bigjoey

I remember being terrified during the Polio epidemic because of the pictures showing children in iron lungs. We did as told because of the fear of ending up in am iron lung?. The swimming pools were closed but we did not complain because we did not want to be confined to those dreaded iron lungs.

I have never said YOU were going to leave the Political Forum. As you well know because we discussed it privately, I was going to leave the Political Forum last October and you talked me into staying until the end of the year. When December 31st came and things had not changed, I departed. That is not a breach of confidentiality because it concerns me directly and your personal accusations against me; I only reveal this as my defense against your personal attacks. As you well know you discussed privately other people who have left and why. I am not disclosing any personal information from those PM’s. Just saying that you discussed the matter is not a breach of confidentiality but just shows “as you well know” was not a fantasy of mine. This is just a defense against your personal attacks. It does not take rocket science to figure out who has left the Political Forum and why.

Sorry, somethings can be beyond redemption. The problem lies not with me but other posters as you well know. As you well know, other posters have left not only the Political Forum but this site due to the stench in the Political Forum. The Political Forum is not an place to honestly exchange ideas and learn from each other. It has become a place to insult, bully, etc. Sorry, but I have a life outside our virtual one and just do not have the time to waste rolling around in the mud.

All activities in life carry risks. We subconsciously calculate risks and act accordingly. I know someone who does not fly in an airplane because he is scared of the risk so he takes a train (which has a risk as well). Young gay men (pre-Covid19) seem to be having a large amount of unprotected sex because they assign the activity as low risk due to drugs. My point is we all do these mental risk calculations as we engage in different activities. All of these activities have the outlier chance of a person dying. That is just part of normal life.

The problem with trying to identify if lockdowns are good or bad is that they cover different populations and were executed differently. For example, NYC’s population is dense and depends highly on public transportation while Kansas City’s population is spread out and there is less reliance on public transport. NY badly executed protections for nursing home residents by mandating they accept Covid19 residents while Florida kept Covid19 residents away and the death rate difference tells the tale. The purpose of lockdowns were to control the flow of patients into the healthcare system by “flattening the curve.” Now that healthcare systems have expanded capacity and are better stocked with PPE, the initial urgency is less. As Dr Fauci has said, at some point, keeping the lockdowns cause “irreparable” harm. There needs to be a balance between keeping the heath care system intake within the system capacity and the emotional, personal health and economic issues that Dr Fauci says will suffer “irreparable” harm. Now just because the lockdowns end, that does not mean that test, trace and isolate does not happen and that precautions are not needed. For example, Falwell’s Liberty University defied the media predictions of infection and death by keeping students on campus; the result was no on campus infections of either students or staff; best practices can be done.

Sorry. Maybe another thought. I started a thread on personal medical factors and Covid19 because while political and social factors are being talked about, personal medical factors are not. The article I read made it clear that we are not all equally at risk due to factors like blood type, genetics, obesity, etc: https://www.livescience.com/amp/why-covid-19-coronavirus-deadly-for-some-people.html Using the factors listed plus a few others like your vitamin D level (not in the article for some reason), general physical condition, you could make an actuarial calculation of your risk beyond age. If you score a low risk for infection or serious results if you do get infected, you might feel more at ease about resuming at least part of your old lifestyle. You would certainly need to be careful like hand washing and avoiding large groups. However, a low risk score could let you have a few select friends over for dinner as a start (if available, an outdoor setting would be best). A low risk score may make you more comfortable in accepting an invitation to a small group dinner or a museum visit (but chose hours that are not normally busy). I hope you get a low score and then start to feel safer in starting to resume your old life.

While the debate continues on lockdowns and political responses to Covid19, there is very little discussion as to the personal factors that affect getting the infection and if so, it’s severity. The link below is a good discussion of the factors why this virus affects some people so lightly they show no symptoms while others end up in an ICU and dying. In addition, it provides links for more information: https://www.livescience.com/amp/why-covid-19-coronavirus-deadly-for-some-people.html This raises a question of what choices we can make to lower our Covid19 risk. While some things like blood type, age and genetics are beyond our control, other things are within our control and we can make changes to lower our risks of infection and death. While there is much talk of physical things to do like hand washing, distancing and reducing unnecessary travel, I have read nothing about medical conditions that are partly under our control. The father of a friend of mine has given up smoking. I have been eating healthier and exercising and I have lost over 15 pounds (while not medically obese I was “a few pounds” too heavy and approaching obesity). People who have diabetes need to be vigilant in keeping it under control. As these medical condition and their relationship to Covid19 becomes clear, a risk profile could be actuarially developed to let people know their risk level and what activities can be taken that have a lower risk for them; a high risk person would need to stay sheltered-in-place while a low risk person could feel more confidence in going grocery shopping (with proper precautions in place).

Unfortunately, we have no choice. Unless herd immunity develops through natural or artificial (vaccine) means, that is our future. Death rates can be lowered by developing medical therapies for those infected and who require hospitalization. As the video shows, much us still not known such as how long after a person recovers is he/she immune (if immune at all). With time, much if this will be known A big unknown is what will happen if the virus mutates. That speculation goes all over the map. TO BE CLEAR: I am not “advocating” herd immunity but just expressing the belief that without natural or artificial herd immunity, the virus will continue its path over time. In the meantime, we can take common sense steps to lower the mortality rate.

Unfortunately, until the history is written, we can only take guesses as to what is happening. The statistics are really just estimates at this point. In different places, the definitions as to “infections” and “deaths” are not only different but change. It will take a historian looking back to sort this all out. This virus is acting in ways not seen before. The large number of asymptotic infections makes true numbers hard to tell and therefore rates of infection and death. Right now, extrapolations are being made to whole populations from limited sample results. Much depends on the accuracy of the sample results, size of the sample, how reflective the sample was of the entire population, etc. To add to the confusion, this data is then fed into models to make predictions and this brings up the whole issue of accuracy of models and how they were constructed. Then layer onto problematic samples and models the changes in the behavior of people from what is learned. For example, NY mandated that people with Covid19 be admitted to nursing home with disastrous results. In Florida, health authorities saw what was happening in Europe and they adopted best practices that kept Covid19 people out of nursing homes and the result was a lower death rate than NY. As they say in show business: “Hold the applause until the end.”

Please keep politics out of this thread. Keep this in the Political Forum. I and others no longer post in that cesspool. It is not worth the time and energy to post in that forum. Sadly, I will not comment.

Not sure why you purposely wrongly state my position. Not the first time you have done that. I am not “promoting” Herd Immunity. At this moment in the US, I can only see this pandemic ending with either artificial or natural herd immunity. As I have noted, I am in favor of test, trace and isolate. But like South Korea, China and Singapore, we will continue get flare ups and the professional opinion is there will be more waves coming with the second wave worse than the first. I am not for having “Covid19 parties” like parents had back when I was small for chicken pox to give their immunity. Yes, I have read of people having “Covid19 parties.” I am not in favor of “promoting” herd immunity as you falsely state. What I am recognizing is the reality of our current situation where the lockdowns can not continue as Dr Fauci has stated because they are causing “irreparable” harm. I am saying there needs to be protection of the vulnerable and common sense rules to slow and/or stop the spread of the infection. At the same time there needs to be test, treat and isolate. We agree with public education. That is a big part of Sweden’s efforts in the pandemic. They are depending on the individuals to act responsibly. Depending on a well behaved public is an interesting concept in a pandemic. Pictures of people failing to social distance are readily available on the internet. While education is necessary in any fight against the pandemic, I would not bet my life on it. As in other subjects, please stop the misrepresentation of my positions. I am “pro-work and anti-death”. We agree on that common goal.

Responses to Covid19 are not black and white; it is not lockdown or completely open. Sweden’s response was guidelines to the general public like ours: hand washing, avoid non-essential travel, distancing, etc. They banned gathering of more than 50. Schools for children over 16 were closed. Bars, cafes, gyms and restaurants were open with distancing rules in place. Where Sweden has admittedly fucked up was in not having greater protections for seniors. Like NY, proper protections for seniors were an afterthought. Sweden’s death rate is a fraction of NY’s death rate even though NY has a much tighter lockdown. Sweden’s deaths were over 80% seniors, especially the elderly-elderly. If Sweden had taken better steps and protected seniors more, their goal of keeping life as “normal” as possible would have been better served. My issue with where we are today is those of us who are in vulnerable groups, with “Covid19 virgin bodies” have no choice but to be extremely careful and mostly shelter-in-place. Countries that have “beat” the virus keep having flare ups like China and Singapore. I have stated that until there is a vaccine which brings “artificial herd immunity” or “ natural herd immunity” our “Covid19 virgin bodies” are in danger. Unless there is a good medical therapy, for those of us who are in vulnerable groups face a high risk of death if infected. If I took my “Covid19 virgin body” to a country that beat the virus like South Korea and went to a gay club, guess what? I would find myself in the middle of a Covid19 flare-up?. (For those who do not follow the news, South Korea just a flare up centered in gay clubs; tracing is hard as many people gave false names to hide their identity). Until there is a safe and effective vaccine, Covid19 is going to be with us for some time like the regular flu’s that come around which kill 30,000-40,000 a year with no hysteria. As I noted, 380,000 seniors die each year from infections in nursing homes with no hysteria. I have cited the Covid19 nursing home statistics for the county where I live. Best practices can keep deaths down. Is it easy? No. But it can be done. Seniors living in long term care communities can be protected. The Johnson County, Kansas statistics show that. Keeping seniors safe from Covid19 and regular infections is very hard work and requires good management and good staff. Just because the task is hard does not mean it shouldn’t be tried. As I have previously stated, this is not either/or. We can do multiple things at once. In previous posts, I have stated that test, trace and isolate should be done. Interestingly enough, for some reason Sweden has not adopted much testing; not sure why. Just because I think a looser lockdown is possible, that does not mean there is not test, trace and isolate program.

I understand your frustration BUT you still have a lot of living to do. Part of the debilitating effects of the pandemic is fear. There are reasonable, prudent risks that can be taken that allow socialization. For example, a friend of mine almost your age is meeting friends for picnics in different parks or in backyards. Sometimes they each bring their own meals. They maintain the proper physical distance. Several friends your age volunteer in a community garden where it is easy to keep separate and do as much or little as they physically can. One friend your age prepares lunch for the volunteers, brings it to the garden and enjoys lunch with them from a distance. Distancing, outdoor clean air and sunshine means a low risk. Volunteer opportunities abound. One friend makes phone calls to other seniors as part of an organized effort to keep them socialized and to see what needs they have; the needs are relayed to different agencies to help provide what is needed. Another friend writes thank you notes for a non-profit to donors. Another (who I think is 81), tutors junior high school childby Zoom. Bottom line, you are healthy and smart and intelligent. You have the freedom to choose your course of action. Look at this pandemic as a time of new adventures and personal growth. You still have a lot of offer and can do so with minimal risk. Growing up, one of my role models was a woman who got her masters degree at age 94. I loved her philosophy of lifetime learning. It told me that no matter what age, limits are often self-imposed. Do not let fear impose unreasonable limits on you. Be smart and safe but live to the fullest possible. Stay well but live life. Chose life.

The failure of senior care facilities like the one in the link is only one illustration of NYC run institutional failures. As you note, it runs across the board. The New York City Housing Authority is considered the country’s largest slum lord. Over 400,000 people live in their apartments. The conditions are famous for lead paint harming children, elevators that do not work, lack of heat or hot water, etc. The failures of the school system are legendary: Children who test years behind their grade level. Lack of supplies. Poor physical plants. The subway system that is third world. A national embarrassment. A system that needs billions in upgrades while capital funds are diverted. A mayor who puts his wife in charge of a mental health system. The result is tens of millions of dollars of spending with no receipts!! Her reward is not only a handsome salary but an appointment to a new commission. It is not for lack of money that these things happen. You are correct in listing many of the causes. Starting with bad management that is deeply entrenched and almost impossible to dislodge. When horror stories appear like the nursing home one in my post, there are the denials and the expressions of“shock,” “shock” as you note. As to our current pandemic, there should be no “shock” at the high number of deaths of seniors in NY nursing homes. Not only the terrible conditions that existed before Covid19 in city run places but the stupidity of mandating that nursing homes take people infected with Covid19?. Like throwing lighted matches into a pile of dry kindling. To bring it back to my point in my post, the deaths in NY are not normal when compared to the rest of the country. I have offered the statistics of the county where I live: about 20,000 seniors living in about 150 long term care facilities, 28 deaths in 7 facilities and half those deaths in a single facility that was poorly managed. Yet, a verbose poster extrapolates the NY death rate over time to the entire country. That extrapolation ignores that NY is not the American normal and it assumes that other places are not continually learning what to do and adopting new best practices. That extrapolation ignores that fortunately most of America has better management of senior facilities and government mandates. (It needs to be added that when the verbose poster wants to show that the Swedish model is bad, he forgets about NY and picks places with lower death rates while forgetting to point out that Sweden’s death rate is a mere fraction of NY’s rate. Picking and choosing when and how to use the NY death rate is a hallmark of the verbose ones style.) Yes, more people will die the more open society becomes as we move away from lockdowns. Each death is its own tragedy. But as Dr Fauci has pointed out, the lockdowns cause “irreparable” harm and those collateral costs need to be balanced with the additional deaths that will occur when the lockdowns are phased out. While those verbose posting praise Dr Fauci when the poster agrees with him, the poster ignores Dr Fauci when the doctor talks about a need for balance. To be clear: I do not know how many more deaths will happen, just that there will be more deaths; bullying me for a specific answer is a strawman argument, a phony argument, an attempt to use emotions to sway readers. Phasing out the lockdowns will lessen the irreparable harm that Dr Fauci mentions but it will come at a cost of more deaths. looking back on this pandemic it is clear what errors happened starting with China, the WHO, our president, governors, mayors, individuals, etc. At this moment, we need to focus on where we are today and how to go forward. Yes, there needs to be test, trace and isolate. Yes, vulnerable people like seniors need to still be sheltered-in-place. Yes, common sense precautions need to be taken. We can not eliminate all risk of more deaths but we can minimize then.

I was surprised as well that their online classes were so large. Apparently, they have been way ahead of larger universities in moving online. I did not realize their size and influence was so large. I guess that just because you do not believe in evolution that does not mean that you can not use advanced technology.

In my post number 34 in this thread, I note the nursing home results where I live as to Covid19 deaths. It should be clear that they are a tiny fraction of the rate in NYC. Why? Because better practices are followed and we have learned from places like NYC. Unfortunately, NY nursing homes have been poorly served by the governor and the mayor and their traditional way of doing business. An idea of why NY nursing homes are death traps: This is important because in the massive word dumps that predict that millions could die, the assumptions are faulty. For example, those predictions assume that as the pandemic progresses, nothing will be learned that lowers deaths and makes a straight line progression; those predictions take NYC’s experience and extend it to places that are better run; those predictions ignore that best practices are known and just need to be followed. While those massive word dumps unfavorably compare Sweden to the writer’s carefully selected countries, he does not compare Sweden to the sovereign state of NY which had a lockdown. Guess why? Sweden with its modified open policy has a death rate that is a mere fraction of NYC’s death rate. The writer uses NY’s death rate to promote fear of what could happen but does not use that death rate when writing how bad Sweden’s policy has been. Careful manipulation of facts to confirm his bias.

Yes. In my post #54 above I linked to a story about Falwell opening Liberty University. Because it is behind a firewall, for those who do not subscribe to The Wall Street Journal, I have a summary of the key points. The “group think media” has buried the story of how best practices can be used. Despite the freak out that Falwell was having students and staff on campus and claims that students were going to die, the results: no infections amoung the students or staff were on campus??. Read my post #54 for more information. Despite massive word dumps to the contrary, we can open up with lowered risk of infection and death. IF best practices are followed in schools, nursing homes, beaches, parks, restaurants, etc., there can be a return to a new normal. I have linked to Dr Fauci saying today that the lockdowns continuing will cause “irreparable”harm. Dr Fauci is endorsing a “balance” between the fact there will be some deaths and that the lockdowns if continued will cause harm as well. While those word dumps continue to praise Dr Fauci, nothing is said that notes his position on “balancing.”

Dr Fauci newest remarks today: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/22/dr-anthony-fauci-says-staying-closed-for-too-long-could-cause-irreparable-damage.html Dr Fauci seems to understand that there is a “balance” between staying closed down to protect lives, especially seniors, and staying closed down too long which can cause collateral damage. I understand him saying we can open smartly and do things right (like Falwell did at Liberty University in my post above) that will minimize (but certainly not eliminate) risk. As things reopen, we will all need to take personal responsibility for both ourselves and each other. We have the freedom to chose how to respond to this crisis. The results in the months to come as things open up will be our legacy. We know what to do to minimize risk and the demands are not hard: wash your hands, do not touch your face, keep physical distance, etc. Certainly, we are capable of the task. Do we have the will to do so?

Yes, that is the way to live. I have personally known people on the Forbes list who lived such understated lives that I was shocked to discover them on the list. No big houses or fancy cars; just regular people who maintained a low profile. Back in college, I lived for two years with one of the nicest, down-to-earth guys you would ever want to meet; his father was a well known surgeon and they lived in a nice house but nothing out of line for a successful doctor; only after college did I discover that his maternal grandfather was number five on the Forbes list?.

@stevenkesslar: If you had bothered to actually read and comprehend what I have posted and articles that I have linked, your questions have been answered. I have quoted statistics. You only see things through the lens of your bias and distortions of reality. No matter what the subject, you only see your side of the argument and the virtue signaling of your self-righteousness has grown tiresome. Your distortions of facts, strawman arguments, cherry-picked statistics, bullying, repetitive postings, lies, etc. do not lend themselves to an honest discussion. You ignore what does not fit your world view. When you are challenged, you simply ignore the challenge when you can not justify your stance. Sorry, I will not engage with you until you change your behavior. My posts are clear. They are fact supported.

Great article on “lockdowns” and “herd immunity”: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/plague-journal-herd-immunity-doidge It explains why we will get a second and third wave of infection. It exposes the dangers of “group think” which seems to be where we are as a society.

Focusing on the macro numbers for the United States or a city like NYC obscure what is happening on a micro level. For example, in a post above, one senior living home out of about 150 in my county accounts for half the fatalities from Covid19; the others managed to have no or minimal deaths because of better management and use of best practices. The Wall Street Journal had a story on one university that did not send its students home after Spring break: The Education of Jerry Falwell Jr. The story is behind a firewall but for non-subscribers a summary: 1-when Jerry Falwell announced that students could return to campus after Spring break or continue the semester on line, 1,200 students returned to campus. 2-media response was hysterical. Daily Beast quoting a doctor “If Liberty University reopens, people will die.” The NY Times headlined “Liberty University Brings Back Its Students, and Coronavirus, too.” Paul Krugman wrote that Mr Falwell “seems to have created his own personal viral hot spot.” Washington Post headlined “An authoritarianism power structure brought coronavirus to Liberty University.” 3-false facts of reports of infections were in the media such as The NY Times and Financial Times which had to be retracted. 4-results at the end of the school year: no infections of students or employees on campus. For students who were online and employees working remotely off campus none had their infections traced back to campus. 5-critics of Falwell’s political and religious convictions allowed bias that to distract them from the question whether Liberty University behaved responsibly. 6-the story tells of what the University did to protect students and that two surprise visits from state health inspectors found no violations. The story details those best practices. As other universities decide what to do, they should look at what was successful, understand why and copy the things that worked. This is not about Falwell’s beliefs on evolution, politics or religion but about what was successful in protecting students and employees. Last I read, the California University system was not going to allow students to resume campus classes in the Fall. This will only add to the collateral damage of the pandemic by harming the education of tens of thousands of young people. This is the result of the pandemic of fear the media is spreading. People can have a “normal” life but like Falwell’s campus, it needs to be done smartly. Like the well managed senior facilities, there do not have to be fatalities. Unfortunately, people do stupid things and some will not follow best practices; their lives will be shorter and tragically they will kill others; think: drunk drivers who kill thousands of people besides themselves. Society often cleans up the messes made by people making bad choices. By the way, the Falwell story’s happy ending has so far not produced any mea culpas from The NY Times, Paul Krugman and the other wrong prophets of death and doom. There were retractions of wrong facts like reports of infected students but no stories from those sources of being wrong in their predictions. The story about how Liberty University was treated in the media is an illustration of media hysteria generating a pandemic of fear rather than focusing on best practices that need to be adopted. The Wall Street Journal story ends: “In a part of his early statements on Liberty’s reopening that received almost no attention, Mr. Falwell said in its handling of coronavirus Liberty would prove a ‘model’ for others. Would it kill the critics so quick to paint Mr. Falwell as the Grim Reaper to acknowledge, if only in the name of science, Liberty’s experience might have something to teach them?”

I think there is much to that: the Boomer’s fear of death is driving their responses. After thinking about that, another factor may be that Boomers (and younger people) are more secular than previous generations. Just my general observation (but I welcome someone posting research) is that deeply religious people are more accepting of death and human mortality than non-believers.

Today’s Wall Street Journal has a story focused on nursing homes and how to prepare them for the second and third Covid19 waves that are expected: https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/prepare-nursing-homes-for-the-next-coronavirus-wave-11589927449 This is behind a firewall and for those who do not have access some key points: 1-while nursing home residents make up less than 1% of the US population, they count for about half the Covid19 deaths (some states are more like Minnesota 81%, Pennsylvania 77%). 2-shutting down the economy did not prevent these deaths as nursing home residents were already pretty much staying “home”. 3-while the focus on the pandemic was hospital/ICU centered, states and the federal governments (like they did in Sweden),pretty much ignored nursing homes (the article gives examples) until it was too late. 4-even in normal times, the CDC says 380,000 residents of long term care facilities die each year from infections. Lax standards are all too normal (the article gives examples). That 1% of the population has 380,000 deaths from preventable infections puts the Covid19 pandemic in perspective when shutting down the entire economy. 5-in total, it seems that about 51-53% of Covid19 deaths are nursing home residents. It becomes clear that the complete shutdown which has physical, emotional, educational and economic collateral damage was not necessary. A common sense approach closing crowded venues, emphasizing hand washing, physical distancing, etc while more rigorous infection control at long term care facilities would have cut the death toll substantially. Think about it a moment: the CDC gives the statistic that infections in long term care facilities due to lax standards kill 380,000 residents each year. Where is the outcry and hysteria over this yearly total? This is a huge scandal but the media which is creating a pandemic of fear ignores these 380,000 preventable deaths.

Yes, vets have problems that differ from the population at large and solutions to help require unique responses. While we talk in universal terms and the statistics give are macro ones covering the entire population, solutions are often at the micro level.