CrazyRichAggie said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

Alta said:

---

No deaths are acceptable. But again we live in reality and not a fairy-tale land. People, especially the elderly, die of illnesses. How many deaths due to consequences of halting daily life due to the virus are acceptable? How do you balance those two concerns. It's easy to try to make decisions in a vacuum but we don't live in a vacuum.

---

Human lives in the order of 10's of thousands are always more important to me than the economy. Maybe you think differently.

---

Happens EVERY SINGLE YEAR, but for some reason this year they feel the need to shut down every school, event, workplace etc.

---

And those losses will still happen in addition to CV.

Alta said:

---

No I'm living in the fantasy land of people being able to make informed decisions without halting daily life. Admittedly that is a fantasy land. If you are a high risk person then change your daily life if you feel appropriate. Self quarantine, avoid gatherings, etc. The same thing that might eventually be mandated. If you are a low risk person then continue with your daily life, go to work, etc. Maybe don't go visit your grandma in a nursing home though and give her a call instead.

---

The problem is we're a nation of narcissists. You have people who have been actually positively tested who are still going out in public. And not like one person. Several! Already!

If we're going to leave it up to individuals doing this on their own behavior you're going to see what happened in Italy.

What I think we're missing right now is real leadership, straight talk, and a very clearly communicated course of action from our elected officials.

Everyone is winging it, Trump's sunshine pumping, schools are closing for no communicated reason, CDC can't seem to find their ass with both hands. Perception is reality here.

88planoAg said:

---

Drifter. said:

---

Question....Have they figured out if this thing can pass by aerosol transmission? I thought the answer was no, it was just in droplets, but the Infectious disease doctor that was interviewed by Joe Rogan was saying that you could get it just by being in a room with someone breathing.

---

All I've seen is droplets and surfaces.

---

What are we, 4 months into this now and we still don't know so many things about this disease with any real certainty.

The variables seem to change, sometimes fairly significantly, from one week to the next and from one study to the next.

Drifter. said:

---

Question....Have they figured out if this thing can pass by aerosol transmission? I thought the answer was no, it was just in droplets, but the Infectious disease doctor that was interviewed by Joe Rogan was saying that you could get it just by being in a room with someone breathing.

---

From everything I've read and heard, it's transferred via droplets. It's not airborne.

You can get infected via droplets being in the same room if the patient sneezes or coughs. It's often said droplets can spread out to 6 feet.

Illuminaggie said:

---

88planoAg said:

---

Drifter. said:

---

Question....Have they figured out if this thing can pass by aerosol transmission? I thought the answer was no, it was just in droplets, but the Infectious disease doctor that was interviewed by Joe Rogan was saying that you could get it just by being in a room with someone breathing.

---

All I've seen is droplets and surfaces.

---

What are we, 4 months into this now and we still don't know so many things about this disease with any real certainty.

The variables seem to change, sometimes fairly significantly, from one week to the next and from one study to the next.

---

It took years to understand HIV

So from the Joe Rogan podcast the disease expert talked about a study that came out of Germany yesterday:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/09/people-shed-high-levels-of-coronavirus-study-finds-but-most-are-likely-not-infectious-after-recovery-begins/

This explains the highly infectious nature of Covid-19

Quote:

---

The researchers found very high levels of virus emitted from the throat of patients from the earliest point in their illness when people are generally still going about their daily routines. Viral shedding dropped after day 5 in all but two of the patients, who had more serious illness. The two, who developed early signs of pneumonia, continued to shed high levels of virus from the throat until about day 10 or 11.

This pattern of virus shedding is a marked departure from what was seen with the SARS coronavirus, which ignited an outbreak in 2002-2003. With that disease, peak shedding of virus occurred later, when the virus had moved into the deep lungs.

Shedding from the upper airways early in infection makes for a virus that is much harder to contain. The scientists said at peak shedding, people with Covid-19 are emitting more than 1,000 times more virus than was emitted during peak shedding of SARS infection, a fact that likely explains the rapid spread of the virus. The SARS outbreak was contained after about 8,000 cases; the global count of confirmed Covid-19 cases has already topped 110,000.

---

The disease expert on Rogan said these patients were shedding JUST after being infected, way before developing any symptoms like a sore throat or cough.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Alta said:

---

You are welcome to read it however you want. But we live in reality and not a fictional fairytale land. The state of the economy which has a direct effect on people's financial and personal well being is very real. Shutting down society at the cost of everything else has consequences. Those consequences are immeasurable with the statistics everybody likes to read but they are certainly there.

---

I think most people are aware of reality. That cuts both ways. Brutal pragmatism can be expressed by saying "we accept 3% GDP growth in exchange for additional 3% case fatality rate of this disease" just as much as it can be expressed by saying "we accept 3% GDP loss in exchange for 3% decrease in case fatality rate."

Just depends on what is more valuable to you.

There's cost to action and cost to inaction. There's direct and indirect consequences here no matter which way you turn.

---

That's great theoretically but we are not practically making that trade off. There are basically two camps:

1) Self quarantine if your are sick, wash your hands, be careful, etc...
2) Lock everything down for a month... and hope the virus doesn't resurface when we start businesses back up (which is complete folly, it will come back). While everything is shut down, have companies keep paying salaries, etc and be completely oblivious to whether their balance sheets can handle it.

I'm not seeing a lot of middle ground from most on this thread.

Bo Darville said:

---

The Lost said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

Alta said:

---

No deaths are acceptable. But again we live in reality and not a fairy-tale land. People, especially the elderly, die of illnesses. How many deaths due to consequences of halting daily life due to the virus are acceptable? How do you balance those two concerns. It's easy to try to make decisions in a vacuum but we don't live in a vacuum.

---

Human lives in the order of 10's of thousands are always more important to me than the economy. Maybe you think differently.

---

So why do you drive daily? Should we shut down the auto industry because it kills?

---

If we could shut down the auto industry for 1 to 2 weeks and save 100,000 lives I'd be okay with it.

---

100,000 lives? Are you being over dramatic to make a point?

k2aggie07 said:

---

The problem is we're a nation of narcissists. You have people who have been actually positively tested who are still going out in public. And not like one person. Several! Already!

If we're going to leave it up to individuals doing this on their own behavior you're going to see what happened in Italy.

---

So martial law? Yeah, that will work real well.

Bo Darville said:

---

Alta said:

---

No deaths are acceptable. But again we live in reality and not a fairy-tale land. People, especially the elderly, die of illnesses. How many deaths due to consequences of halting daily life due to the virus are acceptable? How do you balance those two concerns. It's easy to try to make decisions in a vacuum but we don't live in a vacuum.

---

Human lives in the order of 10's of thousands are always more important to me than the economy. Maybe you think differently.

---

By canceling SWSX, the city and surrounding area losses say $1billion. How many less hospitals beds were used and how many lives saved? 100-500 hospitals beds and 1-10 deaths? Is that worth it? I don't know and I'm glad I don't have to make those kinds of decisions.

to be honest, paranoia will save lives

so i would assume the worst, but (personally) I really don't think you are going to catch this from walking around indoors without a mask, and not touching things.

even the super spreader events all seem to involve close contact with shared surfaces/objects... like the karaoke party in Japan

if it was airborne, i think you would have seen bigger spikes in Japan and HK and South Korea (where most of the cases came from the cult cluster)

Quote:

---

1) Self quarantine if your are sick, wash your hands, be careful, etc...
2) Lock everything down for a month... and hope it doesn't come back in a month (which it will..). While everything is shut down, have companies keep paying salaries, etc and be completely oblivious to whether their balance sheets can handle it.

I'm not seeing a lot of middle ground from most on this thread.

---

People on this thread aren't in charge of anything other than themselves. And there's a huge amount of middle ground. Our country is doing middle ground right now. That's good. I wish it was more clearly communicated.

I think a more coordinated response would be way more effective. A school closing without any identified cases is a useless measure.

RAB91 said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

The Lost said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

Alta said:

---

No deaths are acceptable. But again we live in reality and not a fairy-tale land. People, especially the elderly, die of illnesses. How many deaths due to consequences of halting daily life due to the virus are acceptable? How do you balance those two concerns. It's easy to try to make decisions in a vacuum but we don't live in a vacuum.

---

Human lives in the order of 10's of thousands are always more important to me than the economy. Maybe you think differently.

---

So why do you drive daily? Should we shut down the auto industry because it kills?

---

If we could shut down the auto industry for 1 to 2 weeks and save 100,000 lives I'd be okay with it.

---

100,000 lives? Are you being over dramatic to make a point?

---

There are 46 million elderly living in the US today. If a paltry 25% get infected you'll have 1% die you get about 100,000 people.

Who said anything about martial law?

We have existing legal mechanisms for enforcing quarantines. We've already done it.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Who said anything about martial law?

We have existing legal mechanisms for enforcing quarantines. We've already done it.

---

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlawsregulationsquarantineisolation.html

My understanding is that isolation and quarantine laws only apply once you test positive. Unless we are going to require mandatory testing, there will likely be many unknown carriers roaming freely until they fall ill. I don't see how you prevent that without martial law.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

1) Self quarantine if your are sick, wash your hands, be careful, etc...
2) Lock everything down for a month... and hope it doesn't come back in a month (which it will..). While everything is shut down, have companies keep paying salaries, etc and be completely oblivious to whether their balance sheets can handle it.

I'm not seeing a lot of middle ground from most on this thread.

---

People on this thread aren't in charge of anything other than themselves. And there's a huge amount of middle ground. Our country is doing middle ground right now. That's good. I wish it was more clearly communicated.

---

This is an aspect I think needs to be improved on - communication to the American people. I wish a plan was communicated from the top down. If the plan needs to be amended, so bit it. But humans are mostly prone to follow a plan, so any sort of top down plan would go a long way to quelling some panic.

cone said:

---

to be honest, paranoia will save lives

so i would assume the worst, but (personally) I really don't think you are going to catch this from walking around indoors without a mask, and not touching things.

even the super spreader events all seem to involve close contact with shared surfaces/objects... like the karaoke party in Japan

if it was airborne, i think you would have seen bigger spikes in Japan and HK and South Korea (where most of the cases came from the cult cluster)

---

So you're saying karaoke is to blame... I always kmew that **** was stupid.

Quote:

---

2) Lock everything down for a month...

---

So, no open grocery stores, gas stations, pharmacies, emergicare clinics, doctors offices, hospitals, stop-n-rob'ems, restaurants, fast food joints, feed stores, veterinary clinics, DPS, jails, law offices, police stations, fire stations, bonding agencies, banks, permit offices, hardware stores, clothing stores, <gasp> beer joints?

In your own link:

Quote:

---

If a quarantinable disease is suspected or identified, CDC may issue a federal isolation or quarantine order.
Public health authorities at the federal, state, local, and tribal levels may sometimes seek help from police or other law enforcement officers to enforce a public health order.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Coast Guard officers are authorized to help enforce federal quarantine orders.
Breaking a federal quarantine order is punishable by fines and imprisonment.
Federal law allows the conditional release of persons from quarantine if they comply with medical monitoring and surveillance.

---

Bo Darville said:

---

RAB91 said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

The Lost said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

Alta said:

---

No deaths are acceptable. But again we live in reality and not a fairy-tale land. People, especially the elderly, die of illnesses. How many deaths due to consequences of halting daily life due to the virus are acceptable? How do you balance those two concerns. It's easy to try to make decisions in a vacuum but we don't live in a vacuum.

---

Human lives in the order of 10's of thousands are always more important to me than the economy. Maybe you think differently.

---

So why do you drive daily? Should we shut down the auto industry because it kills?

---

If we could shut down the auto industry for 1 to 2 weeks and save 100,000 lives I'd be okay with it.

---

100,000 lives? Are you being over dramatic to make a point?

---

There are 46 million elderly living in the US today. If a paltry 25% get infected you'll have 1% die you get about 100,000 people.

---

Chancellor Merkel estimates that 60-70 Germans will become infected. Seems inevitable that lots of elderly are going to contract this and die anyways.

The bigger issue I have is does it make sense to cancel vacations, Houston Rodeo, SXSW, schools, churches and daily activities to slow the inevitable?

White House ordered Coronavirus briefings classified ... so much for transparency.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-secrecy-exclusive-idUSKBN20Y2LM

Quote:

---

The officials said that dozens of classified discussions about such topics as the scope of infections, quarantines and travel restrictions have been held since mid-January in a high-security meeting room at the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), a key player in the fight against the coronavirus.

Staffers without security clearances, including government experts, were excluded from the interagency meetings, which included video conference calls, the sources said.

"We had some very critical people who did not have security clearances who could not go," one official said. "These should not be classified meetings. It was unnecessary."

The sources said the National Security Council (NSC), which advises the president on security issues, ordered the classification."This came directly from the White House," one official said.

---

AeroAg2003 said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Alta said:

---

You are welcome to read it however you want. But we live in reality and not a fictional fairytale land. The state of the economy which has a direct effect on people's financial and personal well being is very real. Shutting down society at the cost of everything else has consequences. Those consequences are immeasurable with the statistics everybody likes to read but they are certainly there.

---

I think most people are aware of reality. That cuts both ways. Brutal pragmatism can be expressed by saying "we accept 3% GDP growth in exchange for additional 3% case fatality rate of this disease" just as much as it can be expressed by saying "we accept 3% GDP loss in exchange for 3% decrease in case fatality rate."

Just depends on what is more valuable to you.

There's cost to action and cost to inaction. There's direct and indirect consequences here no matter which way you turn.

---

That's great theoretically but we are not practically making that trade off. There are basically two camps:

1) Self quarantine if your are sick, wash your hands, be careful, etc...
2) Lock everything down for a month... and hope the virus doesn't resurface when we start businesses back up (which is complete folly, it will come back). While everything is shut down, have companies keep paying salaries, etc and be completely oblivious to whether their balance sheets can handle it.

I'm not seeing a lot of middle ground from most on this thread.

---

As I mentioned a couple pages back, mitigation, not containment, is what we need to focus on. Any sort of quarantines or cancellation isn't about eliminating the virus, it's about limiting the spread enough to allow our hospitals to not be overrun. That means that weeks or months from now after these measures are eased up, the virus will still be here, but the hope is that these measures kept our health care system operating smoothly along the way.

I think cancelling large events is acceptable. Personal vacations involving young families should be okay in my opinion. Going in bunker mode is stupid.

Bo Darville said:

---

RAB91 said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

The Lost said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

Alta said:

---

No deaths are acceptable. But again we live in reality and not a fairy-tale land. People, especially the elderly, die of illnesses. How many deaths due to consequences of halting daily life due to the virus are acceptable? How do you balance those two concerns. It's easy to try to make decisions in a vacuum but we don't live in a vacuum.

---

Human lives in the order of 10's of thousands are always more important to me than the economy. Maybe you think differently.

---

So why do you drive daily? Should we shut down the auto industry because it kills?

---

If we could shut down the auto industry for 1 to 2 weeks and save 100,000 lives I'd be okay with it.

---

100,000 lives? Are you being over dramatic to make a point?

---

There are 46 million elderly living in the US today. If a paltry 25% get infected you'll have 1% die you get about 100,000 people.

---

China has an elderly population of three times that and they've only had ~3K deaths. Yes, we have more freedoms that keep certain control measures from being put in place, but I have a hard time seeing the numbers you're pushing.

Ciboag96 said:

---

Quote:

---

2) Lock everything down for a month...

---

So, no open grocery stores, gas stations, pharmacies, emergicare clinics, doctors offices, hospitals, stop-n-rob'ems, restaurants, fast food joints, feed stores, veterinary clinics, DPS, jails, law offices, police stations, fire stations, bonding agencies, banks, permit offices, hardware stores, clothing stores, <gasp> beer joints?

---

Some would say that. If the only way to stop it is true quarantine, nearly all of the things you mention would shut down.

Not saying I think it's necessary though...

Sorry you still think Reuters is a reliable..."sources"....K

Bo Darville said:

---

Illuminaggie said:

---

88planoAg said:

---

Drifter. said:

---

Question....Have they figured out if this thing can pass by aerosol transmission? I thought the answer was no, it was just in droplets, but the Infectious disease doctor that was interviewed by Joe Rogan was saying that you could get it just by being in a room with someone breathing.

---

All I've seen is droplets and surfaces.

---

What are we, 4 months into this now and we still don't know so many things about this disease with any real certainty.

The variables seem to change, sometimes fairly significantly, from one week to the next and from one study to the next.

---

It took years to understand HIV

---

That was 40 years ago; our technology and understanding of viruses, especially thanks to genetics, is light years ahead of what it was then.

It also didn't help that HIV is a sneaky ******* compared to most other viruses.

Yes, we're still learning about the Kung Flu virus, but we've learned more about it in 3-4 months than we learned about HIV in the first 3-4 years after it reared its ugly head.

Maybe the mormons and their food storage were on to something.

Quote:

---

As I mentioned a couple pages back, mitigation, not containment, is what we need to focus on. Any sort of quarantines or cancellation isn't about eliminating the virus, it's about limiting the spread enough to allow our hospitals to not be overrun. That means that weeks or months from now after these measures are eased up, the virus will still be here, but the hope is that these measures kept our health care system operating smoothly along the way.

---

Yet it seems the healthy and young are taking the brunt of the mitigation response while its the unhealthy and elderly that are the most negatively effected.

if this thing could spread exponentially the entire nation of China would currently have this virus.
Currently it is around <1% of population. Why does Germany think it would get 70%

https://ncov2019.live/

JP_Losman said:

---

if this thing could spread exponentially the entire nation of China would currently have this virus.
Currently it is around <1% of population. Why does Germany think it would get 70%

---

You think China is telling the truth?

Bless your heart.