DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk K-9 Consensus CoronaVirus Poll

Poll to show whether easing restrictions:...

Poll on easing restrictions: single choice
	More concerned that easing restrictions will lead to more deaths
	More concerned not easing restrictions will furthur hurt the economy
Votes accepted starting: 04/20/20 05:40 PM You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.

I choose the middle option that is 50/50 of the two.

I'm not overtly concerned about easing restrictions. In fact, I'm all for it.
I'm also worried that it will cause a spike that we may not move rapidly enough to stop.

I agree.

It has to be a series of cautious steps, that can immediately be walked backwards, if necessary.

I think it's too early to ease restrictions. Some more than others. For example, my wife's hospital got permission form the governor to start elective surgeries again. She was at work for over 12 hours today. Most of the cases were Cataracts. Guess who gets that type of surgery?

Also, some states have re-opened beaches. SC is going to do the same. They are also going to be opening salons and barbershops. Fitness centers, etc.

I don't think that is smart.

I am not a medical expert or a scientist. I just think we're opening up ourselves to prolonging the length of the virus and putting more innocent people at risk by not practicing self-discipline.

I do think we can ease restrictions for some businesses to help the economy, but those should be in low-risk areas.

Just my opinions.........

Same

I want actual testing done, especially if people can be ordered back to work like in meat packing. We seem to want to talk to capacity and potential in the WH echo chamber. I want to be open, but not with this artificial rush politically when it is not safe. Test and track. Save lives. Hoping for a vaccine, but this has been a confederacy of dunces as far as judgment, stalling, and just incompetent bungling. I do not want to fix blame, just problems. That starts with testing, but carries with it proof about how mishandled this has been when the documented numbers rise of infection of the contagion. This has been lousy, especially with some of the science-challenged tripe that passes for "briefing."

I think logic would dictate that the odds of such a spike occurring is extremely unlikely. Regardless of the reasons, I think we can all agree that we were behind the curve on this. even with that late start, we managed to get a hold on it that kept us well within the tolerances of our medical capacity.

Now the masses are much more aware and I think too many people equate opening business back up with the masses completely dispensing with all recommended precautions.

We won't know what measures are necessary or the degree of their efficacy until we start loosening up.

Your logic is wrong. There will be a huge spike in the coming months. Period. To deny it is denying all logic and science. I’ve already seen less mask wearing. People are stupid. People are selfish. People are self absorbed and easily deny facts until they get punched in the face by them. There will be much face punching coming to communities all over this country.

Which is ironic, as I am seeing MOST people wearing masks around here. Even at the banks, that have closed their doors to people - only manning the drive thru windows - they are wearing masks.

Gas stations that have drive thru's, those employees inside are wearing masks. The few people I see driving are wearing masks, OR, have them around their neck.

J/C

I see both sides.

There really are no good answers.


I really don't see how sports is going to be played anytime soon.

Say one player contracts, or is even exposed to a person with the virus, wouldn't the whole team need to self quarantine? They practice and play together, plus they played against somebody. Seems that team would be out of action as well.

How do you play games if even 1 team has to sideline for 2 weeks?

We can be hopeful, but there will be no college or pro football this fall.

I just paid off my 2 season tickets. $3500 total. I pay it on the 3 month plan. Just makes it easy on the budget and doesn't cost me any more. Charge it, pay if off.

I'll be honest, I don't want games played, at least where I have to use my tickets, because I probably won't use them.

Nasty escalator rails, germ infested restrooms, 65,000 potential germ carriers hollering and hacking around you. Come on!


$3500 is a good sum of money to near anybody, but my life is worth a hell of a lot more than that. I can give that up pretty easily if need be, though I don't want to give it up. Who likes to toss $3500 down the sewer?


I don't want to but am afraid it is heading to that point.

I have sen people here in SC already getting lax. Walking down the wrong way of the aisle because they can't be bothered to follow the rules. Folks not wearing masks. People congregating. Selfish behavior.

And yeah, I am getting to the point that I am seriously considering laying out the next dude who comes into my space when he isn't wearing a mask.

To clarify..............the last time I was at the grocery store, some big dude w/flip flops, an open shirt, and no mask comes walking down the wrong way in an aisle I was in. I moved to the side to let him pass and he has some stupid grin on his face while saying "Excuse me" in a very sarcastic manner. Kinda like Steven Martin...LOL. It took all I had to not lay him out. Next time might end w/a different outcome. If I go to jail...........so be it.

Essentially teams would have to be tested then fully quarantine all season. Complete lockdown of all players, coaches, and training staff. Each team would have to sequester to a hotel or some such place and only go out for games. Meals would need to be catered. All other outside needs would be provided by outside services with strict guidelines for decontamination. No one in. No one out.
This would have to be league wide.

I don’t see it happening. Hence I don’t see football being played in 2020.

Some people.

All it takes is some people to kill off a lot of people. Entire nursing homes are being wiped out because "some" people can't get with the program.

Yep, just old people who were going to die anyway. Well, you'll feel differently when it is your mother or father, grandmother or grandfather, assuming you loved those people. Most of us do.

And this is just a click. Not directed at anyone.

Were they lying to us then, or are they lying to us now?

My biggest problem with the whole thing of opening up or not opening up is that the goal posts have consistently moved to the point where I'm not even sure there are goal posts any more. If you want to understand the frustration that many of the people feel, those who believe we should open up, this is it. I'm not talking about the AK wielding, flag waving ones at rallies, I'm talking about the otherwise intelligent people who share their opinion that something about this is really really wrong and nobody will tell us what it is.

When stay-at-home orders were first discussed it was to flatten the curve... I didn't do the calculus on it but the area under the flattened curve looked similar to the area under the curve of the spike if we did nothing.. meaning the same number of people would get infected, just over a longer period of time so as not to overwhelm the healthcare system and thus fewer people would die.

We were told that between 200K and 1.4 million people would die and well over 100 million would be infected. We were told that 70-90% of the population needed to be infected before we could feel safe. We currently stand at about 1.4 million infected and 80K dead and the daily infected and death rate has been running at less than half of what it was at its peak... We were told a lot of stuff by the experts that everybody said we should listen to that is now ignored like it never happened.

In actuality, it was only hospitals in a very select few urban areas that EVER go overwhelmed.. the vast majority of the country has had a relatively mild caseload compared to what we were told to expect.. curves have been flattened over most of the country for a while.. and now we are told, wait a minute, that's not good enough, we've moved the goal posts.

You have sacrificed your jobs, your businesses, your graduations, your retirement funds for 10+ weeks instead of 2 or 3.. but that's not good enough, we've moved the goal posts.

Sorry Arkansas, Idaho, Utah, Maine, West Virginia, Vermont, North Dakota, South Dakota, Hawaii, Montana, Alaska, and Wyoming with your grand total of 527 deaths and your steady rate of about 10 new deaths per day, that's not good enough, we've moved the goal posts again.. if you want to go back to work it's surely because you want to kill my grandmother in New York...

Now we have governor Newsom saying that California won't completely open up until there is a vaccine... that was never part of the deal, nobody said in the beginning that we would all be stuck at home until they developed a vaccine.... they've moved the goal posts again...

Every time there is a small outbreak as a result of some gathering or at some essential business they point to it and say "SEE, SEE... look at those morons, people are still getting infected so we can't open up"... getting to ZERO new infections was NEVER used a reason why we needed to shut down, they have moved the goal posts again.

Some people feel that those who want to get out are being ridiculously irresponsible... I believe those of us who have tried our best to comply and have sacrificed a lot to achieve a goal that is constantly changing and can't be defined have been incredibly patient.... so far.

I think the goal posts will change when we are faced w/a pandemic that none of us have experienced before. We don't have all the answers. How could we. This stupid blame game upsets me. I will continue to try and do the right thing because for me it is pretty simple. The well-being of others is more important than my wants and desires. Suck it up and sacrifice a bit for the greater good.

They weren't. I don't think Dr. Fauchi, Dr. Acton, or the various governors and their medical teams thought Americans would initially take well to social distancing.

The public narrative changed once the WSJ Editorial Board let out the "the cure is worse than the disease" anti-science pro-business hack job. President Trump saw it and then he started off on it. Shortly after this the protests started which then leads me to your next point.



This is due to a lack of science literacy, viruses being incredibly odd and complex pieces of matter, and people more willing to yell and scream rather than seeking to trust and understand the experts.

Anytime the experts would try and talk, they'd be gagged or immediately downplayed with some snake oil cure (Chloroquine for example...).



Flatten the curve was part of it, and the other part was to lower with R0 which is known as the rate of transmission. You want the R0 to be less than 1 as it would lower the transmission rate and effectively die out. A 1 one would one other person would get it, and so on with the chain. Most experts think that if left to its own devices, covid could be as high as 4 which means lots and lots of people will get it.

More on R0 and why it's important



Well, when our national briefing turns into campaign rallies, not allowing experts to speak unless given prior approval, half-baked conspiracy theories about the origin...why do you think there's been the messaging there is? There's good information to be found out there if you know who to turn to.

PM me if you want to know where I've been sourcing a lot of this from.



The problem is how easily this virus transmits, the time it takes for symptoms to show, and the large possibility that people transmit this before even showing symptoms.

Once again, this could've all been explained if our national messaging actually stuck to science rather than nonsense about politics.

Most viruses are either highly deadly and not so transmissible, or highly transmissible and not so deadly. This one is rare in that it's highly transmissible and the mortality rate seems to be anywhere between .9%-3%.

The true mortality rate can only be determined by wide-spread testing, and right now that's not a priority in our country.



Your falling into the trap the anti-science messaging wants you to fall into. Look at the hard scientific data behind this virus and you'll understand why information is the way it is.



I'll speak to my experience as an Alaska transplant from Ohio on this one.

A third of the population of the state, roughly 350,000 or so, live in Anchorage. The second biggest population center is Fairbanks. The next few biggest cities are Wasilla, Palmer, Juneau, Seward, etc. We're incredibly spread out, double the size of Texas, and our population density is the lowest in the entire nation. We've talked and I know that you understand the remoteness of this place, so I know you understand why our numbers have been low.

Our governor has also followed DeWine's playbook, and it's paid off for us. We're now under 40 active cases, and over 300+ have recovered.



No one knew how this transmitted at the start. No one knew how contagious this would be.

This is a once in a hundred years type event. There was a playbook and a team formed a few years back to help in an instance like this, but it was cut for some reason or another. Don't blame me on that. I didn't make that decision.



I don't. I understand completely what you're feeling.

I don't fault you at all, either. The national messaging on this has been atrocious. If we would let the experts actually talk, explain, and educate we would all be in a better place.

A nation should educate and calm its populace.

Neither. The initial numbers were based on having no restrictions. Those numbers were drastically reduced when quarantines and social distancing guidelines were put in place.

Now that they are relaxing those guidelines without meeting the minimum criteria set for doing so those projections are rising again.

People need to decide how many people they are willing to sacrifice because the number of corpses will certainly be dictated by our actions.

Just making sure this coronavirus pole is at least six feet long

More concerned not easing restrictions will furthur hurt the economy!

LOL, the poll is 50/50

20 (50%)
20 (50%)

I only made this poll because round about (had to check, the date or April 20) round about April 15-17 then, I saw several reports including nightly news,
saying 68% of Americans think the Country should stay shut down ...

As I looked on this poll, voting opposing that ^ I figured to be in the huge minority,

Through my looks in this poll, different it's been pretty consistent 55% on the Should stay shut down,

But, This Board? I was guessing I'd be 80%-20% in the minority. Hasn't really been that one sided at any time, yet, anyway.

Do you not understand this board leans right?

Those who lean right are more in the "cure worse than the disease" camp that disregard doctors recomendations.

This board doesn't lean right. Right of you, maybe.

This thread, backed by actual polling of responses, says otherwise.

But there are more than a few people here that claim to be conservative on some issues but take the left side of every single argument that's presented.

I never saw that thread. I just voted, so the numbers might be a bit different.

DC, Rocket, and Pit...

I won't copy each part of your posts, but I will say all 3 of you guys make great points or at least raise a great question.

DC is correct that the goal posts are shifting. One would expect that as more information comes in that we do get a more accurate assessment of what is going on. I also think that most people would also expect for aspects of those goals such as time, to shift with the data in terms of when we expect to achieve them. The goal was to flatten the curve so that infections and treatment would fall within the capabilities of the medical system. That goal was met. That goal made sense to people including myself and that was why with few exceptions, businesses shut down when ordered. They trusted the experts and authorities would be true to their word that it would be temporary. Now the goals are changing. You can't change the terms after the fact and expect people to be happy.

I predicted this unrest waaaay back at the beginning when I asked "What are they going to do when more and more people are not directly impacted by the virus itself, yet you keep telling them they need to keep making such huge sacrifices?"

Rocket... I hope you don't have any co-morbidities involving heart issues when I tell you that I agree with you that the national message on this has been atrocious. I get what Trump has tried to do in terms of trying to be a beacon of hope as it were, but the guy's ego prevents him from properly and appropriately articulating anything with nuance or due caution. He's too busy keeping that ace up his sleeve in his personal combat with the media.

On the other side of that blame is the media. They are one of only a few people with direct access to POTUS and influential experts like Fauci, and they waste sooo much time on BS questions and trying to make press briefings more about themselves instead of being carriers of information.

That relationship between them has become so incestuous its like watching Jamie and Cersei Lannister together... its entertaining to a degree, but ew... can you really trust either?

Should we trust the experts? By default, yes. But you have to also recognize that this isn't a single issue we're dealing with. Maybe it was at first, but by following the recommendations of the health experts, we're now around what, 30 million unemployed? I don't think you'd disagree with me when I say that is not a small problem. We have to remember that someone like Fauci is an expert in epidemiology. Maybe he has a minor in macro- or micro- economics, I don't know. If he's in to public health, he probably at least has a cursory knowledge about negative impacts on health associated with lower socio-economic factors. But he's about the epidemics. When you ask him for a course of action, he's going to give you one guided ONLY by what he is an expert on. His recommendations are essentially going to be based in a vacuum, or maybe more like If I were King for a Day. He'll give you his best answer on how to medically combat the virus, but he's not going to be the one to factor in the cost of doing so. Which is understandable. But that doesn't mean we should be ignorant to that cost.

Pit, you asked how many deaths will we find acceptable. I think that is probably the most important question in all of this. Its cold and maybe even callous, but the concept is not a new consideration. Some of it like the tens of thousands of flu deaths we experience a year are probably a reflection of either a realistic or fatalistic view we have of illness. Some of it is a byproduct of the risks we endure in order to live in a free society.

Let's generously say that because of the shutdowns etc that 1 million people have not died from COVID. The cost of that so far is for every life saved, 30 people have found themselves without work and struggling. Factor in that some of those people have families that depend on that income, let's just say an additional 30 people are effected by the job loss. 60 people experiencing serious hardship for every life saved. Is that an acceptable trade off? Beats me. I'm fortunate enough to be employed and despite my quite large extended family, we haven't experienced COVID. And had we, I'm not so sure much about my concerns would change. After all, does it make more sense to rage about the stupidity of a random protester I saw on TV or should I direct my ire towards a Governor who forced the old folks home to house COVID positive patients?

Making that determination however would be anchor point and allow us to start figuring out what the "new normal" is supposed to look like. Is there a number though? I don't think we've determined at what point flu deaths aren't "acceptable". Or is it like what the Courts said about pornography: you can't describe it but you know it when you see it?


I know some of you guys have this impression that I'm anti-virus. I'm really not. I stand on my little dot in line, and when there is none I do my best to estimate 6ft, I wait patiently for other people to cross my path, I only break the 1 way rule when there's no one on my end of the aisle, I'll wear a mask if someone specifically requests it. I'm not out their coughing on anyone or getting in Vers' personal space although I am curious to know what shampoo who he uses. I don't complain about getting my temp taken at the beginning of every shift, though I find it troubling thermometer speaks its results in Chinese (I'm not kidding!).

My whole, and only problem with any of this has been that the measures that have been forced on people have not been proportional to the problem. Some of you guys may feel these restrictions are necessary and can be like our Governor who tried to tout a poll saying 76% of North Carolinians support the lockdowns. Having worked my area for going on 12 years and experiencing things like traffic patterns, I can tell you that there's way more than 24% of the population running around out there. There's a lot of Do as I say, not as I Do out there.

We had a local news crew interview a handful of people last week who went to a park that was recently opened and they were upset about all the people not social distancing. There were a few glaring problems:

1) They themselves went to, and stayed at a park where they were upset about what other people were or rather weren't doing
2) One guy gets pissy talking about how many people were in close proximity and even groups. Then says "well, I don't know if they were couples or families" which are allowable exceptions
3) Big dude gets on there, clearly upset and I kid you not says "Well, I personally don't wear a mask, but I do think a lot more people out here ought to be wearing one".

In any event, its probably about time for my daily Lysol injection. I do hope everyone here is doing well whether your challenge is medical, financial, or emotional.

I fall in to that boat. I am conservative on fiscal issues, am pro business, but tend to lean center to slightly left on social issues.

Lets put it this way, I would rather cut every senior and every person making under $50,000 a check for $10,000 a year than provide foreign aide.

As a senior who doesn't need the $10,000, I'd give it to the local food bank or Ronald McDonald House, just take the tax credit.

Giving back when you can is a important function of being a human. We all need to give something. We have become a nation of takers.

I'm similar... I'm conservative with most fiscal issues and abortion... but more liberal with many social issues such as gay marriage... I'd suspect many Americans have views on both sides of the isle....

I think you misread my post there. I'm about where you are politically.

My first reaction is, I think there are a ton more people who fall into the category of Senior, and or making less than 50K a year to give them all 10,000 a year and not have 10,000 instantly have very little real value.