/ … MYaWdNDT8w

    2. blueheron profile image95
      blueheronposted 13 months ago

      The psychology of this completely bogus "epidemic" is quite interesting. I don't think that its incandescent "believers" are primarily politically motivated--at least not most of them. I think it is mostly just extreme credulity--probably combined with a fairly common tendency that you see in many people to jump on any passing bandwagon, thus giving them something interesting to think about and providing an opportunity for borrowed self-importance. You get to be a bossy busybody without the public contumely that normally results from such behavior (or so you think).

      I have no idea what impels people to be bossy busybodies in the first place. Maybe low self-esteem, psychoactive meds, hormonal imbalances, or just lives devoid of meaning, and the unhappy condition of being generally (and justly) disregarded by just about everyone.

      We have a surprising number of such people around here--surprising, especially, in that there is manifestly no epidemic. I see them posting on our community pages, but I only know one of them personally, and that particular person is at least partly politically motivated--though mental illness also plays a role. She is one of those people whose ramblings and outbursts the other old ladies at the local book club endure with polite stoicism and a combination of puzzlement and pity--even though they are mostly of the same persuasion. I have always rather liked her, mostly due to the crazy factor, but I think she has unfriended me on Facebook.

    3. blueheron profile image95
      blueheronposted 13 months ago

      What you are overlooking is that a rapid spread of the infection through the general population (while protecting the elderly and vulnerable) is a GOOD thing. That way, the virus burns out quickly due to herd immunity, and the vulnerable can quickly return to leading normal lives.

      In a recent article, Jeffrey Tucker remarks that, "Among the strangest aspects of this has been the near universal failure on the part of regular people, and even the appointed “experts” (the ones the government employs, in any case), to have internalized anything about the basics of viruses that my mother understands, thanks to her mother before who had a solid education in the subject after World War II."

      The epidemiology of viral diseases is well understood, and it goes like this, per the author: "So I decided to download Molecular and Cell Biology for Dummies just to check if I’m crazy. I’m pleased to see that it clearly states that there are only two ways to defeat a virus: natural immunity and vaccines."

      https://www.zerohedge.com/political/sma … pid-people

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Setting aside that your "rapid spread" of the virus would also grossly overload our health care system, you might be right.  Perhaps the only answer is to allow those that are vulnerable, or get a very bad case, to go ahead and die as hospitals and IC units are overwhelmed.

        Not a solution that I think most people would accept...unless there is a personal cost to them, whereupon those deaths have a lower priority than a mug at the local pub.

        Of course, slowing the spread until a vaccine is developed is another answer...

        1. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Perhaps the vulnerable should be protected if they choose to be.(don't forget just because one is elderly they still have rights). The healthy work , and for on with their lives. This is a virus, we won't have a vaccine for at least a year, we can't lose our economy due to a virus. If we choose to do that more, in the end, we will suffer.

          We need to move on and live the best way we can with a virus that is undeniable here to stay for some time. We as Americans are somewhat unrealistic, we have come to expect that any problems that befall us be fixed with good speed. This problem is a virus, there is no immediate bandaid nor can we sweep it under our big problem rug...

          It would appear to me we need to be realistic. Protect the elderly, make sure those that are going on with their lives use common-sense precautions such as masks in close spaces, social distancing, and washing one's hands more frequently. This is at this point our only bandaid. We can't let our country fail due to a virus.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Couldn't agree more.  The answer is to take precautions that we can afford to do, protect the vulnerable as we can, and continue to live.

            That does NOT mean huge gatherings of people in close proximity.  It does NOT mean refusing to take even the simplest of precautions, like a mask.  It does NOT mean to pretend it is not a problem.

            But neither does it mean shutting down thousands of businesses, or even whole industries, in an extreme effort.  It does not mean ruining our economy, dooming millions to abject poverty or even death. 

            There is a middle ground that must be followed, while we do our utmost to find a vaccine or other prevention.

          2. crankalicious profile image94
            crankaliciousposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Holy cow! Just wanted to support some common sense solutions. Totally agree too.

            That said, how do we deal with those who won't take precautions and put others at risk? Seems to me that if we made masks mandatory for about a month, we'd severely damage the spread of this virus. Should we do such a thing or just accept that people won't follow the rules? Do we ticket them? Jail them?

            The public health is pretty important and getting this thing under control will lead to economic recovery much faster, which benefits everyone.

          3. Sychophantastic profile image90
            Sychophantasticposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            If President Trump, who is 74, doesn't think it's important to wear a mask, I'm not wearing one.

            Coronavirus is not a thing. It's over. Defeated!

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)