Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

[Slot Machine]

If you'd like to shut down a store that sells only those things go for it. But I don't know the last time I've driven by a caviar store, because I never have.

You're not going to shut down 3 aisles in a grocery store. FFS man your entire premise started that WWE was essential and you've gone to this. I mean it's common sense.

I never said the WWE was essential.I asked what defines essential using the WWE which has been a source of some level of normalcy for many people during this as an example. I then brought up things like assuring kraft macaroni can keep getting their blue dye for their box because heaven forbid consumers get confused by the product on the shelf and then I brought up that things like high end groceries that sell high end specialty products and liquor stores are both open and essential in most markets.

Instead of engaging in a topic that I think would be interesting as what is essential is different in each state and in every country, you've turned this into who's profiting off the WWE as if the WWE specifically was ever important in the discussion. At some point mental health does matter and entertainment is a part of protecting society's mental health, if that's WWE or not is really non consequential.

Literally you 2 pages ago:

It's not essential? And one of them already tested positive. In what world is WWE essential.

I'm even a fan but there's no real way to argue its an essential business.

Just to play devils advocate as I don't think I believe this. Is having entertainment that keeps people happy and more at peace while staying at home not a pretty valuable service? My company makes inks and pigments that go into all kinds of manufactured goods. We're essential...does it really matter if your box of kraft mac and cheese be the normal color blue right now?

There are other ways to entertain yourself. This isn't complicated. Frankly if people think this this is a bigger issue in why and how this thing gets worse. "Hey I need entertainment, I need X".

No, no you don't. Watch a replay on TV. Spend time with family in your house. Take a walk, bike, lift weights, whatever. Life existed before WWE too.

For someone who enjoys talking down on people as much as you do, you should probably learn what "devil's advocate" and "I don't think I believe this" mean.

It's obvious the other individual was trying to discuss the nuances of weighing individual risk versus society benefit. He wasn't saying that entertainment (in this case, WWE) is more important than social distancing or being safe.

[NBAFan93]

They overreact with people potentially catching the virus at an outdoor sporting event or any activity outdoors. The issue is indoor places where fresh air doesn't come in and the bad air can't escape. I can understand being at an indoor basketball or an indoor hockey game when your indoors. But Football, baseball, golf and tennis are played outdoors where fresh air is always available and any bad air goes up into the sky away from people possibly being infected. The only indoor area at an outdoor sporting event is the restrooms but we can still social distance in the restrooms if need be.

But we do need to get the economy/country back up and try to get as many things back to normal. Things like dining in at a restaurant that should come back right now. But large gatherings shouldn't comeback yet. I think Gym's can re-open like LA fitness that I go to. It would be great to get LA fitness back and compete with people on the basketball court. I need to get back LA fitness, bodysurfing, dining in at restaurant, sporting events.

Really really bad idea. Gyms are cesspools. You can always get exercise from home or you know...going outdoors.

Gyms like L.A. Fitness are giant scams & should be banned permanently.

Use this time instead to go outside & soak up the sun. Enjoy nature. You'll thank me.

Gyms are mostly filled w/ healthy people though. I could see the argument that they are way less of a risk to open than other things - for ex. church services or visitations at nursing homes.

And gyms are only a scam if you don’t use them.

If you live with a high risk person, of course don’t go cause you could catch it and bring it home. At some point people are just going to have to be responsible for being smart about this stuff if we ever want to get back to normal. These blanket policies of nothing is allowed by anyone ever no matter what aren’t sustainable long term.

A young healthy person who lives alone or w/ other young healthy people going to the gym probably provides a lot more benefits than the risk it creates. Especially if you set capacity limits and disinfect equipment regularly like many gyms already do.

[bondom34]

I never said the WWE was essential.I asked what defines essential using the WWE which has been a source of some level of normalcy for many people during this as an example. I then brought up things like assuring kraft macaroni can keep getting their blue dye for their box because heaven forbid consumers get confused by the product on the shelf and then I brought up that things like high end groceries that sell high end specialty products and liquor stores are both open and essential in most markets.

Instead of engaging in a topic that I think would be interesting as what is essential is different in each state and in every country, you've turned this into who's profiting off the WWE as if the WWE specifically was ever important in the discussion. At some point mental health does matter and entertainment is a part of protecting society's mental health, if that's WWE or not is really non consequential.

Literally you 2 pages ago:

Just to play devils advocate as I don't think I believe this. Is having entertainment that keeps people happy and more at peace while staying at home not a pretty valuable service? My company makes inks and pigments that go into all kinds of manufactured goods. We're essential...does it really matter if your box of kraft mac and cheese be the normal color blue right now?

There are other ways to entertain yourself. This isn't complicated. Frankly if people think this this is a bigger issue in why and how this thing gets worse. "Hey I need entertainment, I need X".

No, no you don't. Watch a replay on TV. Spend time with family in your house. Take a walk, bike, lift weights, whatever. Life existed before WWE too.

For someone who enjoys talking down on people as much as you do, you should probably learn what "devil's advocate" and "I don't think I believe this" mean.

It's obvious the other individual was trying to discuss the nuances of weighing individual risk versus society benefit. He wasn't saying that entertainment (in this case, WWE) is more important than social distancing or being safe.

I don't enjoy it. Frankly I know he's smarter than that which is why it was so damn frustrating.

You know when you say something that's a joke (because WWE being essential is a joke) and someone just runs with it to a point where it's just infuriating? Yeah, that's what was going on.

Because there are people who believe these things. And if your entire premise is "well just to play devil's advocate" during a pandemic then cool. But hey maybe this is a real thing and not something to be foolish about. There's a big gap between devil's advocate and going on about it to try to sound smart. You don't, and you sound like you're trying to say its essential.

If you want to discuss nuances cool, then go for it. But that's not at all what I or anyone in that conversation mentioned, and if you're going to accuse someone of talking down on another person I'd also suggest you think about how ludicrous the claims were. Devils advocate doesn't go from "I don't think I believe this" to "what about these specific foods". You can just own it was a sort of bad claim .

But apologies for taking a pandemic seriously, I mean gosh what a thing to do.

[Slava]

Wow, something so simple could've saved more lives.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-prone-positioning/index.html

Read on Twitter

These nerds must have never took care of a friend who got black out drunk.

[Cactus Jack]

Gyms are mostly filled w/ healthy people though. I could see the argument that they are way less of a risk to open than other things - for ex. church services or visitations at nursing homes.

And gyms are only a scam if you don’t use them.

If you live with a high risk person, of course don’t go cause you could catch it and bring it home. At some point people are just going to have to be responsible for being smart about this stuff if we ever want to get back to normal. These blanket policies of nothing is allowed by anyone ever no matter what aren’t sustainable long term.

A young healthy person who lives alone or w/ other young healthy people going to the gym probably provides a lot more benefits than the risk it creates. Especially if you set capacity limits and disinfect equipment regularly like many gyms already do.

I hate to do this, but things won't ever go back to being the "normal" that you mention. We are truly living in a new age. For the better. It's those that can't accept this reality that are having the most trouble. But as a society we will adapt. In the same way we looked at travel post 9/11. The worst possible outcome would be to attempt "normal".

The one great positive to this lock-down will be who/what people prioritize (i.e. Gyms).

[dhsilv2]

They overreact with people potentially catching the virus at an outdoor sporting event or any activity outdoors. The issue is indoor places where fresh air doesn't come in and the bad air can't escape. I can understand being at an indoor basketball or an indoor hockey game when your indoors. But Football, baseball, golf and tennis are played outdoors where fresh air is always available and any bad air goes up into the sky away from people possibly being infected. The only indoor area at an outdoor sporting event is the restrooms but we can still social distance in the restrooms if need be.

But we do need to get the economy/country back up and try to get as many things back to normal. Things like dining in at a restaurant that should come back right now. But large gatherings shouldn't comeback yet. I think Gym's can re-open like LA fitness that I go to. It would be great to get LA fitness back and compete with people on the basketball court. I need to get back LA fitness, bodysurfing, dining in at restaurant, sporting events.

Really really bad idea. Gyms are cesspools. You can always get exercise from home or you know...going outdoors.

Gyms like L.A. Fitness are giant scams & should be banned permanently.

Use this time instead to go outside & soak up the sun. Enjoy nature. You'll thank me.

Gyms are mostly filled w/ healthy people though. I could see the argument that they are way less of a risk to open than other things - for ex. church services or visitations at nursing homes.

And gyms are only a scam if you don’t use them.

If you live with a high risk person, of course don’t go cause you could catch it and bring it home. At some point people are just going to have to be responsible for being smart about this stuff if we ever want to get back to normal. These blanket policies of nothing is allowed by anyone ever no matter what aren’t sustainable long term.

A young healthy person who lives alone or w/ other young healthy people going to the gym probably provides a lot more benefits than the risk it creates. Especially if you set capacity limits and disinfect equipment regularly like many gyms already do.

It does depend on the gym, oddly one of the gyms I went to with the largest number of serious athletes also had an extremely significant older age group of people who attended.

You're certainly right here in about 4 weeks, we'll have to start a plan of action on how to open things back up. I'm not sure gyms should be near the top of that list. I'm not sure they aren't either, but it's a challenge as those places seem like they were built to spread germs.

[NBAFan93]

Gyms are mostly filled w/ healthy people though. I could see the argument that they are way less of a risk to open than other things - for ex. church services or visitations at nursing homes.

And gyms are only a scam if you don’t use them.

If you live with a high risk person, of course don’t go cause you could catch it and bring it home. At some point people are just going to have to be responsible for being smart about this stuff if we ever want to get back to normal. These blanket policies of nothing is allowed by anyone ever no matter what aren’t sustainable long term.

A young healthy person who lives alone or w/ other young healthy people going to the gym probably provides a lot more benefits than the risk it creates. Especially if you set capacity limits and disinfect equipment regularly like many gyms already do.

I hate to do this, but things won't ever go back to being the "normal" that you mention. We are truly living in a new age. For the better. It's those that can't accept this reality that are having the most trouble. But as a society we will adapt. In the same way we looked at travel post 9/11. The worst possible outcome would be to attempt "normal".

The one great positive to this lock-down will be who/what people prioritize (i.e. Gyms).

Forms of public congregation that are at most at risk if social distancing becomes a new normal:

Sporting events
Concerts
Clubs
Church Services
Public transpiration - subways, buses, airplanes
Amusement parks

At least at a gym the 6 foot social distancing protocol is possible - the list above it’s just not feasible. The concepts of crowded busses and subways taking people to work during rush hour, and a completely full airplane flying from city to city could really be at risk if what you say is true.

I’m not sure society will be willing to give those things up - I think eventually people will just assume/take responsibility for a certain amount of risk and we will get back to how things were. Maybe not though - time will tell.

[dhsilv2]

Gyms are mostly filled w/ healthy people though. I could see the argument that they are way less of a risk to open than other things - for ex. church services or visitations at nursing homes.

And gyms are only a scam if you don’t use them.

If you live with a high risk person, of course don’t go cause you could catch it and bring it home. At some point people are just going to have to be responsible for being smart about this stuff if we ever want to get back to normal. These blanket policies of nothing is allowed by anyone ever no matter what aren’t sustainable long term.

A young healthy person who lives alone or w/ other young healthy people going to the gym probably provides a lot more benefits than the risk it creates. Especially if you set capacity limits and disinfect equipment regularly like many gyms already do.

I hate to do this, but things won't ever go back to being the "normal" that you mention. We are truly living in a new age. For the better. It's those that can't accept this reality that are having the most trouble. But as a society we will adapt. In the same way we looked at travel post 9/11. The worst possible outcome would be to attempt "normal".

The one great positive to this lock-down will be who/what people prioritize (i.e. Gyms).

Forms of public congregation that are at most at risk if social distancing becomes a new normal:

Sporting events
Concerts
Clubs
Church Services
Public transpiration - subways, buses, airplanes
Amusement parks

At least at a gym the 6 foot social distancing protocol is possible - the list above it’s just not feasible. The concepts of crowded busses and subways taking people to work during rush hour, and a completely full airplane flying from city to city could really be at risk if what you say is true.

I’m not sure society will be willing to give those things up - I think eventually people will just assume/take responsibility for a certain amount of risk we will get back to how things were. Maybe not though - time will tell.

I've been in very few gym were 6 foot social distancing is sustainable. I've been in some....but those are not the norm and with so many people working at home still, I expect the volume of those going to gyms would spike.

Also movie theaters have to be a high high risk place as well. Same with restaurants.

[NBAFan93]

I hate to do this, but things won't ever go back to being the "normal" that you mention. We are truly living in a new age. For the better. It's those that can't accept this reality that are having the most trouble. But as a society we will adapt. In the same way we looked at travel post 9/11. The worst possible outcome would be to attempt "normal".

The one great positive to this lock-down will be who/what people prioritize (i.e. Gyms).

Forms of public congregation that are at most at risk if social distancing becomes a new normal:

Sporting events
Concerts
Clubs
Church Services
Public transpiration - subways, buses, airplanes
Amusement parks

At least at a gym the 6 foot social distancing protocol is possible - the list above it’s just not feasible. The concepts of crowded busses and subways taking people to work during rush hour, and a completely full airplane flying from city to city could really be at risk if what you say is true.

I’m not sure society will be willing to give those things up - I think eventually people will just assume/take responsibility for a certain amount of risk we will get back to how things were. Maybe not though - time will tell.

I've been in very few gym were 6 foot social distancing is sustainable. I've been in some....but those are not the norm and with so many people working at home still, I expect the volume of those going to gyms would spike.

Also movie theaters have to be a high high risk place as well. Same with restaurants.

I still feel that generally people who are taking the effort to go to a gym to do relatively vigorous exercise in public are the set of people who are at least risk for COVID death. I mean even if you are a healthy person who feels sick, you skip the gym. I can see an argument where the droves of shoppers all at Walmart and grocery stores are creating more risk w/ their hands all over those carts and shelves, all going through the same checkout lines, etc. A lot of those people aren’t what you’d call the healthiest either cause everyone needs to do it.

Maybe something like a temperature checks at the doors, kind of like security scans at the airports, would help to get tings started up. You’re not 98.6, you can’t go in. Sounds draconian, but I saw a video of some police forcibly dragging a man off a bus yesterday for not having a mask on. It seems the constitution is “just a suggestion” at this point already. I don’t mean just for gyms or grocery stores, but any of the large gathering types of places/events.

[dhsilv2]

I still feel that generally people who are taking the effort to go to a gym to do relatively vigorous exercise in public are the set of people who are at least risk for COVID death. I mean even if you are a healthy person who feels sick, you skip the gym. I can see an argument where the droves of shoppers all at Walmart and grocery stores are creating more risk w/ their hands all over those carts and shelves, all going through the same checkout lines, etc. A lot of those people aren’t what you’d call the healthiest either cause everyone needs to do it.

Maybe something like a temperature checks at the doors, kind of like security scans at the airports, would help to get tings started up. You’re not 98.6, you can’t go in. Sounds draconian, but I saw a video of some police forcibly dragging a man off a bus yesterday for not having a mask on. It seems the constitution is “just a suggestion” at this point already.

I mean regular gym goers do tend to be younger but they also contain a LOT of elderly as well, especially during the day. And what I think you're also describing is a group of people who will likely be a symptomatic if they have it which is all the worse.

Plus again, fat people like me would LOVE to hit the gym while doing all this working at home. For once I have the time and energy to do it and I'm stuck here on my butt. Now I'm not exactly old or outside of being a fat butt, I'm pretty low risk, but none the less there are a lot of people who wouldn't normally go to the gym who would line up right now.

All that sweat, the steam rooms, the pools, locker rooms...and some gyms are these nice huge open layouts, but the bulk of gyms I've been in over the years are crammed as hell, with little space, more equipment than you can imagine just shoved together. I mean I've got an Any Time Fitness memebership, nice place, but if that place is full, it's like being in a closet. Great for some people like me who tend to workout at 10pm-mid night when they make it, but for the 99% who don't do that, that's a place you can't be 3 feet away from someone.

[madmaxmedia]

Gyms are mostly filled w/ healthy people though. I could see the argument that they are way less of a risk to open than other things - for ex. church services or visitations at nursing homes.

And gyms are only a scam if you don’t use them.

If you live with a high risk person, of course don’t go cause you could catch it and bring it home. At some point people are just going to have to be responsible for being smart about this stuff if we ever want to get back to normal. These blanket policies of nothing is allowed by anyone ever no matter what aren’t sustainable long term.

A young healthy person who lives alone or w/ other young healthy people going to the gym probably provides a lot more benefits than the risk it creates. Especially if you set capacity limits and disinfect equipment regularly like many gyms already do.

I hate to do this, but things won't ever go back to being the "normal" that you mention. We are truly living in a new age. For the better. It's those that can't accept this reality that are having the most trouble. But as a society we will adapt. In the same way we looked at travel post 9/11. The worst possible outcome would be to attempt "normal".

The one great positive to this lock-down will be who/what people prioritize (i.e. Gyms).

Forms of public congregation that are at most at risk if social distancing becomes a new normal:

Sporting events
Concerts
Clubs
Church Services
Public transpiration - subways, buses, airplanes
Amusement parks

At least at a gym the 6 foot social distancing protocol is possible - the list above it’s just not feasible. The concepts of crowded busses and subways taking people to work during rush hour, and a completely full airplane flying from city to city could really be at risk if what you say is true.

I’m not sure society will be willing to give those things up - I think eventually people will just assume/take responsibility for a certain amount of risk and we will get back to how things were. Maybe not though - time will tell.

How about even pickup basketball? Maybe it will become pickup HORSE for awhile...

[karkinos]

Wow, something so simple could've saved more lives.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-prone-positioning/index.html

Read on Twitter

Some of these articles are giving me the impression that medical doctors are trying to figure things out on the fly and don’t know what they are doing as they treat these patients. Really scary **** honestly.

Saw a stat that 80% of patients put on ventilators for COVID-19 eventually die - followed up later w/ article “are doctors using ventilators wrong?” - goodness gracious.

your gut feeling is correct. unfortunately covid does not mimic respiratory infections that they are used to treating. yes, new strategies have been developed over the past 3 weeks and currently has shifted towards avoiding intubation if possible using high flow nasal cannula. if you asked what they were doing 3 weeks ago, they were intubating patients much earlier and realizing that they could not get them off of the ventilator. why didn't they use high flow nasal cannula or other strategies to avoid intubation in the first place? 1. ct imaging looked like ARDS (not exactly the same, but they shared some overlapping features) so they were presuming there would be inevitable respiratory failure and it's always better to intubate while they are stable. unfortunately they realized they were having trouble taking them off the ventilator, and the ventilator techniques that worked in the past were not working for these patients 2. non-invasive ventilation has risk of aerosolization, and still does, but currently that is a better alternative than intubating early. there is a lot of research into how to modify the devices to minimize aerosolization. whoever can do that will make a lot of money.

[basketballRob]

Delete. Wrong data

[Bottomsouth]

What models are you referring to? Kids absolutely are affected by the virus, they just experience much milder symptoms generally. They are still carriers and, if school were to reopen now, would spread infection to faculty and family, essentially negating a large portion of the effects of social distancing we've already accomplished.

It seems like there are people who want to do a 2 steps forward, 1-2 steps back approach to social distancing/quarantine. We are doing a good job right now. It took too long to get here though and I don't want to go back and have to start over while another round of this peaks.

What science are you referring to? That’s all I asked.

We’re referring to virtually all known studies of virology.

Early testing was skewed because it’s based only on testing in clinics/hospitals. Younger people are generally affected less seriously than older people so they go to the hospital less, so there ends up being little to no testing done on young people. Since then, several people under the age of 10 have died from this, proving it affects young people. Hard numbers = science.

That was not the question I asked.

Weird.

[Bottomsouth]

What models are you referring to? Kids absolutely are affected by the virus, they just experience much milder symptoms generally. They are still carriers and, if school were to reopen now, would spread infection to faculty and family, essentially negating a large portion of the effects of social distancing we've already accomplished.

It seems like there are people who want to do a 2 steps forward, 1-2 steps back approach to social distancing/quarantine. We are doing a good job right now. It took too long to get here though and I don't want to go back and have to start over while another round of this peaks.

This is the old election polling issue we can't seem to EVER get past. So and so leads so and so by 3 points in the poll. At the bottom of the screen (hopefully it's there) it states there is a margin of error of +/-5. So news person says that someone is leading in the poll (technically true) and the idiot hearing this thinks that the poll says so and so has a majority of votes according to the "experts". Well no, the experts say it is way too close to conclude anything. Similarly, with models we went in knowing from the start that models were based on VERY limited and poor data and had huge margins for error. And people are now drawing the conclusion that models were wrong because the data was both poorly presented to them and worse, people just don't understand how to read data.

The end result is we now have people claiming the experts were wrong instead of understanding that most of the models were designed to help us prepare for the worst and give hospitals and government officials ideas on how to act. They were never intended to predict the actual number of deaths from them.

Exactly.

Another example of this is weather forecasting, where based on multiple factors you can have a % chance of something happening. If that doesn't happen than the meteorologist "lied" and "doesn't know what they're doing".

I also suspect that if this doesn't completely spiral out of control you'll see a Y2K hindsight effect, where the catastrophic scenarios are avoided because of increased attention and speed to remedy so people claim it to be a media driven hoax (which people are still claiming about corona now).

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

[DoubleLintendre]

One issue that America is facing is the idea that since healthy people will likely live there is no danger. While technically true for those people specifically, COVID-19 is a public health risk. That is as non-specific as it gets for everyone who comes into contact with the infected.

Unless the plan is to force everyone's grandparents, the poor, and those with pre-existing health conditions roll the dice, healthy people need to consider that they are part of the risk. Not potential part, an active person in the prevention of viral transmission.

Around my house in SF I can't park my car with so many people visiting the beach with friends and families. At the grocery stores it's the young people who forgo the masks and distancing measures. It's older people who are forced to share public spaces that are at risk. I can't stress how terrifying (and tragic) this outbreak is to vulnerable communities. If you're healthy please consider that a 96% survival rate may only apply to yourself.

[TunaFish]

One issue that America is facing is the idea that since healthy people will likely live there is no danger. While technically true for those people specifically, COVID-19 is a public health risk. That is as non-specific as it gets for everyone who comes into contact with the infected.

Unless the plan is to force everyone's grandparents, the poor, and those with pre-existing health conditions roll the dice, healthy people need to consider that they are part of the risk. Not potential part, an active person in the prevention of viral transmission.

Around my house in SF I can't park my car with so many people visiting the beach with friends and families. At the grocery stores it's the young people who forgo the masks and distancing measures. It's older people who are forced to share public spaces that are at risk. I can't stress how terrifying (and tragic) this outbreak is to vulnerable communities. If you're healthy please consider that a 96% survival rate may only apply to yourself.

Amen to that!

[LAKESHOW]

The unemployment applications are stacking.up.. The food lines circle around the block. And now, the Federal Business assistance loans, the so called paycheck protection program has a logjam delay in dishing out the Assistance.

"Florida Senator Marco Rubio tweeted Tuesday that $242 billion in PPP loans had already been approved for more than a million businesses. In a video posted shortly after that tweet, Rubio said the PPP needs more funding.

New York Senator Chuck Schumer tweeted Monday that his office has been receiving complaints that the program is not working efficiently for businesses in his state.

“The loan applications are not being processed and businesses are not getting the money in time,” he wrote. “...President Trump and his administration need to fix these issues NOW.”

[Triples333]

One issue that America is facing is the idea that since healthy people will likely live there is no danger. While technically true for those people specifically, COVID-19 is a public health risk. That is as non-specific as it gets for everyone who comes into contact with the infected.

Unless the plan is to force everyone's grandparents, the poor, and those with pre-existing health conditions roll the dice, healthy people need to consider that they are part of the risk. Not potential part, an active person in the prevention of viral transmission.

Around my house in SF I can't park my car with so many people visiting the beach with friends and families. At the grocery stores it's the young people who forgo the masks and distancing measures. It's older people who are forced to share public spaces that are at risk. I can't stress how terrifying (and tragic) this outbreak is to vulnerable communities. If you're healthy please consider that a 96% survival rate may only apply to yourself.

Amen to that!

Interesting. In my area the older people (50+) at the market seem to be the most likely to be sans mask. It's a "tougher" area in general so I suppose it can be accrued to that mind set, but the younger kids mostly seem to be falling in line.

Concerning your "96% survival rate" though, please do understand that at least 85%+ of those who contract the virus are not tested. Do not for a second think that this virus has a 4% death rate or forward that nonsense.

[DoubleLintendre]

One issue that America is facing is the idea that since healthy people will likely live there is no danger. While technically true for those people specifically, COVID-19 is a public health risk. That is as non-specific as it gets for everyone who comes into contact with the infected.

Unless the plan is to force everyone's grandparents, the poor, and those with pre-existing health conditions roll the dice, healthy people need to consider that they are part of the risk. Not potential part, an active person in the prevention of viral transmission.

Around my house in SF I can't park my car with so many people visiting the beach with friends and families. At the grocery stores it's the young people who forgo the masks and distancing measures. It's older people who are forced to share public spaces that are at risk. I can't stress how terrifying (and tragic) this outbreak is to vulnerable communities. If you're healthy please consider that a 96% survival rate may only apply to yourself.

Amen to that!

Interesting. In my area the older people (50+) at the market seem to be the most likely to be sans mask. It's a "tougher" area in general so I suppose it can be accrued to that mind set, but the younger kids mostly seem to be falling in line.

Concerning your "96% survival rate" though, please do understand that at least 85%+ of those who contract the virus are not tested. Do not for a second think that this virus has a 4% death rate or forward that nonsense.

Absolutely. I'm just going with the (cosmetic) data as available. It's not representative whatsoever.

Testing is very difficult to come by and likelihood of recovery is dependent on many factors, like access to non-impacted medical facilities.