Dr. Anthony Fauci Says Staying Closed For Too Long Could Cause 'Irreparable Damage' (cnbc.com) 275
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: Stay-at-home orders intended to curb the spread of the coronavirus could end up causing "irreparable damage" if imposed for too long, White House health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci told CNBC on Friday. "I don't want people to think that any of us feel that staying locked down for a prolonged period of time is the way to go," Fauci said during an interview with CNBC's Meg Tirrell on "Halftime Report."
He said the U.S. had to institute severe measures because Covid-19 cases were exploding then. "But now is the time, depending upon where you are and what your situation is, to begin to seriously look at reopening the economy, reopening the country to try to get back to some degree of normal." However, Fauci also cautioned states against reducing social distancing measures too quickly, adding they must take "very significant precautions." "In general, I think most of the country is doing it in a prudent way," he said. "There are obviously some situations where people might be jumping over that. I just say please proceed with caution if you're going to do that." In regard to a coronavirus vaccine, Dr. Fauci told NPR that it remains "conceivable" that a vaccine for the deadly pathogen could be available by the end of the year.
He said the U.S. had to institute severe measures because Covid-19 cases were exploding then. "But now is the time, depending upon where you are and what your situation is, to begin to seriously look at reopening the economy, reopening the country to try to get back to some degree of normal." However, Fauci also cautioned states against reducing social distancing measures too quickly, adding they must take "very significant precautions." "In general, I think most of the country is doing it in a prudent way," he said. "There are obviously some situations where people might be jumping over that. I just say please proceed with caution if you're going to do that." In regard to a coronavirus vaccine, Dr. Fauci told NPR that it remains "conceivable" that a vaccine for the deadly pathogen could be available by the end of the year.
sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Given that he is the government's medical expert, any opinion he gives to the media that is not based in medical reasoning can be assumed to be forced on him by his master for political reasons.
I read it differently. "I didn't say that". (Score:5, Insightful)
I read it differently. Note he said "I don't want people to think that any of us ..."
Here's the sequence of events as I've seen it:
Fauci: We need to lock down for a while and ...
Other people: Fauci wants to stay totally locked down forever.
Fauci: I don't want people to think that any of us ...
I read it as him saying "hey, no I'm not saying stay totally locked down forever. I said while cases were rising fairly aggressive were needed, and now we still need to be careful as we re-open."
Yes, sounds like countermessaging the FUD storm (Score:2)
I actually think it's taken too long to get this message out, and the professional rage wranglers have been given far too much of a head start in corralling the emerging currents of frustration and uncertainty into a cohesive repression narrative.
It's already reached the point that wearing masks = admission of fear and weakness, rather than a temporary bandaid to throttle back the spread to manageable levels. There's no going back from here, the ambiguous cover of preparedness will collapse into a clean li
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it's to the point where not wearing the mask is like not wearing the ribbon [youtube.com]
Re: Yes, sounds like countermessaging the FUD stor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The Lock Down Zealots will resist until their end. Then blame everyone else.
Re: (Score:3)
So an alien invasion is more likely than people who got some power were corrupted by said power?
Re: I read it differently. "I didn't say that". (Score:3)
It will undo the flattening. Some states are starting to see increases again, even to the point that ICU beds are again running out.
Why restrict churches and small stores, but allow liquor stores and big-box retailers?
Churches are large social gatherings of people who hug and shake hands, and who sing (pushing viral droplets much further than normal talking). They arenâ(TM)t being singled out; all large gatherings and close contact have been prohibited.
The only big box retailers around here who were allowed to stay open were those who provided groceries or certain other essentials. I
Need to move past just medical (Score:5, Interesting)
Keep in mind that we're not just looking at damage in the sense of covid-19 deaths, but damage to the economy, which makes people's lives worse on average because they no longer have a job/earnings to live on.
In that sense, sadly enough, one needs to balance extra covid-19 deaths against the value such lives have to the economy. Generally each life is worth somewhere between $1M and $25M, depending on which government agency you ask, whether you're looking at self-valuation*, etc...
So if a certain level of isolation in a certain area will save, say, 4 deaths @ $25M each, but cause $1B of losses in the economy, it isn't worth it.
*Which, believe it or not, tends to be lower than the government agency valuations, at least if you go by their actions.
Re:Need to move past just medical (Score:5, Insightful)
The pandemic won't go away soon. A vaccine is likely years off in to the future if developed and tested properly. The quickest vaccine development was for the mumps and it took 4 years. There has never been a vaccine developed for coronavirus.
So (obligatory "not a Trump fan"), how long must we sequester ourselves? One month? Three? A year? Longer?
This thing isn't going away. This is the new normal.
So where do we go from here? We can't stop working forever or for a year or more. What happens when we can get food? What happens when we lose our homes?
Where will it end?
Re: (Score:3)
"There has never been a vaccine developed for coronavirus."
Well, work on that had started back in ~2002-2004 when SARS-COV appeared, things were just not completed as in the end that corona variant was brought under control and didn't spread any further.
SARS-COV-2 is not the same thing, but similar enough, so it is not "work from scratch", we actually have a head start on this one. And we know more about vaccines and the immunte system than we did when the mumps vaccine was developed, tested, and brought t
Re: (Score:2)
Places that got the infections way down can now reopen and keep the virus at bay with contact tracing. If you reopen before you have the capacity to do contact tracing on everyone affected, you are likely to get a second wave, which will force restrictions on the economy for months.
You can do it the Swedish way of course, and have capacity enough in the hospitals. The Swedish consumers are spending 25% less than normal (as of a couple of weeks ago). In comparison, with Denmark still mostly in lockdown at th
Re:Need to move past just medical (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course the whole problem with all of this is that, besides becoming completely polarized by politics, many people are acting like "Lockdown over, virus over!" Crowding into bars, restaurants, stores, beaches, etc. It's supposed to be easing restrictions, not going 100 to 0 to 100 again. The other problem is that I don't see most states re-imposing lockdowns until things are completely out of control. There will just be too much backlash for trying to do it again.
Re: Need to move past just medical (Score:3, Insightful)
People aren't stupid. The majority of people across the board are in favor of opening up carefully with many precautions.
You can't socially distance forever though, CA is already seeing more suicides due to lack of social contact than COVID19 deaths.
Given most people died due to poor implementation of the lockdown policies (lock down all the healthy people but force grandma back to the nursing home while she's sick which is what happened in MI and NY) and the lockdown itself was poorly informed (read up on
Re: (Score:2)
One also needs to balance them against the lives lost because the money was spent elsewhere. Insurance companies, and hospitals, make this trade-off daily. Is one older person who desperately needs a heart transplant, with its expensive followup care, of equal value to a premature infant who needs an ICU for underdeveloped lungs, and who also will need chronic care? Are flu vaccines for everyone worth the time nad money?
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
There is ample money in the government coffers to handle this and take care of people...
Bullshit! [usdebtclock.org]
President Trump doesn't need a pandemic, he's up against Biden. A rock in the street would present a more formidable adversary.
Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass, take a weekend off campus (or out of whatever silly liberal bubble you live in) and realize reality doesn't give a shit about or agree with what you think.
the government ... if only they'd stop with the corporate welfare and concentrate on the important task of getting us through this safely.
Here's an idea: You're responsible for yourself! The Government is not your mommy or your daddy. If you want to be healthy, eat better foods and exercise. If you want mo
Re: Need to move past just medical (Score:2)
*squints at Florida and Georgia death rates*
Right, you let me know when that happens.
Re:sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:4, Insightful)
...any opinion he gives to the media that is not based in medical reasoning can be assumed to be forced on him by his master for political reasons.
That was my first thought too. And given that he focused so strongly on the economy, I still consider it likely. But allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment.
Widespread loss of jobs and incomes - that's a kick in the 'nads to public health, especially in a country without public healthcare. Lots of worry and stress - with an associated increase in cortisol, and a drastic decrease in the social contact that might reduce it. Less time outdoors - Vitamin D levels are low. Lower activity levels, plus poorer diet and overeating - bring on the obesity and the heart problems. Depression - if suicide rates haven't risen, I think it's just a matter of time.
All of these factors, and others, are likely taking a tremendous toll on people's physical and mental health. So if we could trade them for a few isolated outbreaks in a well-controlled and sane move towards normality, it might be for the greater good. Admittedly, given Trump's performance so far, that's a damned big IF.
So Fauci could be saying that at some point the measures to prevent spreading Covid might cause more damage than they prevent. I suspect not though - he's smart enough to know that the country doesn't currently have the wherewithal to manage the transition effectively. But I DO think it's possible that his focus on the economy was code for 'there's no medical justification for this stupid plan'. He may also be thinking that if he doesn't keep his job, his replacement will kiss Trump's ass 24-7 and not give a damn about how many people will die. So no, I'm not ready to condemn Fauci just yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
1. Cinco de Mayo happened on Taco Tuesday, and was brought to us by Corona.
2. Covad-19 is currently, incurable
3. All of us will catch it
4. If one goes to the hospital, that person has a 1 in 16 chance of wearing a body bag
5. I will wait 30 days after the vaccine for covad-19 goes to the gen-pop, then I will do a body count.
Re: (Score:2)
Given how the US is plagued by obesity, it could be a problem to have those people doing even less exercise than usual.
But on the other hand, natural selection.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
has the average American's food intake improved considerably? I'm guessing yes.
You cannot be serious. I'm guessing you don't watch much TV, because the incessant advertising for all the fat-ass favorites is prevalent as ever.
Terms like "contactless delivery", "curb side pickup", "contactless drive-thru", "Grubhub", "Door Dash" and "$6 large pizza" should inform you well that America will not switch their eating habits because of Covid. The market will adapt to support the "new normal" and America will remain fat sedentary fucks at home consuming in their quarantine nests.
Advertising is because people AREN'T eating out (Score:3)
In my admittedly limited experience, the restaurants are running all that advertising, including subway marketing ALL $5 footlongs for weeks, because people are not eating out like they used to. Even with all the delivery options, they just aren't getting as much business.
Meanwhile, I've seen lots of shortages in the grocery stores, such as with yeast, indicating that people are baking a lot more.
So yeah, people's eating habits have changed. Not everybody's, and probably not that much healthier, but it ha
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well... kinda. The knock-on effects of exercise would include better cardiovascular health, lower blood pressure, better weight control and more energy to do more stuff (it sort of feeds on itself). Why do we care? Aside from age what seems to be the biggest factor in whether you'll get sick / die of the Wuhan virus? Being unhealthy! High blood pressure, diabetes, respiratory and cardiovascular problems. 6 months ago I'd see 1-2 peop
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because what he says is nonsense, right? I mean, there's no real downside to staying quarantined forever, as long as the government keeps sending out checks, which can go on indefinitely, since the gvernement can literally print their own money.
Re: (Score:2)
sounds like someone has been force feeding him words to say under threat of firing. The economy is not and should not be his concern, his concern should start and end with providing the medical advise.
His concern for the economy is that of any rational human. When gaps start appearing in basic commodities on our store shelves because the supply chain is fraying apart, reopening with appropriate precautions will save net lives.
An initial lockdown period bought us some valuable time, but prolonged isolation is also a bad idea medically. If our immune systems are not continually challenged by normal human contact, they will atrophy as surely as our quarantine musculature.
Re: (Score:2)
There are mental health issues as well with a lockdown. Saw a survey today (likely biased) that suggests only 12% of people thrive in a WFH environment.
Re: sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:5, Insightful)
And this is why I can't take the left any more seriously than the right.
Foci says "social isolation" and the right screams "OMG my rights!!"
Foci says "but maybe don't overdo it" and the left screams "OMG trump made him say that!!!"
Idiots to the left of me ... idiots to the right ...
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, is it medical advice to recommend doing something that'll keep the hospitals/doctors able to operate? It's not like there's much of anything in our economy that is purely standalone - factories make this stuff, and other factories make the equipment used by factories that make this stuff, and still other factories make the equipment used by the factories that make the equipment that the
Re: (Score:3)
Politics is the art of making choices appear simple, and nothing is simpler between choosing between people who want good things to happen to you and and people who want bad things to happen to you.
So politicians try to frame our thinking with straw men, e.g., people who don't want to reopen immediately want to stay closed *forever*. Or equivalently, people who want to look at opening more businesses don't care how many people die.
The reality is, most people are fooling themselves, trying to make the choic
Re:sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:5, Insightful)
This is global. Ask any development country's chief medical agency, and they'll tell you the same thing. People are horrified to go into hospitals because they're afraid of catching coronavirus. Due to this, most of the prophylactic procedures, and many necessary ones are being left not done.
Here in Finland, our agency has a word for this: "hoitovelka", literally "(medical) treatment debt". This debt is being accumulated very rapidly, and folks like oncologists are sounding the alarms on people not coming to get critical life saving treatments because they fear the coronavirus. This in a country with socialised, nearly free medicine.
It has to be much worse in US where healthcare is largely private and expensive.
Re: (Score:3)
Australia has this thing called "geography" on its side when it comes to isolating. Comparing any connected nations to it on isolation is like comparing any planet in our system to the Sun on thermals.
Re: sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:2)
The US is similarly positioned when compared to most nations; what's our excuse?
Re: (Score:2)
I did understand. That's why I asked the question that I asked. When a single look at a world map makes the falsehood painfully obvious, what other options are there?
It's either malice or stupidity. I prefer to err on side of stupidity. Consider yourself free to admit to malice as a motive instead.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you took a look at the map and comprehended that your position was indefensible to be this blatant in switching topics entirely.
Also, how the fuck is this about Trump? In US, it's a federal system where States are responsible for local healthcare. The only thing that president can do is protect against outside threats, which he did by closing down travel and getting called "racist" for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:2)
Only the federal government had the power to secure the necessary supply chains needed to fill the PPE and testing equipment shortage that hampered early efforts to contain the virus.
Ah. Of course. Individual states aren't allowed to buy PPE or disease testing kits. I forgot that that was in the constitution.
Re: sounds like he is being force fed lines (Score:2)
How about you don't have a bunch of super spreaders from NYC infecting the rest of the country as they fled like rats after a month of Cuomo and DeBlasio telling them to ignore the virus and keep running around because Orange Man Bad, also while keeping the subway running 24/7 and never cleaning it till recently. Oh, and Cuomo completely ignoring CDC guidelines and until April 29th stuffing covid positive patients in unequipped nursing homes and allowing covid positive care workers to interact with their c
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Experts warn [usnews.com] of a surge in suicides.
Cancellations of surgeries [modernhealthcare.com], including orthopedic surgeons (joint replacements).
Cancer screenings [cancerhealth.com] are way down.
Child vaccinations [go.com] are way down.
Given that approximately 150, 000 people are diagnosed [cancer.gov] with cancer every month, and 50,000 die from it every month, a 2+ month delay in cancer screenings alone runs the risk of 300,000 undetected cases of cancer, and up to 100,000 additional cancer deaths. And that's not including suicides, vaccinations, and other complic
Suicides are a wash (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll give you the cancer diagnosis, but you do realize a majority of those in America are discovered too late to do anything because folks don't have reliable access to medical care here, right?
I guess my point is, these are largely excuses to re-open without doing the hard (and expensive) work needed to do it safely.
Re: (Score:2)
You seriously thing NOT WORKING reduces stress? How about not getting the education you've already paid for, but maybe some online classes like all the other ones on the Internet? I'm seriously interested in how you think that works! Especially the job thing. I'd love to know how to pay my bills and feed my family without working. Please do elaborate.
Re: (Score:2)
Overall, the death rate for an unemployed person is 63 percent higher than for someone with a job, according to findings in the journal Social Science & Medicine. [nypost.com] Drinking has gone up, depression is going gangbusters, people are avoiding hospitals and doctors (obviously) for non-Wuhan-related reasons and you can't take your head out of the sand for a 5 second Google search to see what's going on? How hard do you have to work to remain that ignorant?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
reopening carefully makes sense, a doctor talking about economic damage as the reason to reopen does not! especially when he so recently had the opposite view.
Re:People will call extortion, inconsistency. (Score:4, Insightful)
Extended lockdowns are affecting people's mental health. Suicides are up by a 1/3rd. People aren't getting necessary medical care. People aren't getting physicals, medication adjustments, screened for cancer, kids aren't getting vaccinated for things that they are susceptible to. Medical issues that are being deferred are going to be much more severe to deal with than if they had been dealt with right away. People are refusing to go to hospitals for suspected heart attacks. Death rates are increased overall, and they can't all be contributed to the pandemic. Stress kills.
Economic collapse leads to poverty. Poverty leads to people making poor lifestyle choices. Poverty leads to loss of health insurance. Poverty leads to deferred health care as people can't afford deductibles. Poverty leads to deferred dental care. Poverty leads to deferred mental health treatment. Poverty leads to people missing appointments for things like vaccines. Poverty leads to despair. Despair leads to increased alcohol and drug abuse. Despair leads to increased domestic violence. Despair leads to increased suicides. Poverty kills.
I'm quite certain that a doctor is going to be concerned about all of the above issues.
Re: People will call extortion, inconsistency. (Score:2)
lol. Yes, lowest unemployment figures in history and highest market values ever equals the economy going to shit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A doctor with no economic background calling for reopening due to economic reasons and just happens to work for people that want it reopened for economic reasons. hmmm why would anyone suspect a problem here?
No I don't. Fauci since first promoting the lockdown has always had a policy of responsible re-opening. I don't know why the media have perpetuated this "he's for eternal lockdown" garbage, just like the republicans did in the senate inquiry. However he has often attempted to come up with ways of re-opening the economy.
To be clear this is where he is lacking, his ways have often been incredibly impractical in every way so far. But anyone claiming that Fauci is somehow inconsistent or changed his stance is w
Re: (Score:2)
A doctor with no economic background calling for reopening due to economic reasons and just happens to work for people that want it reopened for economic reasons. hmmm why would anyone suspect a problem here? reopening carefully makes sense, a doctor talking about economic damage as the reason to reopen does not! especially when he so recently had the opposite view.
So he's a genius when he cheerleads shutdowns, but a puppet when he says it's time to open up. Sounds like the difference lies within you, not him.
Re:People will call extortion, inconsistency. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd say cut him some slack - if he said it, he probably really does feel this way. And it's not as if he's saying anything earth shattering.
Fauci has been willing to speak bluntly against Trump's talking points in the past; he's in his 70s and already at the pinnacle of his career; and he's far more widely admired than the president. It's doubtful he could have been coerced in any meaningful way. At most, he might have gone a little out of his way to show that he's not completely at loggerheads with the general idea of gradually and carefully opening up the economy.
Re: (Score:2)
To be clear this isn't the first time he's talked about re-opening the economy. I mean he has been actively mocked for the ideas he has put forward in aid of re-opening the economy. So his current stance on it is quite consistent.
The key thing is, states *are* reopening. There's no point promoting an alternative view at this point that won't be listened to. The solution needs to be suited to fit the local context, and that local context is not "no no no go back!", it's "if we're going to go forward then we
Re: (Score:2)
Closed, open, choices, choices (Score:2, Insightful)
Staying closed might damage the economy, but "irreparably"? It's an economy, it doesn't have "injuries". However, while your lungs may 'heal' from a coronavirus infection, you can't exchange oxygen through scar tissue [youtube.com], which is genuinely irreparable in the current state of medicine.
Re: (Score:2)
the people that die from it will not be feeling the same way you do.
As I warned in the past here... causing damage to the economy stands the chance in killing people in other ways. So it will not be good if we save lives in a way that causes them to die in other ways. Here are a couple of "easy" examples. There are more complex one but the morons are just going to drag that conversation into the weeds with ignorance and bullshit.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0... [nytimes.com]
https://www.npr.org/sections/h... [npr.org]
Now, compa
Re: (Score:2)
Demuro [a municipal Judge of Elections] fraudulently stuffed the ballot box by literally standing in a voting booth and voting over and over, as fast as he could, while he thought the coast was clear.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can do it in a single precinct
READ YOUR OWN ARTICLE. Vote by mail had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CRIME.
Absentee ballots [heritage.org] are the largest portion of voter fraud convictions
LOL! The Heritage site shows 210 convictions for "Fraudulent Use Of Absentee Ballots" out of 945 total FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS. What is it you're afraid of again? Christ, your own source shows that voter fraud is very rare and vote by mail fraud is extremely rare.
and many States don't want to do the basics [heritage.org] to ensure a fair and honest vote.
I guess you didn't even read your own source AGAIN. Who do you think you are, rsilvergun? Your Heritage piece simply lists some do’s and don’ts in order to ensure
Re: (Score:2)
Typical. You go from "There's no evidence of an absentee voter fraud" to "Well, 210 convictions isn't that bad!".
I said LynnwoodRooster's *link* doesn't have anything to do with vote by mail - and it doesn't. If you think that's the same as me saying there's no fraud occurring via vote by mail, you're a fucking idiot. Sorry. And guess what? 210 cases over forty years isn't considered "overwhelming" by anyone who can fucking count.
There is overwhelming abuse of absentee voting and most places don't even have enough of them to make a difference in an election. Hell, a lot of places don't even count them unless the total would effect the outcome.
So there's "overwhelming abuse" with vote by mail, and it matters because
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that they're the same person.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, yes they do. Perhaps you could teach LynnwoodRooster how to Google so he can cite sources that actually support his claims.
I didn't say vote by mail fraud doesn't exist, I said the Rooster's source wasn't an example of it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be more concerned about fraud the benefits the GOP. You know, because that's where it actually happens [foxnews.com].
Let's be honest. Most of this crying about voter fraud is just an attempt to push vote suppression efforts, the rest is just projection.
Re:Closed, open, choices, choices (Score:4, Interesting)
>"Staying closed might damage the economy"
Might? MIGHT damage the economy? Wow. Where have you been? We have already lost many TRILLIONS of dollars.
>"but "irreparably"?"
Yes, quite possibly.
>" It's an economy, it doesn't have "injuries""
Please study economics and read history.
>"However, while your lungs may 'heal' from a coronavirus infection, you can't exchange oxygen through scar tissue, which is genuinely irreparable in the current state of medicine."
Yes, and for the small percent of people who are vulnerable to such a severe reaction (those with major pre-existing health conditions), THEY should continue to take aggressive precautions. If they CHOOSE NOT TO, then it is no different than a choice of having unprotected sex, eating too much, smoking, riding a motorcycle, drinking alcohol, rock climbing, being inactive, living in a crowded city, or whatever other risky behavior that comes with being FREE.
Until there is an effective treatment or vaccine, I do support extending work exemptions and continued unemployment benefits and support to those [medically documented] vulnerable people.
Re:Closed, open, choices, choices (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Closed, open, choices, choices (Score:4, Insightful)
The equivalent argument I heard before all this started was "you can't eat money!!"
Yeah, that's a really stupid argument, and one that indicates a deep ignorance of what economics is. Economics isn't about money, it's about stuff, stuff like food, among other things. Money is just a tool to facilitate the exchanges that the economy is really about.
Even I would have agreed with lots of that crap when I was younger, until I realized economic interests are human interests.
Exactly right.
That said, the positioning of the debate as "lives vs economics" is all wrong. We should be looking at "economics vs economics", specifically, what are the economic effects of doing what we need to to limit the spread of the virus until we get a vaccine vs what are the economic effects of widespread death. Even if the fatality rate is only 0.1%, letting it infect everyone in the US will mean more deaths than all of the US wars except the civil war combined. And that number ignores what would happen if (a) the healthcare system were overwhelmed, which increases the fatality rate by almost two orders of magnitude, and it also ignores the people who recover but are permanently damaged... lungs, hearts, even brains are harmed by the virus. And then there's also the question of what will happen to the economy if it gets bad enough that we have widespread "uncontrolled" shutdowns... meaning people just decide to stay home, and not in a nice, managed "all but essential workers way".
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, and for the small percent of people who are vulnerable to such a severe reaction (those with major pre-existing health conditions)
A significant portion of the deaths were people with no known precondition, so you might not want to rely on that idea with your life. Wear a mask.
Re: (Score:3)
>"A significant portion of the deaths were people with no known precondition"
Of the deaths, very small but perhaps "significant", depending on one's definition. Unfortunate, yes. But when looked at through the lens of the whole population of those infected, it is very, very tiny percent. The overall risk to those without known precondition is probably far less than the regular, combined risks of normal life (like being killed in a car accident, being murdered, falling down stairs, drowning, being str
Re: (Score:2)
yet strongly oppose any law saying adults must.
I feel the same way about pants.
Re: (Score:2)
Freedom is just that- being free to make choices, good and bad. Freedom comes with risk and with it, responsibility.
This argument is invalid here because your foolish actions could literally kill other people. So wear your mask. But yeah I get it, yay freedom!
Re: (Score:2)
>"This argument is invalid here because your foolish actions could literally kill other people."
Wrong. Those who choose not to isolate or protect themselves accept the risk. A river is what it is, a river. It is compelled to exist and to flow, just like we are compelled to work and be social creatures. Choosing to swim in the river brings the hazards. You don't yell at the river, demanding it to change its nature, you, yourself, decide if you want to swim.
It is a shame you don't value your freedom o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"The constitution doesn't give you unlimited freedom, and neither do your states laws."
The Constitution doesn't give freedom and rights at all. Your freedom is natural/God-given. The Constitutions (Fed & State) say that the government cannot create laws that take away those rights, other than the limited powers listed, therein.
Government takes away freedom, it doesn't supply it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"I am not sure a river is a very good analogy."
It probably isn't the best analogy, but I was tired and couldn't think of anything else at the time. :) I still think it mostly works, though. If not, most will at least understand the concept (I hope).
Re: (Score:2)
Significant? Citation and definition needed?
Since preconditions were pretty broad, including things like high blood pressure - which already covers half the population in the US - and age - which covers a large majority of deaths as well.
Re: (Score:3)
If they CHOOSE NOT TO, then it is no different than a choice of having unprotected sex, eating too much, smoking, riding a motorcycle, drinking alcohol, rock climbing, being inactive, living in a crowded city, or whatever other risky behavior that comes with being FREE.
Except that this is a contagious disease, so it's actually completely unlike all of those things in that it can significantly impact other people. Surely, you don't think people should be free to choose to drink alcohol and ride a motorcycle at the same time?
Re: (Score:3)
>"Except that this is a contagious disease, so it's actually completely unlike all of those things"
One that with few exceptions, causes little risk to the overwhelming vast majority and then only danger to those who refuse to protect themselves. In that regard, it is exactly about taking responsibility for yourself to mitigate risk, just like wearing a seat belt.
If you are in a risk group, protect yourself. Nobody is saying you can't... even if you are not in such a group.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"If you have preexisting health conditions, how do you isolate yourself from your coworkers?"
If you choose to work, then wear a mask, and wash hands. As I said before, I do support giving assistance to those with medically-documented, major pre-existing conditions that choose not to work until an effective treatment or vaccine is available.
>"If you live in a nursing home, how do you isolate yourself from the staff?"
The staff isolates from them with universal precautions, and performs testing and adm
Re: (Score:2)
It's an economy, it doesn't have "injuries".
I guess you've never been to Venezuela, or less extreme examples Japan. Yeah I agree it's unlikely that the USA economy will get irreparably damaged, but the reality is yeah you can injure economies, and you can do so fatally as the economic systems in place exist to support a certain economy in a certain state.
Re:Closed, open, choices, choices (Score:4, Insightful)
How about the economic changes that are going to be enforced after covid... the fallout of 9/11 caused more trouble than the event itself did.
We rolled over and let the terrorists win and even patted ourselves on the back doing it! Fauci is not wrong that the damage may become irreparable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know right? I have never seen any professionals get it wrong and have never seen someone who is no expert get it right.
The advice of professionals is definitely valuable, but it hardly makes them the ONLY people you should be listening too. Being professional does not suddenly confer on people the inability to make a mistake, intentionally lie, or become hamstrung by political ends.
Conceivable (Score:2)
Yes, many things are conceivable. It's conceivable that the U.S. could have competent leadership. Is it likely though?
Enjoying the popcorn here (Score:2)
Jail? (Score:2)
What about people in jail. Do they know about the dangers of being locked up?
Why the false choice? (Score:4, Interesting)
Lock down and face economic ruin, or open up and face hundreds of thousands of deaths. (maybe millions). If only there were some other choice, but that's just crazy talk:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
and others
or showing that you can completely screw-up and still recover:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Why does the US have to assume that its too incompetent to do what other wealthy technologically advanced nations are doing.
Lock down (for real) until the case load is down to ~100/day, then you can test / track / quarantine anyone in contact with an infected person. Even if you quarantine 100 people for each detection, with 100/day, that isn't at all crazy. With 25,000/day, its not reasonable.
Media spin. (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny thing is, it's almost exactly what he said on the 13th, that the media blew up into "REOPENING DANGER WILL ROBINSON!"
But now the spin is "DANGER! don't stay locked down forever!"
The correct spin IMO is "We should decide what places can be reopened, and open them."
With maybe a touch of "Here's some criterion to help make that decision."
Sadly, the media wants to hear mindless sound bytes, not "think about what your doing!"
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly, the media wants to hear mindless sound bytes, not "think about what your doing!"
This! I see a lot of comments here saying that he's being inconsistent or coerced. But Fauci has never been for eternal lockdown. However if all you ever heard were his media soundbites you may justifiably have this opinion.
He has in the past proposed some seriously comical methods of re-opening the economy. I enjoyed them, it's a good reminder than people who are experts in one area can look like utter goofs in another.
Doing too much of anything is harmful (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone can say that. The key missing information is, of course, how long is "too long"?
And what is the damage that's "irreparable"? And did he mean more irreparable than the deaths of covid patients?
Furthermore, just as important, was the damage due to the lockdown? Or was it due to the abysmal state of safety nets and health care system of the country? All the while politicians were busy playing games to score points rather than taking care of the people?
Look at the Brits. Almost as soon as the lockdown started in March, the govt banned eviction, required banks to provide interest-free overdrafts, pay business a large portion of wages to their employees, and then frequently the parliament raised questions to the Boris Johnson to address different kinds of gaps for people that even these measures failed to help. As a result, most Brits can safely stay home.
Re: (Score:2)
Fauci is blowing it; lockdowns are for the (Score:2)
Replace Fauci (Score:2, Informative)
Parks, stadiums, sidewalks (Score:2)
Sitting indoors for weeks may cause by itself serious health issues. It is a well known fact. That is why even in prison inmates take one hour outdoor walk every day.
We could see what happens with a human after years indoors by looking at Julia Assange when h
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)