Know anyone with Coronavirus?

[EdFred]

People talk about deaths as though they were the only serious health consequence of this virus. The number of people who end up with long term health consequences is reportedly significantly larger than the number of deaths.

One important point that I think people overlook is that, unlike shutdowns, masks don't harm the economy.

Personally, because I care about other people, and because there is no way to know whether I am one of the unsymptomatic carriers or not, I would hate to think that I might unknowingly cause someone else to suffer serious health consequences because of failing to adopt a mitigation measure as harmless and inexpensive as wearing a mask over my mouth and nose when I'm in the proximity of others. YMMV.

That's fine, but my stance is if someone develops issues or dies, it's not my fault because I went about my normal every day routine. Nature/God/whatever you want to believe designed/created/whatever-term-you-want-to-use created them to have a weakness to this virus, and what happens is on nature/God/whatever and the cards we were each dealt. We will all die from something. It might be this, it might not be this. At some point, just let nature take it's course. That's my stance.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Everyone saying this offers ZERO workable solutions that were actually feasible, Ive noticed.

So if I take my car in for repair and it runs worse afterward, I'm not allowed to mention it unless I can describe in detail how the car should have been fixed. Got it.

 

[MuseChaser]

That's fine, but my stance is if someone develops issues or dies, it's not my fault because I went about my normal every day routine. Nature/God/whatever you want to believe designed/created/whatever-term-you-want-to-use created them to have a weakness to this virus, and what happens is on nature/God/whatever is the cards we were each dealt. We will all die from something. It might be this, it might not be this. At some point, just let nature take it's course. That's my stance.

That's also my 85-year-old father's stance. His life revolves around writing music and rehearsing ensembles; outside of his doctor's appointments, that's pretty much the only contact he has with people. He hasn't been able to rehearse his groups in months which pretty much ends many of his reasons for enjoying life at all. He simply can't understand why we're choosing to not live just so we can survive.... especially having lived through the Great Depression, the polio epidemic, World War II, and a host of other things that were FAR worse than COVID.

 

[MuseChaser]

So if I take my car in for repair and it runs worse afterward, I'm not allowed to mention it unless I can describe in detail how the car should have been fixed. Got it.

Mentioning it is far different than the equivalent of calling your mechanic an idiot and incompetent without being able to tell him exactly what he should have done differently and helping him solve the issue. If you're going to berate him, you DO need to know what you're talking about. You actually made a decent analogy. When you fix a car, there is no guarantee that it will remain fixed... systems interact, fixing one thing might cause something else to fail down the line, blah blah.
Case in point... My '88 SL had been running poorly, but driveable, for a few years. One mechanic seemed to have fixed the issue, but it would occasionally stall when coming to a stop. Another shop, a year later, found a ton of vacuum leaks and replaced those lines and gaskets. After that, the car wouldn't run at all. Turns out, the previous mechanic had goosed the K-Jet timing to get the car to run without fixing the underlying problem. The more recent mechanic, AFTER fixing the vacuum issues, then proceeded to properly adjust the K-Jet fuel injection system, and the car runs like a champ now.
Neither mechanic was wrong, stupid, or incompetent. The first one did a quick inexpensive bandaid that got me running and down the road until such time as I had more money (and more time), then the second one dug deep and solved the issue for good.
Finding fault, placing blame... all easy to do, and all unproductive. Finding causes and solutions... not so easy, but much more admirable.

 

[EdFred]

That's also my 85-year-old father's stance. His life revolves around writing music and rehearsing ensembles; outside of his doctor's appointments, that's pretty much the only contact he has with people. He hasn't been able to rehearse his groups in months which pretty much ends many of his reasons for enjoying life at all. He simply can't understand why we're choosing to not live just so we can survive.... especially having lived through the Great Depression, the polio epidemic, World War II, and a host of other things that were FAR worse than COVID.

That's the thing right there. People would rather sit at home and do nothing than live. I was bowling 4 times a week before this thing hit and getting ready to bowl in some PBA regionals. But not anymore because the majority of people in this country would rather sit home and just exist rather than live, and feel like that's how I'm supposed to live my life as well.

 

[bnt83]

That's fine, but my stance is if someone develops issues or dies, it's not my fault because I went about my normal every day routine. Nature/God/whatever you want to believe designed/created/whatever-term-you-want-to-use created them to have a weakness to this virus, and what happens is on nature/God/whatever and the cards we were each dealt. We will all die from something. It might be this, it might not be this. At some point, just let nature take it's course. That's my stance.

There is a whole lot of "you're responsible for affecting others with incredibly ****ty genetics" going on. Almost like "fat shaming" healthy people.

 

[Morgan3820]

I flew to WV this weekend. Went hiking, with other people. Ate at restaurants. It was nice. Cheated death yet again. But I could have died. Not letting fear determine my actions. If you want to be afraid, fine.

 

[Palmpilot]

...Where I differ is the governmental REQUIREMENT to wear a mask, rather than allowing it to remain a "personal" choice. "Unknowingly caus(ing) somone else to suffer serious health consequences because of failing to adopt a mitigating measure as harmless..."..... as not eating peanut butter outside your own home because someone with a severe peanut allergy may be in your vicinity unbeknownst to you? As serving bread containing gluten to someone who doesn't tolerate it, but didn't tell you? The onus for one's health risks, in a free society, should rest on the individual much more than on governmental dictates. Intentionally harming someone else is, of course, wrong and SHOULD be (and is) against the law. If someone wishes to remain unexposed, or to limit their exposure, to COVID-19, there are plenty of ways to do that other than requiring the entire population to bend to that individual's will.

I don't see food allergies as a good analogy to a highly infectious disease. We're talking about something with the potential to affect everyone, not just a few. If N95 masks and face shields were widely available to everyone, them MAYBE the individual's opportunity to take responsibility for avoiding infection would be real, but that's not the situation we're in. There are many, many laws whose purpose is to reduce the risk that we cause for others, so that ship has sailed. The real issue, as I see it, is whether mandatory measures deal with a significant enough risk to justify their impact on individual freedom. That needs to be assessed based on how widespread the costs and benefits are for the measure being proposed.

We as a nation have been caught up in an apparent assumption that we can either have a healthy populace, or a healthy economy, but not both. Face masks are ONE of the tools that we can use to pursue both goals. Telling the government that they can't make pandemic-mitigation measures mandatory would be tying their hands, thus ensuring failure. Voluntary measures aren't getting the job done, because too many people with nothing more than an Internet account and an opinion seem to fancy themselves public-health experts.

 

[overdrive148]

That's the thing right there. People would rather sit at home and do nothing than live. I was bowling 4 times a week before this thing hit and getting ready to bowl in some PBA regionals. But not anymore because the majority of people in this country would rather sit home and just exist rather than live, and feel like that's how I'm supposed to live my life as well.

Do you really think that people intending to stay home like this is a permanent thing?

 

[Palmpilot]

I flew to WV this weekend. Went hiking, with other people. Ate at restaurants. It was nice. Cheated death yet again. But I could have died. Not letting fear determine my actions. If you want to be afraid, fine.

The goal is not to be afraid; the goal should be to make rational decisions, at both the governmental and individual level.

 

[Salty]

Do you really think that people intending to stay home like this is a permanent thing?

That's the rub. If people that say we should stay home are right, then It is a permanent thing. Maybe YOU won't think the next one is dangerous enough to warrant it, but SOMEONE will. The idea that we can beat a virus by social distancing falls apart at even a mild inspection of the idea.

 

[Gary]

That's fine, but my stance is if someone develops issues or dies, it's not my fault because I went about my normal every day routine. Nature/God/whatever you want to believe designed/created/whatever-term-you-want-to-use created them to have a weakness to this virus, and what happens is on nature/God/whatever and the cards we were each dealt. We will all die from something. It might be this, it might not be this. At some point, just let nature take it's course. That's my stance.

Ahhh – the Darwinian approach to epidemic control. I would tend to agree with your first statement, IF the situation was that your actions ONLY affected your own health. That being said, the evidence is clear that an individual’s actions can indeed affect the health of others. Short of a complete lockdown where no one associates with anyone else -OR- an effective vaccine is widely available; we all will likely become infected at one point or another. Since a vaccine isn’t yet available (nor is likely soon) and a complete lockdown would be devastating to the economy and individuals, we are left with finding some actions in between. Left unchecked, we all then are faced with the unknown as to whether we are in the +/-80% that will have no (or little) impact or we are in the +/-20% that will have serious consequences.

IMHO, wearing a mask is a pain (understand they are not 100% effective), and attempting to minimize social contact is difficult, but seems to be the most logical way to at least slow the spread, minimize the impact to health care providers and protect the most venerable population until an effective vaccine is available.

True that we will all die from something, would rather make that my own choice verses having it be decided on the actions of others.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

No it’s not. You didn’t do anything to help the folks forced into bankruptcy by it. Didn’t even say to stop the goods and services people don’t actually need, like the kitchen remodelers... oh wait, the people doing the remodeling go bankrupt.

Try again. Lame first effort. Going to have to cover the equally or more dangerous side-effects if you want anybody to take the statement seriously.

But at least you’re discussing now.

Airplane engine is on fire. Where you gonna land? Work the entire problem not just one.

I can make my company’s IT systems perfectly secure. Throw all the computers away. Kinda puts us out of business though.

Point being — you’re going to have to accept an imperfect solution at some point. Whining that it was wrong accomplished nothing. And many things being done are to avoid considerable different harm happening to your neighbors.

Their 99.7% chance of death IF they even contract the thing... may not outweigh their 100% chance of not ... fill in the blank.

I’d take those odds for quite a few things really. Got worse odds on lots of other things in life that can cause my death or suffering.

If you hit dealt better cards, great. Hide from it. I’m sure it looks scarier to you. See ya in two years... or not. But your solution isn’t workable for me. Doesn’t help my wife either. You didn’t even mention all those folks.

Don’t care about their risks you want them taking for you? Well... welcome to the club if you think I’m bad. Order a pizza. Click on that something you don’t need to survive on Amazon. Just send the servants out.

But liquor and pot. Both stores are “essential” here. LOL. Right.

First, an apology to you. You do seem like you wish a discussion, although some of your comments in your reply above still suggest otherwise.
To follow your analogy-Airplane is on fire- you do something now, and take decisive action to put out the fire now. That may be land now, if you just departed the runway, or you are a long way up and you don't need a fire further damaging the airframe. In that situation, with a lot of altitude, stop the fire first, and the deal with landing

As for the economic situation, the USA could have handled it a lot worse. Probably better, as well. To the best of my knowledge, China had the companies continue to pay their employees during lock down. That's what I got from people who live there. That created other issues. The use of unemployment insurance was helpful.

As for one of your comments-"you're going to have to accept an imperfect solution- it applies to you too." The countries that handled it well still have small outbreaks. Unfortunately, the USA response was very "imperfect" and we could have done much better.

 

[Palmpilot]

That's the rub. If people that say we should stay home are right, then It is a permanent thing. Maybe YOU won't think the next one is dangerous enough to warrant it, but SOMEONE will. The idea that we can beat a virus by social distancing falls apart at even a mild inspection of the idea.

We know that most countries have done a far better job of controlling the spread of the virus than we have, so there must be SOMETHING that works. Maybe we should spend more time studying what they did.

 

[GaryM]

The idea that we can beat a virus by social distancing falls apart at even a mild inspection of the idea.

Beat it, no. Flatten the curve and minimize the damage it does until a vaccine arrives, yes. And the prospects for an effective vaccine in this case are excellent.

 

[Salty]

We know that most countries have done a far better job of controlling the spread of the virus than we have, so there must be SOMETHING that works. Maybe we should spend more time studying what they did.

It's not over yet. Slowing is not preventing.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

I have a sore throat and a nasty cough that a Claritin hasn't quelled. Hopefully just a particularly nasty allergy day.

 

[Salty]

Beat it, no. Flatten the curve and minimize the damage it does until a vaccine arrives, yes. And the prospects for an effective vaccine in this case are excellent.

Then we should be doing the same for the flu and any other virus. Full lockdown and forced inoculations for all strains we have developed them for. If you don't agree, you're as good as a murderer.

 

[weilke]

We know that most countries have done a far better job of controlling the spread of the virus than we have, so there must be SOMETHING that works. Maybe we should spend more time studying what they did.

Many of those places do remarkably little at this point yet continue to have either decreasing numbers or remain at a stage of very small case numbers with only sporadic outbreaks.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

If anyone asks you 'why is this virus spreading in the US', just point them to this thread.

Just make sure they don’t get close to denverpilot or salty

That's the rub. If people that say we should stay home are right, then It is a permanent thing. Maybe YOU won't think the next one is dangerous enough to warrant it, but SOMEONE will. The idea that we can beat a virus by social distancing falls apart at even a mild inspection of the idea.

If everyone actually stayed home for the first 4 weeks, those that were "essential" actually wore proper masks 100% of the time and washed/sanitized their hands often, and we had leaders that were competent, then everyone could be getting back to "normal" life in a safe (still wearing masks) manner already. But because there are enough people in this country that think they don't have to follow the rules/recommendations and believe that everyone else can fend for themselves, we are now in a prolonged situation where an extra 100,000? people are dying as a result.

 

[Salty]

Just make sure they don’t get close to denverpilot or salty

If everyone actually stayed home for the first 4 weeks, those that were "essential" actually wore proper masks 100% of the time and washed/sanitized their hands often, and we had leaders that were competent, then everyone could be getting back to "normal" life in a safe (still wearing masks) manner already. But because there are enough people in this country that think they don't have to follow the rules/recommendations and believe that everyone else can fend for themselves, we are now in a prolonged situation where an extra 100,000? people are dying as a result.

That's total nonsense in my opinion.

 

[Salty]

Just make sure they don’t get close to denverpilot or salty

If everyone actually stayed home for the first 4 weeks, those that were "essential" actually wore proper masks 100% of the time and washed/sanitized their hands often, and we had leaders that were competent, then everyone could be getting back to "normal" life in a safe (still wearing masks) manner already. But because there are enough people in this country that think they don't have to follow the rules/recommendations and believe that everyone else can fend for themselves, we are now in a prolonged situation where an extra 100,000? people are dying as a result.

I don't know a single person that even knows a single person that's been infected, so don't point any fingers at me.

 

[EdFred]

Just make sure they don’t get close to denverpilot or salty

If everyone actually stayed home for the first 4 weeks, those that were "essential" actually wore proper masks 100% of the time and washed/sanitized their hands often, and we had leaders that were competent, then everyone could be getting back to "normal" life in a safe (still wearing masks) manner already. But because there are enough people in this country that think they don't have to follow the rules/recommendations and believe that everyone else can fend for themselves, we are now in a prolonged situation where an extra 100,000? people are dying as a result.

I did stay home for the first SIX weeks. (well, I went out where I had zero interaction with people, I drove my truck on some back roads, and went flying in the plane) At that point I said **** it, I'm not on this earth to sit on my ass and do nothing.

If I have a thousand bucks, and lose 30 cents, I'm not going to ask the country to stop to help me find a quarter and a nickel that I lost. I wouldn't even ask anyone to stop if I lost 10 bucks.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

Then we should be doing the same for the flu and any other virus. Full lockdown and forced inoculations for all strains we have developed them for. If you don't agree, you're as good as a murderer.

To be honest, many Asian nation individuals think of wearing masks as a public responsibility and that is why you would see any person who may be sick wearing a mask out in public long before this pandemic. Those people are being compassionate about their fellow countrymen and trying to prevent the spread of any virus they have to others. In the future, we should all wear a mask if we have a cold or flu and it will indeed prevent unnecessary deaths/discomfort of others. But I guess again only those that have the fortitude to wear a mask will be nice people to others (like my 4 year old).

 

[Matthew Rogers]

I don't know a single person that even knows a single person that's been infected, so don't point any fingers at me.

Have you and all those that you know been tested regularly? If not, then you may be one of the 20-40% of asymptomatic carriers. Answer that one.

 

[Palmpilot]

It's not over yet. Slowing is not preventing.

"Slowing is not preventing" is an oversimplification.

 

[EdFred]

Have you and all those that you know been tested regularly? If not, then you may be one of the 20-40% of asymptomatic carriers. Answer that one.

Nope. And won't be. Spread the wealth. If it's good for economic policy it's good for viruses.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

I did stay home for the first SIX weeks. (well, I went out where I had zero interaction with people, I drove my truck on some back roads, and went flying in the plane) At that point I said **** it, I'm not on this earth to sit on my ass and do nothing.

If I have a thousand bucks, and lose 30 cents, I'm not going to ask the country to stop to help me find a quarter and a nickel that I lost. I wouldn't even ask anyone to stop if I lost 10 bucks.

So if you had a fire in your airplane and you put out 80% of it, then you just throw up your hands and say F this, I am done fighting this fire, let's continue to the destination, I have a burger to go buy! Sounds like a good plan.

 

[Palmpilot]

Then we should be doing the same for the flu and any other virus. Full lockdown and forced inoculations for all strains we have developed them for. If you don't agree, you're as good as a murderer.

The flu is not currently in pandemic status.

 

[Salty]

To be honest, many Asian nation individuals think of wearing masks as a public responsibility and that is why you would see any person who may be sick wearing a mask out in public long before this pandemic. Those people are being compassionate about their fellow countrymen and trying to prevent the spread of any virus they have to others. In the future, we should all wear a mask if we have a cold or flu and it will indeed prevent unnecessary deaths/discomfort of others. But I guess again only those that have the fortitude to wear a mask will be nice people to others (like my 4 year old).

That doesn't cut it. You can be walking around symptomatic infecting others. You have to wear the mask 100% of the time. No more restaurants. No more theaters.

 

[Palmpilot]

Many of those places do remarkably little at this point yet continue to have either decreasing numbers or remain at a stage of very small case numbers with only sporadic outbreaks.

Do we have any idea why that is?

 

[weilke]

The flu is not currently in pandemic status.

One of these days, we may well get a influenza variant with a similar profile of infectivity and disease severity to covid. If that happens, I expect that similar control measures to the current covid outbreak will have to be taken.

 

[EdFred]

So if you had a fire in your airplane and you put out 80% of it, then you just throw up your hands and say F this, I am done fighting this fire, let's continue to the destination, I have a burger to go buy! Sounds like a good plan.

Nonsensical and not even an accurate analogy. A fire will destroy the whole airplane. This virus will not kill everyone, and the people we are losing aren't even critical parts of the economy. If anything, losing them is going to HELP. But if I lost some paint I'd continue to the destination and get a burger. Even fly home afterwards.

 

[Salty]

Have you and all those that you know been tested regularly? If not, then you may be one of the 20-40% of asymptomatic carriers. Answer that one.

Yeah, I struggle with answering the ridiculous logic of why the 100 people I know without any symptoms are evil because we aren't being tested daily.

 

[EdFred]

Do we have any idea why that is?

Do we KNOW the numbers any place is reporting is accurate?

 

[weilke]

Do we have any idea why that is?

Well, for one their case numbers are now so low that the risk of catching the disease from community spread is almost nil. At that point, there is little need to restrict activities like restaurants or church services. In Norway for example, the current guidance is against wearing masks, and the health agency has a very good evidence based rationale of why that is.
The cases that do occur in those countries are mostly imported from endemic areas and when outbreaks happen, they tend to be in settings like slaughterhouses, cucumber farms and congreate living facilities.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

The flu is not currently in pandemic status.

And the flu could indeed develop into a global pandemic someday. Just look at 1918-1919. But that flu killed males in the 20-40 age bracket most efficiently. So it wouldn't affect most of the old crotchety pilots here as much.

That doesn't cut it. You can be walking around symptomatic infecting others. You have to wear the mask 100% of the time. No more restaurants. No more theaters.

Don't be ridiculous here. We even know that preventing 100% of the cases is not necessary. Getting the R0 number below 1 will result in cases naturally going away over time, so complete and draconian measures are not necessary in the case of non-pandemic normal flu, but the more that we do, the faster it gets better. We are not even close to getting towards an R0 of 1.0.

Nonsensical and not even an accurate analogy. A fire will destroy the whole airplane. This virus will not kill everyone. But if I lost a couple rivets off a wing seam I'd continue to the destination and get a burger. Probably even fly home after inspection.

This is more like a situation where the rivets are slowly, but constantly popping out of your wings while flying. Each minute, there goes another one, but let's just keep flying and see how far we can go until the wing falls off. Rather than land, do a simple fix at the first sign, and even delay the trip one day, then take off again.

Yeah, I struggle with answering the ridiculous logic of why the 100 people I know without any symptoms are evil because we aren't being tested daily.

Not evil, just that you are telling me that you and the 100 people are totally fine and do not have the virus, but that is a total guess without testing and you may be infecting others without knowing it. Don't make assumptions unless you actually know the details of you and the others case history, which is only known with frequent testing.

 

[EdFred]

And the flu could indeed develop into a global pandemic someday. Just look at 1918-1919. But that flu killed males in the 20-40 age bracket most efficiently. So it wouldn't affect most of the old crotchety pilots here as much.

Don't be ridiculous here. We even know that preventing 100% of the cases is not necessary. Getting the R0 number below 1 will result in cases naturally going away over time, so complete and draconian measures are not necessary in the case of non-pandemic normal flu, but the more that we do, the faster it gets better. We are not even close to getting towards an R0 of 1.0.

This is more like a situation where the rivets are slowly, but constantly popping out of your wings while flying. Each minute, there goes another one, but let's just keep flying and see how far we can go until the wing falls off. Rather than land, do a simple fix at the first sign, and even delay the trip one day, then take off again.

Not evil, just that you are telling me that you and the 100 people are totally fine and do not have the virus, but that is a total guess without testing and you may be infecting others without knowing it. Don't make assumptions unless you actually know the details of you and the others case history, which is only known with frequent testing.

Changed to paint, because that's more accurate analogue than rivets. But even if it was rivets, losing them won't cause the wing to fall off. That's the error in your analogy. This thing isn't catastrophic to the country, but you are practically begging pleading, and hoping it will be so you can force your lifestyle choice on others. At least that's the way you are coming across.

 

[Palmpilot]

If everyone actually stayed home for the first 4 weeks, those that were "essential" actually wore proper masks 100% of the time and washed/sanitized their hands often, and we had leaders that were competent, then everyone could be getting back to "normal" life in a safe (still wearing masks) manner already. But because there are enough people in this country that think they don't have to follow the rules/recommendations and believe that everyone else can fend for themselves, we are now in a prolonged situation where an extra 100,000? people are dying as a result.

According to Dr. David Ho, a virologist who played an important role in bringing the AIDS epidemic under control, another part of the problem is the staggered responses in various states and regions. Because of the mobility of the American public, that has had the effect of prolonging the Covid-19 epidemic, and the economic impact, for the nation as a whole.

 

[Palmpilot]

Do we KNOW the numbers any place is reporting is accurate?

Beats me.