My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

In the early 1940s we had 16 & 17 year olds trying to get into the military to go risk their lives to fight an enemy on some foreign soil, now we have full grown men scared to go outside without their faces covered by a maxi-pad. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

(04-24-2020 10:19 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  In the early 1940s we had 16 & 17 year olds trying to get into the military to go risk their lives to fight an enemy on some foreign soil, now we have full grown men scared to go outside without their faces covered by a maxi-pad. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Excellent point. But there's still many of us not afraid to get out and work and try to keep this country rolling along. I haven't missed a day, actually been working more in this crisis. Wasn't happy about it first until I realized the media is way overhyping things and the models were off bigly. Open the USA back up and lets go!

It looks like the virus had already spread in many places. It also appears that somewhere in the range of 80-90% of the people infected are either asymptomatic or have minimum symptoms.

I think we overreacted and the government has overreached. But Fear keeps the dimocrats in power...so there you have it.

(04-24-2020 10:19 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

In the early 1940s we had 16 & 17 year olds trying to get into the military to go risk their lives to fight an enemy on some foreign soil, now we have full grown men scared to go outside without their faces covered by a maxi-pad. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Anyone wearing a simple mask to protect themselves is a moron. I wear a mask as a courtesy to those around me. ESPECIALLY to that generation from the 1940's who risked their lives to fight an enemy on foreign soil, like both of my parents and 3 of my 4 grandparents. Yes, my grandmother was an Army Colonel in the 40's-60's (Europe and Korea) and my mother was an Army Nurse (Vietnam) in the 60's.... both serving overseas.


As to the OP, there certainly is some value in that, but how many lives is that value worth? I don't know. Given that 50,000 people have already died from this... despite some MASSIVE efforts... could it have been 500,000?
I'm not disagreeing, I just don't know. I DO know that there are still many people developing these antibodies... perhaps millions of asymptomatic people already... but just like the flu, nobody is ever really immune because the diseases continues to adapt as well.

It's worth noting that the first time H1N1 came around in 1918, 675,000 Americans died from it and an estimated 50mm people worldwide. I don't know how many were infected... but I'm sure it was a big number. The population of the US was less than 1/3 of what it is today. That number on a population our size would easily be in the millions. Of course we're also much better at keeping people alive today, so 500,000 isn't crazy. The second time H1N1 came around, it still infected 60mm people... mostly because we didn't do anything to stop the spread... but because we'd been working on it and several mutations since then for literally 100 years... we had more treatments and likely had a lot of those antibodies you speak of.

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

I believe most people would have self-quarantined anyway....at least for the first 2-3 weeks. And, the reaction and fear to the pandemic and lack of consumer confidence would have shut down schools, churches, and many retail businesses regardless.

In Utah, many local retail businesses shut their doors on their own because there was no consumer traffic and very little revenue so no way to pay employees.

Without developing the needed immunity, I worry we are going to go through this again and again. The number of deaths will rise to a high level no matter what we do. We are just delaying the inevitable. The deaths will be spread out over a longer time period.

Sent from my LG-H932 using CSNbbs mobile app

Long term outlook on society or humanity. Without a doubt in my mind yes.

Hell you could throw science back in the face of those with with both natural immunity and evolution (although most that are passing away aren’t having kids anymore).

Still. while I think we have overreacted a lot we took care of many who otherwise wouldn’t be able to take care of themselves and I understand and agree with that up to a point. I don’t agree with the total destruction of the economy and extremely questionable measures against all of our rights.

(04-24-2020 11:42 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  Without developing the needed immunity, I worry we are going to go through this again and again. The number of deaths will rise to a high level no matter what we do. We are just delaying the inevitable. The deaths will be spread out over a longer time period.

Sent from my LG-H932 using CSNbbs mobile app

but this is (obviously) not the first COVID disease (It's Covid-19) and the virus continues to morph as it wants to live as much as we want to kill it.

and because so many are asymptomatic and it spreads so easily, many many more are being exposed.

I get your concern... and expressed it a little bit myself early on.... It's absolutely valid... but since then I've recognized that despite our efforts, there is still a lot more exposure than we know.

(04-24-2020 11:50 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 11:42 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  Without developing the needed immunity, I worry we are going to go through this again and again. The number of deaths will rise to a high level no matter what we do. We are just delaying the inevitable. The deaths will be spread out over a longer time period.
Sent from my LG-H932 using CSNbbs mobile app

but this is (obviously) not the first COVID disease (It's Covid-19) and the virus continues to morph as it wants to live as much as we want to kill it.
and because so many are asymptomatic and it spreads so easily, many many more are being exposed.
I get your concern... and expressed it a little bit myself early on.... It's absolutely valid... but since then I've recognized that despite our efforts, there is still a lot more exposure than we know.

And because there is more exposure, the death rate is far lower than we had originally guessed. Basic math: You make the denominator bigger, and the quotient gets smaller.

I would even be happy with having people like me (comprised health) be locked down. And allowing younger people to go about their business and develop the needed antibodies. I just don't think what we are doing is a good long term strategy.

Sent from my LG-H932 using CSNbbs mobile app

(04-24-2020 12:13 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  I would even be happy with having people like me (comprised health) be locked down. And allowing younger people to go about their business and develop the needed antibodies. I just don't think what we are doing is a good long term strategy.

Sent from my LG-H932 using CSNbbs mobile app

Fair.

I think the problem is that this virus was
a) first totally missed/misrepresented by China/the WHO. Many similar viruses never make the jump from animal to human (zoonotic) and even if they do, it's like having to have actual physical contact with the infected animal. This was the original report on the virus.

b) once the above was found false, the 'known' transmission rate was fairly serious, but the mortality rate was EXTREMELY high relative to that.... and as we investigated, we found more and more and more ways which the disease could be spread... from direct physical contact with bodily fluids to casual transmission to even remaining on surfaces for hours or even days... again, based on symptomatic patients.... which means we're potentially looking out for a global killer. Remember, it's not usually the virus that kills you so we really aren't at first looking for ways to treat the disease. We're looking for ways to identify it and treat the resulting respiratory issues/symptoms. Sort of like how there is no cure for the cold... but you can treat the symptoms.

and because of that (a potential global killer) you get ONE chance to stop it. I don't mean everyone, but a meaningful number... like 5% of the global population.

Since then, we've learned even more about the transmission.... that many people.... perhaps more than are symptomatic, are Asymptomatic... which DRAMATICALLY changes the 'best practices' model. Note that the Seattle nursing home essentially went into the sort of lockdown you're describing.... and yet somehow it 'got out' anyway. It changes the model because you go from being concerned about 5+% of the population, to a number more like a fraction of a percent.

While yes, some people had this idea early on, that was based on supposition and not on known facts at the time nor on evidence from Seattle. It was an option... but given what little we knew, it would have been a HUGE leap of faith and a tremendous risk to the nation to decide to play 'defense' first. It would be like a calculated slow troop build-up in defense of the border to address a Mexican invasion from the Army that you know about... only to find out too late that there were already millions of them 'behind' you. By the time you realize you're in trouble, there is nothing you can do to stop it.

Today in hindsight, it's still debatable which way we should have gone. There is no way to know how bad things could have been... but certainly we need to start making a transition to a 'safe' return to work and social lives while also protecting those most vulnerable.

Only a few of those decisions should be made by government imo... as an example... regardless of any stay at home orders, once such restrictions are lifted, my company (healthcare) will only return those people to offices who cannot fully do their jobs from home. Once that is working out, they will make it optional for others to return as they choose... and review the jobs of those who don't to see if they can continue to work from home.

(04-24-2020 10:19 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

In the early 1940s we had 16 & 17 year olds trying to get into the military to go risk their lives to fight an enemy on some foreign soil, now we have full grown men scared to go outside without their faces covered by a maxi-pad. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Outstanding point....Those 16 & 17 year olds also had grown up through the great depression. Didn't have nothin, and didn't have much prospect of ever having nothin. My late grandfather was one of them, and that whole generation was tougher than a $2 steak. It is kinda sad to witness what we have become....

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

Blue, someone like yourself should self isolate as much as possible. But business should have continued normally. If local schools wanted to close that is fine.

Current death rate per million US 155.98, that includes NY.
NY 908.27
Sweden 217.30 (no government mandated crap)

One size does not fit all. Besides the subway another reason NYC is doing so bad IMHO muli generational living arrangements, large % of C. American Hispanics, Jamaicans, Dominicans, other Caribbeans...it is cultural. That is bad for older people with conditions, more exposure to the virus.

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

No.

If the whole US had New York state's rate of death, there would be 360,000 dead already with hundreds of thousands to come (instead of 50,000).

Sweden did very little. They have 211 deaths per million compared to 156 in the US, 70 in Denmark, 37 in Norway and 32 in Finland. Those are dramatic differences.

Something needed to be done. I think what has been done has been excessive. There should have been fewer shutdowns and more social distancing measures, limiting business capacity.

(04-24-2020 11:50 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 11:42 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  Without developing the needed immunity, I worry we are going to go through this again and again. The number of deaths will rise to a high level no matter what we do. We are just delaying the inevitable. The deaths will be spread out over a longer time period.

Sent from my LG-H932 using CSNbbs mobile app

but this is (obviously) not the first COVID disease (It's Covid-19) and the virus continues to morph as it wants to live as much as we want to kill it.

and because so many are asymptomatic and it spreads so easily, many many more are being exposed.

I get your concern... and expressed it a little bit myself early on.... It's absolutely valid... but since then I've recognized that despite our efforts, there is still a lot more exposure than we know.

SO, that begs the question are we to take these same economy killing measures for COVIDS-19,20,21,31,41, and on and on? We as a species have been fighting killer viruses for likely the largest part of our existence and in all probability will continue to do so.

Why is it just now that we have given in to the fear being propagated through our propagandized media and political class and granted our government such broad ranging authority to regulate our lives in clear violations of our civil liberties? Could it be that no other virus that's had this kind of impact was seized on as a political tool/weapon with which to subjugate an entire population? Who has been leading that charge btw?

(04-24-2020 01:18 PM)JUSTGOPLAY Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 10:19 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

In the early 1940s we had 16 & 17 year olds trying to get into the military to go risk their lives to fight an enemy on some foreign soil, now we have full grown men scared to go outside without their faces covered by a maxi-pad. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Outstanding point....Those 16 & 17 year olds also had grown up through the great depression. Didn't have nothin, and didn't have much prospect of ever having nothin. My late grandfather was one of them, and that whole generation was tougher than a $2 steak. It is kinda sad to witness what we have become....

You just described my parents to a t.

(04-24-2020 10:29 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  It looks like the virus had already spread in many places. It also appears that somewhere in the range of 80-90% of the people infected are either asymptomatic or have minimum symptoms.

I think we overreacted and the government has overreached. But Fear keeps the dimocrats in power...so there you have it.

I agree on the overreaction but the overreach came from police not understanding that these measures weren't enforceable laws. You also had governors making random recommendations not based off of best practices but more so on the basis of political security.

The response could have been better coordinated, but that is because the U.S. refuses to implement an operational component of FEMA that practices and plans for scenarios such as this. For instance, was getting the USNS Comfort underway really a good idea when the Javits Convention Center had already been converted to a field hospital?

It's imperative that a non-partisan Lessons Learned briefing be conducted so we don't have to relearn all these processes again and organizations are giving legit tasks to implement when this situations arises again. The lack of Pre-planned responses and zero autonomous actions are IMO the biggest failures that I see.

Nearly All Patients Hospitalized With Covid-19 Had Chronic Health Issues, Study Finds
Only 6 percent of patients at one New York area health system had no chronic conditions. Hypertension, obesity and diabetes were common.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/healt...-risk.html

(04-24-2020 01:22 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 10:07 AM)Old Blue Wrote:  My gut tells me it would have been more effective to let people develop the antibodies necessary to fight this virus by not locking everyone down. That is in my estimation why in the past this was never done. In 1958 (Avian Flu) there were 116,000 deaths in the united states alone. People understood that death was a part of the outcome. But also people developed an immunity. The question then becomes "How many deaths are acceptable?" I say this knowing full well, with my compromised health (Type 2 diabetes and High Blood pressure) I would stand the best chance of not making it. But right now.....I worry about our entire country not making it.

Blue, someone like yourself should self isolate as much as possible. But business should have continued normally. If local schools wanted to close that is fine.

Current death rate per million US 155.98, that includes NY.
NY 908.27
Sweden 217.30 (no government mandated crap)

One size does not fit all. Besides the subway another reason NYC is doing so bad IMHO muli generational living arrangements, large % of C. American Hispanics, Jamaicans, Dominicans, other Caribbeans...it is cultural. That is bad for older people with conditions, more exposure to the virus.

You forgot to mention Cuomo ordered nursning homes to take on Covid patients. He should be arrested for Manslaughter for how many people directly died from that decision. Also, who here thinks that if the majority of deaths in this country had happened in say, Missouri instead of New York that NYC would have shut down, much less the whole country?