Poll: Do You Support Re-Opening Most of America?

[AZGrizFan]

33 of 215 pregnant women in one hospital (and no, they didn’t get it AT the hospital)
Santa Clara County Study (50-85x more common than previously thought)
Homeless study (35% currently or had had it)
Current NIH study of 10,000 individuals

They’re all showing the same thing. This thing (that’s for you, klammy) is WAAAAAAAY more prevalent than first thought...and been here longer and spread far wider than first thought. Attempts to “contain” it are essentially like pissing in the wind. So we’d better learn to live with it, and learn fast.

[Gil Dobie]

LMAO. Says the man that has moved into an echo chamber and spreads it around.


So in other words, you don't have any links, and are talking out your ass.

Maybe you will pull out the now discredited Stanford Study, not realizing you are using a study that is horridly flawed, but MAGAts are treating it like Gospel because it reinforces what they WANT to hear.

Jon, there are all kinds of links out there, even some from your favorite news sources, that validate the studies (growing in number) that ALL show the same thing: this thing is much more prevalent than originally thought.....50-80x more prevalent. Which makes it 50-80x LESS deadly.

But you’d rather hang YOUR hat on one horribly flawed model that pedals fear porn because it reinforces what YOU want to hear.

You do you. Hide in your fucking basement if you want to. I’m ready to go back to work.

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

[AZGrizFan]

Jon, there are all kinds of links out there, even some from your favorite news sources, that validate the studies (growing in number) that ALL show the same thing: this thing is much more prevalent than originally thought.....50-80x more prevalent. Which makes it 50-80x LESS deadly.

But you’d rather hang YOUR hat on one horribly flawed model that pedals fear porn because it reinforces what YOU want to hear.

You do you. Hide in your fucking basement if you want to. I’m ready to go back to work.

Not exactly - it depends on how many deaths from other causes were aggravated by the virus. Now that they know it isn't only attacking respiratory systems we may have underestimated the number of deaths.

And fer chrissakes wear a mask.

80% of deaths are over aged 70 with preexisitng conditions. And sorry, but it IS 50-80x less deadly if it’s 50-80x more prevalent. That’s the simple math of it.

[AZGrizFan]

Jon, there are all kinds of links out there, even some from your favorite news sources, that validate the studies (growing in number) that ALL show the same thing: this thing is much more prevalent than originally thought.....50-80x more prevalent. Which makes it 50-80x LESS deadly.

But you’d rather hang YOUR hat on one horribly flawed model that pedals fear porn because it reinforces what YOU want to hear.

You do you. Hide in your fucking basement if you want to. I’m ready to go back to work.

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

And that can be accomplished without shutting down the country. It’s not an either/or, zero sum game, Gil. It’s not a one-size fits all solution. If you’re in danger, then by all means, sequester. If not, let’s let the vast majority of the country/world get back to work.

[89Hen]

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

Over 6000 pedestrians are killed every year by cars. Please stop folks from driving.

[Gil Dobie]

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

And that can be accomplished without shutting down the country. It’s not an either/or, zero sum game, Gil. It’s not a one-size fits all solution. If you’re in danger, then by all means, sequester. If not, let’s let the vast majority of the country/world get back to work.

I'm not saying it should remain closed, cautious reopening, so we don't flood the hospitals like Italy or parts of New York did. I've been saying that on many posts.

[GannonFan]

Gil, we do that shit every. Single. Day.

Every time you leave your house, there’s risk involved. Every time you get in an elevator. Every time you get fast food. Every time you go into a public place. Every time you plug something in. EVERYTHING involves an element of risk. If 2 of 100 cookies are poisoned, that’s one thing. If 2 of 10,000 are poisoned, I’m eating cookies all day long.

It's apples and oranges. We can do something to stop the spread of this virus.

So if you had 10,000 cookies, and had 10,000 people to give them to, would you give them away, knowing 2 people would die?

Think of the deaths from heart disease related to processed meats (not to mention various cancers that are purportedly associated with those diets). In those cases it is almost literally eating potential poison. We may want to think of permanently closing all delis.

[AZGrizFan]

Jon, there are all kinds of links out there, even some from your favorite news sources, that validate the studies (growing in number) that ALL show the same thing: this thing is much more prevalent than originally thought.....50-80x more prevalent. Which makes it 50-80x LESS deadly.

But you’d rather hang YOUR hat on one horribly flawed model that pedals fear porn because it reinforces what YOU want to hear.

You do you. Hide in your fucking basement if you want to. I’m ready to go back to work.

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

And lest we not forget: The stated goal of sequestering was to “flatten the curve” to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. Mission accomplished. We reduced the spread to help protect people in danger. Now we need to open back up (under controlled circumstances with proper protocols in place — that’s for you, MJ, someone who has difficulty comprehending, apparently) and let the majority of the country who’s risk profile is significantly lower, to get the country and economy and their small businesses back up and running.

[AZGrizFan]

It's apples and oranges. We can do something to stop the spread of this virus.

So if you had 10,000 cookies, and had 10,000 people to give them to, would you give them away, knowing 2 people would die?

Think of the deaths from heart disease related to processed meats (not to mention various cancers that are purportedly associated with those diets). In those cases it is almost literally eating potential poison. We may want to think of permanently closing all delis.

Gil: the beautiful thing about how this country USED to operate was this: You could choose whether you wanted a cookie or not. Nobody holding a gun to your head. Now, you can’t take a cookie even if you’re willing to take the infinitesimal risk associated with it.

[SDHornet]

My economic fear porn? I've been calling for balancing the medical impacts with the sociological, psychological and economic impacts almost from the beginning. How is it fear porn if I'm calling for balancing the many impacts? Fear porn is using tales economic doom or killing grandma to argue for prioritizing one impact at the expense of others.

What are the curative measures and vaccines for the economic impacts? We have things that have helped in the short-term but can we keep doing them for longer? At what cost? I have and will continue to argue that we can't keep throwing money at this problem. Government revenues are dropping and will continue to drop as long as people are out of work. IMO, continuing to print money to throw at people and companies is going to have some very serious long-term ramifications.

Americans refusal to save is a problem that was well known but has been further exposed by COVID-19.

It's come down to this, 88: If you support the reopening of America, even with proper protocols in place, it's fear porn. Unless you support the continual moving of the goal posts, it's fear porn. Until you support complete shutdown without 100% testing, tracing, and zero new cases, it's fear porn.

But those of us that point that out that common sense approach are advocating for "eating grandma". Go figure.

[Gil Dobie]

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

Over 6000 pedestrians are killed every year by cars. Please stop folks from driving.

According to the CDC, 47% are alcohol related, even thou it's against the law to drink and drive. I'm not surprise, many many people walk on the wrong side of the road, many run across the road to try and beat traffic, and quite a few dare traffic to stop when in a cross-walk. Being in a cross-walk doesn't make you safe, make sure traffic stops first.

[Gil Dobie]

It's apples and oranges. We can do something to stop the spread of this virus.

So if you had 10,000 cookies, and had 10,000 people to give them to, would you give them away, knowing 2 people would die?

Think of the deaths from heart disease related to processed meats (not to mention various cancers that are purportedly associated with those diets). In those cases it is almost literally eating potential poison. We may want to think of permanently closing all delis.

I try and eat red meat twice a week at the most, seafood and chicken the rest of the time. I go to the DR, take meds, walk on treadmill, bike, etc, etc. There are things we can do to help our chances.

[89Hen]

Over 6000 pedestrians are killed every year by cars. Please stop folks from driving.

According to the CDC, 47% are alcohol related, even thou it's against the law to drink and drive. I'm not surprise, many many people walk on the wrong side of the road, many run across the road to try and beat traffic, and quite a few dare traffic to stop when in a cross-walk. Being in a cross-walk doesn't make you safe, make sure traffic stops first.

Removing alcohol reduces pedestrian deaths from cars. Removing the cars eliminates it. The solution is clear.

[Gil Dobie]

It's not fear porn, it's actual compassion for our fellow human beings, to reduce the spread to people that are danger.

And lest we not forget: The stated goal of sequestering was to “flatten the curve” to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. Mission accomplished. We reduced the spread to help protect people in danger. Now we need to open back up (under controlled circumstances with proper protocols in place — that’s for you, MJ, someone who has difficulty comprehending, apparently) and let the majority of the country who’s risk profile is significantly lower, to get the country and economy and their small businesses back up and running.

We have reduced it and I also mentioned this in a previous post. We do'n't want to go back to the 3000 deaths per day routine, so lets open cautiously.

[SDHornet]

No, if someone put 100 cookies on a table and said 2 are poison and will kill you, I would not take a cookie. I don't think COVID-19 is at .02 percent though.

It is if 150,000,000 already have it or have had it. And that’s what just about every large-scale study is showing.

0.02% of 100 cookies isn't 2 cookies, it's like a couple crumbs from one tiny piece that broke off of one cookie.

It's just math people, c'mon.

[SDHornet]

No, if someone put 100 cookies on a table and said 2 are poison and will kill you, I would not take a cookie. I don't think COVID-19 is at .02 percent though.

He asked .02%, not 2%..

.02% would be 1 cookie out of 5,000...

2 of 100 cookies would be 2%.
2 of 1,000 cookies would be .2%
2 of 10,000 cookies would be .02%

Fuck, beat me to it.

[Gil Dobie]

According to the CDC, 47% are alcohol related, even thou it's against the law to drink and drive. I'm not surprise, many many people walk on the wrong side of the road, many run across the road to try and beat traffic, and quite a few dare traffic to stop when in a cross-walk. Being in a cross-walk doesn't make you safe, make sure traffic stops first.

Removing alcohol reduces pedestrian deaths from cars. Removing the cars eliminates it. The solution is clear.

Having everyone stay home would eliminate the virus, but that's not practical. Cautious reopening is practical.

[SDHornet]

He asked .02%, not 2%..

.02% would be 1 cookie out of 5,000...

2 of 100 cookies would be 2%.
2 of 1,000 cookies would be .2%
2 of 10,000 cookies would be .02%

My bad, but the question is still similar, would you eat a cookie if you knew 1 out of 5000 was poison, and would kill you?

Would you take a medicine/vaccine with a higher risk of death/adverse health impact?

[Gil Dobie]

Think of the deaths from heart disease related to processed meats (not to mention various cancers that are purportedly associated with those diets). In those cases it is almost literally eating potential poison. We may want to think of permanently closing all delis.

Gil: the beautiful thing about how this country USED to operate was this: You could choose whether you wanted a cookie or not. Nobody holding a gun to your head. Now, you can’t take a cookie even if you’re willing to take the infinitesimal risk associated with it.

I did say people had a choice to take the cookie or not.

[Gil Dobie]

My bad, but the question is still similar, would you eat a cookie if you knew 1 out of 5000 was poison, and would kill you?

Would you take a medicine/vaccine with a higher risk of death/adverse health impact?

No, but it would depend on other conditions. I had a couple surgeries with 5% risk of death. Dr said I wasn't a high risk patient, so I had the surgeries.

[SDHornet]

If we open up to much to soon and a second wave kicks in for June and July. We may lose even more small businesses due to a smaller customer base and extended self quarantine of many of their customers. I'm looking restaurants, as a lot of older people meet at them in groups. Specifically the 4pm crowd will be down.

There will be a second, third, and etc. wave. This is not a one and done, nor a two and done. We will loose those small business if we stay shut down. In fact we will loose much more than those small business if we stay shut down much longer. That is the real economic hit.

If you are in a high risk age group, stay home. Those of us that are not, our task is to keep the economy running. A one size stay at home order, even a state by state one is not the right fit, IMHO. It will have to be done by risk factor and that is going to annoy people because they think they are being singled out and "discriminated" against. There are very clear age/risk factors that are know on this virus, let us use that to open up for those people that are not affected.

This.

[houndawg]

Not exactly - it depends on how many deaths from other causes were aggravated by the virus. Now that they know it isn't only attacking respiratory systems we may have underestimated the number of deaths.

And fer chrissakes wear a mask.

80% of deaths are over aged 70 with preexisitng conditions. And sorry, but it IS 50-80x less deadly if it’s 50-80x more prevalent. That’s the simple math of it.

Don't skim over the bolded part, it's very important. You don't know if the deaths were undercounted or not

[SDHornet]

Gil, we do that shit every. Single. Day.

Every time you leave your house, there’s risk involved. Every time you get in an elevator. Every time you get fast food. Every time you go into a public place. Every time you plug something in. EVERYTHING involves an element of risk. If 2 of 100 cookies are poisoned, that’s one thing. If 2 of 10,000 are poisoned, I’m eating cookies all day long.

It's apples and oranges. We can do something to stop the spread of this virus.

So if you had 10,000 cookies, and had 10,000 people to give them to, would you give them away, knowing 2 people would die?

No, no we can't "stop" the spread. We can slow it and lessen the impact on health services...oh look, we did. No we can open thing back up with the proper protocols in place. How the narrative moved from "slow the spread/bend the curve" to outright "stopping" the spread is complete nonsense.

[houndawg]

It's apples and oranges. We can do something to stop the spread of this virus.

So if you had 10,000 cookies, and had 10,000 people to give them to, would you give them away, knowing 2 people would die?

No, no we can't "stop" the spread. We can slow it and lessen the impact on health services...oh look, we did. No we can open thing back up with the proper protocols in place. How the narrative moved from "slow the spread/bend the curve" to outright "stopping" the spread is complete nonsense.

And the only thing that flatteming the curve means is that there is room for you in the ICU.

The takeaway is the shittiness of our healthcare system compared to the one that supports our excuse for leaders.

[AZGrizFan]

80% of deaths are over aged 70 with preexisitng conditions. And sorry, but it IS 50-80x less deadly if it’s 50-80x more prevalent. That’s the simple math of it.

Don't skim over the bolded part, it's very important. You don't know if the deaths were undercounted or not

They’re being over counted...for a number of reasons. That much has become painfully clear....