Hammer Dog (jaime59)

4GEA (Golf Equipment Aficionados)

Hosted by Hammer Dog (jaime59)

This is the successor forum to the original Golf Equipment Aficionados forum or 4GEA

  • 125
    MEMBERS
  • 3565
    MESSAGES
  • 1
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Our Own Fault or ?   Futility Folder:Politics

Started Jun-29 by Boomslang (DaveP8); 429 views.
Boomslang (DaveP8)

From: Boomslang (DaveP8)

Jun-29

A wave of coronavirus infections across the nation was caused by people traveling from New York before the city was locked down, according to research reported by The New York Times. Nathan Grubaugh, an epidemiologist at the Yale School of Public Health, estimates that viruses spreading from New York account for as much as 65 percent of the infections across the U.S. Grubaugh said: “We now have enough data to feel pretty confident that New York was the primary gateway for the rest of the country.” The findings are based on the tracking of virus mutations, travel histories of infected people, and models of the outbreak by disease experts. Researchers say the findings show that by taking earlier action, the city could have slowed the virus’ spread across the country. Kristian Andersen of Scripps Research said: “It means that we missed the boat early on, and the vast majority in this country is coming from domestic spread... I keep hearing that it’s somebody else’s fault. That’s not true. It’s not somebody else’s fault, it’s our own fault.”

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/coronavirus-infections-in-the-us-mostly-stem-from-new-york-city-research-shows

 

Dave P

ToraMori

From: ToraMori

Jun-29

Perhaps a quarantine on hot spots can help control an epidemic/pandemic. Along with a few other common sense measures.

Charlie6D

From: Charlie6D

Jun-29

Here's what's puzzling about the spread of the CV.  I don't think it's possible to "stop" the spread of the virus.  We can slow the spread by taking certain precautions, but "stopping" the spread is simply impossible because it is already so widespread that it's impossible to stop the spread from all the various sources.  Remember, even if we were to think we had it stopped, all it would take is one person with the virus to start the spread all over again.

So, the natural tendency of most people is to think "Well, let's slow the spread as much as possible."  That may sound good at first, but that approach has serious drawbacks, namely that the more the spread is slowed, the longer the vulnerable people are going to have to remain in self imposed isolation. 

Many people are already starting to go nuts from being cooped up and isolated from friends and family for 3 months now, so how much longer do you think they can (or will) remain isolated?   Personally, I think it is almost a certainty that EVERYONE will be exposed to the virus at some level or to some degree unless they can truly isolate themselves in a cave for almost forever. 

This really puts the older, more vulnerable, people in a tough spot.  For some of these people, they may figure that they likely have only a year or two left to live under the best of circumstances, so do they want to spend their final year or so on earth in total isolation from friends and family or do they want to roll the dice and take their chances that they could survive the exposure to the virus?

The scientists are still saying that there's little chance of a vaccine being developed before the end of this year, at best.  And likely it may be 2 or 3 years from now, or perhaps NEVER.  So, while we are discovering better ways of treating people who have the disease, there's still no magic bullet that will kill it and we may never discover a magic bullet. 

For a lot of older, immune compromised people, their choice comes down to this:  Do they want to spend their final year or so in total isolation from friends, family, and life, or are they willing to take a chance that they can survive the virus and actually LIVE their final year or two on earth.  Tough decision!

Charlie----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ToraMori

From: ToraMori

Jun-29

We screwed up the shutdown by shutting almost everything down and tanking the economy as a result. And now we are screwing up the re-opening. It's actually good the virus is spreading mostly among the young and healthy with mild outcomes. But the old and vulnerable are not being protected during the re-opening and we've given the signal it's OK for them to resume normal behavior. The buck stops with Trump in both cases.

  • Edited June 29, 2020 1:22 pm  by  ToraMori
Charlie6D

From: Charlie6D

Jun-29

ToraMori said...

 

We screwed up the shutdown by shutting almost everything down and tanking the economy as a result. And now we are screwing up the re-opening. It's actually good the virus is spreading mostly among the young and healthy with mild outcomes. But the old and vulnerable are not being protected during the re-opening and we've given the signal it's OK for them to resume normal behavior. The buck stops with Trump in both cases.

 

I don't see it exactly that way.  In the early stages of the pandemic, Trump followed the advice of the medical experts.  While it may be (and arguably was) the wrong approach, I'm not sure that many presidents would have done it any differently.

Second, I don't agree that Trump is giving the old folks the OK to "resume normal behavior".  He is actually leaving it up to each state to decide their policies while saying that he won't shut down the country again over the virus issue... not that HE actually shut it down the first time.  I think that Trump and his "experts" are still advising the old and vulnerable to take precautions as appropriate for THEM.

Charlie----------------------------------------------------------------------

Boomslang (DaveP8)

From: Boomslang (DaveP8)

Jun-30

Nailed it.  

 

Dave P

BlkNGld1

From: BlkNGld1

Jun-30

I do find it interesting reading how when cordoning off NYC or NYS was being discussed, Cuomo had a fit, but also fine with forced isolation of people traveling there from other hotspots.

BlkNGld1

From: BlkNGld1

Jun-30

I agree that it's a tough choice.   We've got plenty of family and friends in the higher risk category.

But, IMO, it needn't be a choice between extremes.

If I were in that situation with what I know today, I'd be making some decisions about who it's most important for me to spend time with and having a discussion around what steps are needed to protect each other.   And I'd have to decide which activities are important to me, and make a call there.   

Obviously where it gets difficult is when for whatever reason one party disagrees with the other around what's prudent or necessary. 

 

 

TOP