Pardon me for asking you to simply listen to something and think for yourself.
|
Pardon me for asking you to simply listen to something and think for yourself.
I did listen to your link, fact checked it for background and evaluated it's accuracy for myself. Standard for my posts and responses. Sorry I disagree with you yet again based on facts and not just feelings. Deal with it!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Could you elaborate on those facts?
This member of the Hoover Institute, a conservative think tank, has his own biases, which makes your non partisan statement suspect, if not biased, on your part. .
Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19.
While true that doesn't have anything to do with the illness itself, the severity or the hospitalization that will be needed. Nor the infectability of the asymptomatic, or being able to predict exactly who will die if infected.
Fact 2: Protecting older, at-risk people eliminates hospital overcrowding.
Agree that should be the focus, but doesn't guarantee elimination of hospital overcrowding but slowly the rates of infections by people staying at home and closing potential infection points like stores, schools and large events is credited with less infections and the overwhelming of hospitals so far.
Fact 3: Vital population immunity is prevented by total isolation policies, prolonging the problem.
We don't know that as a fact and it's a hope at best, but the isolation policies was meant to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed which is more important I think than hoping we get herd immunity. Even now we don't know if people have that immunity.
Fact 4: People are dying because other medical care is not getting done due to hypothetical projections.
No evidence of that so until it is not a credible scientific statement
Fact 5: We have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected with targeted measures.
We may have good credible evidence of high risk of dying but everyone is subject to serious illness and that's not so defined, nor are there any tests to define it clearly.
That's just a start JL, there may be more coming soon as time permits.
Hmm. Well, I looked for the place where you had evidence that contradicted his statement. Didn't find it.
I'll be waiting for the more agreement to come.Quote:
Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19.
While true that doesn't have anything to do with the illness itself, the severity or the hospitalization that will be needed. Nor the infectability of the asymptomatic, or being able to predict exactly who will die if infected.
Fact 2: Protecting older, at-risk people eliminates hospital overcrowding.
Agree that should be the focus, but doesn't guarantee elimination of hospital overcrowding but slowly the rates of infections by people staying at home and closing potential infection points like stores, schools and large events is credited with less infections and the overwhelming of hospitals so far.
Fact 3: Vital population immunity is prevented by total isolation policies, prolonging the problem.
We don't know that as a fact and it's a hope at best, but the isolation policies was meant to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed which is more important I think than hoping we get herd immunity. Even now we don't know if people have that immunity.
Fact 4: People are dying because other medical care is not getting done due to hypothetical projections.
No evidence of that so until it is not a credible scientific statement. What? You're not aware of the multitude of med procedures that have postponed, and the fact that some of those postponements have resulted in the death of the patient?
Fact 5: We have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected with targeted measures.
We may have good credible evidence of high risk of dying but everyone is subject to serious illness and that's not so defined, nor are there any tests to define it clearly.
That's just a start JL, there may be more coming soon as time permits.
I'll save you the trouble. Whatever Fauci and Birx says I will agree. Just today the FDA released stricter guidelines for the testing in all the categories because of the lousy results some are producing. Worth noting also, while most of the states are in the process or have limited openings, NONE have met the 14 day thresh hold of downward trend infections, hospitalizations, or deaths, as set out as guidelines by the CDC. In some states like Georgia, quite the opposite is happening.
I hope this works out I really do, but you know how that goes, hope for the best but plan for the worst.
I understand that. It's a dilemma for sure.
Working on sheetrock the next two days. Have I ever mentioned how much I hate working on sheetrock? The business of cutting the holes for the boxes to go into is especially aggravating. This is, I hope, the final wall of our house I'll have to deal with.
I go out everyday, morning only, wave at neighbors from a distance so I understand the need for outdoors by many. Nothing like a shave, haircut bueaty shop to feel much better I understand that too. I LOVE THE BEACH! Lived on one and raised kids there back in the day and feeding gulls in winter was a date for me and the wife. I know how hard this stay at home is. Got peeps in nursing homes and senior living facillities. No VISITS! Can't see the GKids! Calls only.
You think I don't want my life back?
I hate sheetrock too!
It's not so much the stay at home. That's not fun, but it's the destroying of our economy that must be stopped. Everything has a cost.
Yes it is for sure. How many people will you sacrifice to save the economy? Did we not learn the lesson of the 1917 pandemic, and the subsequent ones? Sure we have, just a matter of doing it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_pandemic
The main ways available to tackle a flu pandemic initially are behavioural. Doing so requires a good public health communication strategy and the ability to track public concerns, attitudes and behaviour. For example, the Flu TElephone Survey Template (FluTEST) was developed for the UK Department of Health as a set of questions for use in national surveys during a flu pandemic.[89]
- Social distancing: By traveling less, working from home or closing schools, there is less opportunity for the virus to spread. Reduce the time spent in crowded settings if possible. And keep your distance (preferably at least 1 metre) from people who show symptoms of influenza-like illness, such as coughing and sneezing.[90] However, social distancing during a pandemic flu will likely carry severe mental health consequences; therefore, sequestration protocols should take mental health issues into consideration.[91]
- Respiratory hygiene: Advise people to cover their coughs and sneezes. If using a tissue, make sure you dispose of it carefully and then clean your hands immediately afterwards. (See "Handwashing Hygiene" below.) If you do not have a tissue handy when you cough or sneeze, cover your mouth as much as possible with the crook of your elbow.[90]
- Handwashing hygiene: Frequent handwashing with soap and water (or with an alcohol-based hand sanitizer) is very important, especially after coughing or sneezing, and after contact with other people or with potentially contaminated surfaces (such as handrails, shared utensils, etc.)[92]
- Other hygiene: Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth as much as possible.[90]
- Masks: No mask can provide a perfect barrier, but products that meet or exceed the NIOSH N95 standard recommended by the World Health Organization are thought to provide good protection. WHO recommends that health-care workers wear N95 masks and that patients wear surgical masks (which may prevent respiratory secretions from becoming airborne).[93] Any mask may be useful to remind the wearer not to touch the face. This can reduce infection due to contact with contaminated surfaces, especially in crowded public places where coughing or sneezing people have no way of washing their hands. The mask itself can become contaminated and must be handled as medical waste when removed.
- Risk communication: To encourage the public to comply with strategies to reduce the spread of disease, "communications regarding possible community interventions [such as requiring sick people to stay home from work, closing schools] for pandemic influenza that flow from the federal government to communities and from community leaders to the public not overstate the level of confidence or certainty in the effectiveness of these measures."[94]
Or we forget the past lessons and repeat the mistakes.
all wonderful lessons, but the young don't respond, they are invulnerable like Achilles
Some of the old coots don't respond well either Clete. I mean how do you ease restrictions when infections and deaths are rising?
Do you realize we could save 40 thousand lives a year just by eliminating cars? Are you for that? If not, then why do you value your convenient transportation over the lives of 40 thousand people a year?Quote:
Yes it is for sure. How many people will you sacrifice to save the economy?
Logically you don't, you exercise patience, which may only mean a week or two until the worst is over, this thing seems to run for about three months and then subsideQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
yes and you will save an equal number by eliminating guns, but that's logical, and no amount of logic will prevailQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Do you realize we are approaching almost twice that many deaths in just a few months? This virus is already outpacing other causes of death in this country. Will you say the same thing after 100,000 deaths? If it hits someone close to you? Ain't no fun feeling scared and helpless like those meat packing workers, or first responders like transit, grocery, cops, emt's, nurse, and doctors, you know essentials, who see death every day, and risking dying themselves.
You want to stop making cars, go ahead, I'm with you.
You trying to incite a riot? Gun deaths don't count.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I don't think there is any avoiding loss of life with this virus. New York City is locked down pretty tightly but they are having more deaths than anyone. I do think there is something to be said for learning to walk through this smartly. If this economy goes south, then the suffering will be amplified. I imagine that if your retirement income is cut by 50%, then you'll be at the head of the "Reopen the Economy" protest in your town. It's easy to take a stand for life when it is costing you nothing. And while you're at it, what about the 900,000 abortion deaths a year that you seem to care nothing about?
Talk's cheap.Quote:
You want to stop making cars, go ahead, I'm with you.
apparently notQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Are you suggesting along with Walsh that we do nothing about this pandemic just let people get sick and die because we kill babies? I think as people rush to save the economy and ignore the virus, we lose people and the economy. The virus is the problem, not the economy.
The point of the guy's statement is that it is the pinnacle of hypocrisy to claim to be so concerned about life that we will basically enter into another Great Depression to (we think) avoid loss of life while standing idly by, year after year, while nearly a million human beings are killed and tossed aside as so much garbage every single year. I think his point is valid. People who vote for those who delight in abortion (as dems do) can't profess to be occupying any moral high ground.
The virus knows no moral high ground, nor care about your great economy. Just finding hosts on which to feed and grow. Babies can die, and have, the young can die, and have. The old can die, and have. Workers can die, and have. What does moral high ground have to do with that?
Nothing except that when you point fingers at those who are rightly (my view) concerned about the destruction of our economy and accuse us of being uncaring, and then exhibit no concern at all for over 900,000 human deaths every year, then it raises legitimate questions. If you are really so concerned about lives, then where have you been all these years?
I have criticized the response and execution of this administration around this pandemic but it's you throwing all the ills of society in the mix. This economy has bounced back throughout history, so what makes you think it won't comeback from this challenge as well?
For sure this virus won't go away until there is a cure or treatment, and if you think the economy can grow and thrive while the virus is very active and growing, that makes no sense.
1. Of course you have criticized this admin. It's because, it sure seems, that you are more motivated by political considerations than by any real morality.
2. The economy "bounced back" from the Great Depresssion. If you want to read about great suffering, then read about that, and then think if we really need to be running the risk of doing that again.
3. I do believe the economy can pick back up while we still exhibit common sense about this virus, but it will take come courage.
Spoken by the board's "Holy Joe". Who are you to criticize anyone's morality?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Life expectancy increased by 6 years during the Great Depression. Mortality decreased in every category except for suicide. No Americans starved during the GD. This time unemployment is being dealt with in many ways by the government, many businesses, and various other organizations.Quote:
The economy "bounced back" from the Great Depression. If you want to read about great suffering, then read about that, and then think if we really need to be running the risk of doing that again.
As Tal says, you put the economy ahead of human suffering.
Common sense is being applied now to the present crisis. It is the wackos ( a tiny percentage) with their guns and swastikas on the state house steps that are failing to show a modicum of common sense.Quote:
I do believe the economy can pick back up while we still exhibit common sense about this virus, but it will take come courage.
The American people are overwhelmingly against those nuts.
Just go back and look at your Aquinas post if you want to see immorality at work. Sorry, but your credibility is shot.Quote:
Spoken by the board's "Holy Joe". Who are you to criticize anyone's morality?
Yeah, those were really the "good ole days." Unemployment above 20%. Wages falling from one year to the next. Negative GDP growth for four consecutive years, but it was a great time!Quote:
Life expectancy increased by 6 years during the Great Depression. Mortality decreased in every category except for suicide. No Americans starved during the GD. This time unemployment is being dealt with in many ways by the government, many businesses, and various other organizations.
As to unemployment being "dealt with" by the feds, it is interesting to note that the debt to GDP ratio in 1929 was 16%, so the feds were in a much better position to increase federal debt and did so. Now, thanks to the collective genius of both Obama and Trump, the ratio is 110% and climbing even more, so it can be argued that this being "dealt with" with TONS of borrowed money is going to come back and bite us. Your plan of just shutting down the economy, closing our eyes, and singing "Happy Days are Here Again" does not strike me as sensible. There are much better ideas developing out there.
And where are you on those 900,000 abortions a year that you never bring up? That's the phoniness of your position. You stand idly by while unborn babies are killed because you can't be troubled about that. It doesn't fit your political agenda.Quote:
As Tal says, you put the economy ahead of human suffering.
I would agree with that. I think most people on both sides would. It is beyond amazing that Michigan would allow those nuts in their Statehouse.Quote:
It is the wackos ( a tiny percentage) with their guns and swastikas on the state house steps that are failing to show a modicum of common sense.
You just can't get past that, can you? Even tho it's been explained to you three or four times as you keep insisting. When you refuse to believe the facts, and charge others with immorality, who's the Holy Joe? Who has no credibility?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
For a Holy Joe telling others how they think, you have no compunction about lying, do you? Your habit of putting words in my mouth continues unabated. Are you never ashamed of doing that, being such a holy Christian and allQuote:
Your plan of just shutting down the economy, closing our eyes, and singing "Happy Days are Here Again" does not strike me as sensible.
NEVER BRING UP?!!? Now you moralize about something I NEVER BRING UP??Quote:
And where are you on those 900,000 abortions a year that you never bring up?
Your stupidity is breathtaking.
It's not the guy who gave half the quote that he knew favored his position, and left out the other half that he know destroyed his position.Quote:
You just can't get past that, can you? Even tho it's been explained to you three or four times as you keep insisting. When you refuse to believe the facts, and charge others with immorality, who's the Holy Joe? Who has no credibility?
I put no words in your mouth as there was no quote. Remember that conversation? At any rate, it was my characterization of your position. I think it's fairly accurate.Quote:
For a Holy Joe telling others how they think, you have no compunction about lying, do you? Your habit of putting words in my mouth continues unabated. Are you never ashamed of doing that, being such a holy Christian and all.
Well...yeah. Kind of obvious.Quote:
NEVER BRING UP?!!? Now you moralize about something I NEVER BRING UP??
I can always tell when you have run out of arguments and data. That's when the name calling begins.Quote:
Your stupidity is breathtaking.
Referring to the Aquinas quote, this is your reply when what appeared for all the world to be dishonesty from you was pointed out. "Augustine/Plato starts off the Middle Ages and Aquinas/Aristotle is the culmination. (BTW, a flatly incorrect statement. J.L.) Aquinas wrote tons of words and I stand by my interpretation of what he wrote. Like the Bible, there is so much there that the tendency to cherry-pick is never far away. For that reason, I suggest we drop Aquinas as getting too far from the topic at hand."
Note that there was nothing about how the Catholics forced him to amend his writings. That was a later plea. You just simply said that I had it wrong and you had it right. So no, I don't buy your answer now.
Remember that I save many of your posts since they are good for others to see and learn from as regards the defense of the faith and not trusting everything another person says.
And while that might sound mean, it is not intended to be. It is intended to be honest.
I still stand by it. Nothing you said changes my opinion. Btw, you clearly do not understand the Augustine/Plato- Aquinas/Aristotle comment. No explanation will be forthcoming from me - you'll have to look that one up yourself which I'm certain you will never do.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Yes, there was - that is exactly what I said![/QUOTE]Quote:
Note that there was nothing about how the Catholics forced him to amend his writings.
Also said by me.Quote:
That was a later plea.
I save none of yours.Quote:
I save many of your posts ... not trusting anything the other person says.
Your choice.Quote:
I had it wrong and you had it right. So no, I don't buy your answer now.
The name-calling is always, and I mean ALWAYS, a reaction to what you bring to this board.
I know. It's always someone else's fault. "He made me do it!! It's not my fault."Quote:
The name-calling is always, and I mean ALWAYS, a reaction to what you bring to this board.
You did...months and months later.Quote:
Yes, there was - that is exactly what I said!
Did you ever put forth what you think we should be doing about the economy and the virus?
I liked what the guy in the video said. The virus is especially lethal to a fairly small minority of the population. There are, he said, four areas of concern. 1. age 2. hypertension. 3. obesity. 4. diabetes.
I have a friend who has three of those four problems, so people like that need to shelter in place. Everyone else should be looking at getting back to work ASAP. Sporting events? I'd say no for now. Church? In a wise manner, yes.
There is still plenty of room for discussion, but we are looking at economic disaster in a matter of months if we don't do something now.
This is the information he was relying on.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/pol...es/2959183001/
Plus COPD and other lung diseases/conditions, and autoimmune situations (anemia of various kinds, lupus, MS, etc.).
That video is about a month old.
No doubt that is all true.Quote:
Plus COPD and other lung diseases/conditions, and autoimmune situations (anemia of various kinds, lupus, MS, etc.).
How do you figure that?Quote:
That video is about a month old.
Yes. I'm one of those several times over.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
JOSEPH SPECTOR | NEW YORK STATE TEAM Updated 3:16 p.m. CDT Apr. 7, 2020Quote:
How do you figure that?
I'm still not with you. The video I linked, which I did not see on your link, was dated 4/24 and the column he referenced was published 4/22.Quote:
I'm doing fairly well to be 67. Blood pressure requires meds and acid reflux is an issue, but all in all, I am grateful. Now I walk out to my shop and then have to stand there a minute or two to remember what I was supposed to get.Quote:
Yes. I'm one of those several times over.
Who opens the store in the middle of a disaster?
https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/...60&u=t&o=f&l=f
There are, and have been, many stores open. Why should Walmart be open but local stores be closed?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:51 PM. |