We're not going to solve the Social Security shortfall and homelessness by staying shut down.
True.
Nor would we in the absence of the pandemic, either. (And I have a great deal of historical support for that.)
We're not going to solve the Social Security shortfall and homelessness by staying shut down.
I have seen the light now. It could still be a train, but that’s solid logic.It makes a huge difference. Virus start spreading in November/December leading to 60K deaths (what might be representative of what really happened) is worlds different from Virus start spreading in February/March leading to 200K to 1MM+ deaths (what was largely a scare tactic).
I think it’s important from the aspect that many of us might already have immunity and therefore be about normal activity. Only “the vulnerables” shelter in place.When one looks at where we are now with this wuhan virus, I don't see the importance of whether or not it was first here in January vs December.
Gotcha, thanks for clarifying.That's kinda misleading. The UK has a parliamentary system so it is kinda as simple as having a vote. The monarch is still the head of state. This kinda isn't a big deal.
It is more contagious. It is more fatal. We don't have a vaccine. We don't have a proven treatment regimen for it.
Other than that....
I have seen the light now. It could still be a train, but that’s solid logic.
There is a reason it is worded as subjunctive. That if is a big if.
What was quoted doesn't say that. What has been reported in this thread supports that it might be the practice.
True.
Nor would we in the absence of the pandemic, either. (And I have a great deal of historical support for that.)
I can see right now, no matter what proof is brought before you will dispute anything, it's more than just flattening the curve. If you can prevent the spread to a new host, it prevents the transmission to another person and the vicious cycle that has transposed over this whole crisis. Each ensuing cycle will over burden resources that have already been stretched thin because of the physical and mental burdens placed upon our first responders and medical providers, they are human.
While it may not be a wipe the population event, 35 percent of the US population is over 50, so 114 million give a take a few can be effected along with younger ones. Can we take a hit like that, no we can't, no country can.
So please don't try to morph this into a anti 2nd style argument because that is a apple to oranges argument. I already have a friend in ICU because of a idiot co-worker got him infected because even though he had all the signs and symptoms, he was hiding it with Ibuprofen and cough drops. May you be lucky enough to not get this.
If you actually read the guidelines you will see that the implications put forth in this thread such as above are far less reasonable than reality.
mortality higher in areas where fewer people are tested. go figure.
indiana is absolutely flat on new cases. so is the US. the world has been flat for a week.
COVID-19 - Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
I have some 200 proof alcohol but I don't drink.
...Costco has great pricing on 1.75 L booze if you didn’t already know. In order to save money, though, I’ve broken out the “Doomsday Bank Account” and have been consuming it. Id forgotten how bland Jim Beam was.
Reality to accomplish what? 100% prevention was never the goal and is not possible in any event.
Why do people get hung up on the preventative measures not being perfect? That's a "no **** Sherlock" observation.
mortality higher in areas where fewer people are tested. go figure.
indiana is absolutely flat on new cases. so is the US. the world has been flat for a week.
COVID-19 - Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/08/funeral-birthday-party-hugs-covid-19/
Chiraqi made the news on a CDC study from FEB on how a funeral and bday party got everyone in the family sick and caused at least 3 c-virus deaths so far. All because an out of town family member who was sick, coughing, came to the events!
That had nothing to do with preventive measures at all. The subject was the reality of what the guidelines actually say regarding diagnosing COVID-19 as the cause of death. The real guidelines are much more reasonable than some of the conjecture put forth here.
Sorry for the confusion. As for the guidelines....I don't so much care whether they "inflate" the numbers to some extent as long as they are uniform. Trends are what I am interested rather than raw numbers.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/08/funeral-birthday-party-hugs-covid-19/
Chiraqi made the news on a CDC study from FEB on how a funeral and bday party got everyone in the family sick and caused at least 3 c-virus deaths so far. All because an out of town family member who was sick, coughing, came to the events!
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes?
For the life of me, I could not figure out why the former president of France was involved, and why you spelled his name wrong...