User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 567891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 101

Thread: The big debate: is lockdown wrong?

  1. #81
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CenterField View Post
    I agree. We can't afford the lockdown any longer, the economy is taking too big a hit. But all states now, all 50 are already reopening, no? (Correct me if I'm wrong; maybe Michigan hasn't started reopening yet, I don't know, I haven't followed each state), so I don't see why some people are still so upset about it. Some states are reopening a bit more slowly, but that's OK, because it depends on local conditions and the severity of the contagion there.

    Now what I've been advocating for, is that we do reopen but we do wear masks. That's such a cheap and rational thing to do! Why not? I really don't get the resistance to wearing masks. Well, I do get it, it's ideological, not wearing one is seen as a sign of courage, pride, and non-conformism, but frankly, it's not very rational.
    Masks are going to be required here inside businesses starting Friday as a condition to reopening.

    I ordered a dust mask from Amazon. It is the type people use in motocross. Useless for viruses but it will make the sheep comfortable. It is much more comfortable than N-95s. It is in the new Army camo pattern- multicam.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  2. #82
    Points: 7,671, Level: 20
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 79
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    CenterField's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    510
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    1,587
    Points
    7,671
    Level
    20
    Thanks Given
    143
    Thanked 500x in 395 Posts
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    I am planning on that. Thanks.
    You're welcome.

    I feel that this thread should be split into two questions.

    1) Was the lockdown wrong? I'd reply to this one with an emphatic "NO!" You guys need to think of the dire consequences if we had allowed everybody to contract this illness at about the same time, overwhelming the health care system. It would have been a full-blown disaster. When you think that this illness is just a problem for the elderly (well, it is not, actually, but that's another discussion), at least think of the collateral damage: if we had allowed the peak to happen in a way that would surpass hospital capacity, every other condition that needs hospital assistance - including a child's severe asthma attack, or a teenager's trauma from a car crash - would suffer from lack of hospital beds and equipment, and lack of healthcare workers, all tied up with a flood of COVID-19 patients.

    Also, the protocols have evolved so every time gained in delaying infections did help with saving lives. For example, at first, we thought that intubation and invasive ventilation early was the way to go. We've realized by now that the prolonged invasive ventilation that COVID-19 requires actually damages the lungs and kills more people than it helps so now we're delaying ventilation until the last moment. We learned that low Vit D makes a difference so we're encouraging supplementation. We learned that hydroxychloroquine makes COVID-19 patients particularly prone to cardiac arrhytmias unlike lupus and rheumatoid arthritis patients. We learned that anticoagulants and steroids need to be given early to avoid the blood clots and damage from an overactive immune system.

    The bottom line is, you're better off catching COVID-19 now than 2 months ago because we know more about how to treat it. So, the lockdown did help.

    2) Is the lockdown wrong, as in, its long continuation? To that, I'd say yes; we just can't take so much economic impact, and also people are desperate, suicide is up, many have lost their paychecks, people with other serious conditions are being neglected because hospitals cancelled elective procedures, and so forth. It's time to open up.

    But can't we open up prudently? Can't we at least avoid getting too close to other people, and wear masks? These are easy, cheap, and prudent measures that don't hurt anybody, and it is regretful that they've been made into a political statement.

    At this point I care little for politics. I care for saving the lives of fellow Americans and for putting paychecks into the pockets of fellow Americans, again. If to do this we need to go to the ridiculously small inconvenience of wearing a facemask and keeping some distance between us and the next person, I don't see what's the downside.
    _________________________
    Please take COVID-19 seriously; don't panic but don't deny it; practice social distancing (stay 6ft from people); wear a mask, wash your hands a lot, don't touch your face, don't gather with too many people, so that you help us contain it.

  3. #83
    Points: 7,671, Level: 20
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 79
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    CenterField's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    510
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    1,587
    Points
    7,671
    Level
    20
    Thanks Given
    143
    Thanked 500x in 395 Posts
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    Masks are going to be required here inside businesses starting Friday as a condition to reopening.

    I ordered a dust mask from Amazon. It is the type people use in motocross. Useless for viruses but it will make the sheep comfortable. It is much more comfortable than N-95s. It is in the new Army camo pattern- multicam.
    Look, why not make it efficient too?

    Simple facemasks with the three rubber band technique I've been advocating are comfortable and very protective.

    And again, this word sheep, and above you said cowards... being prudent to avoid a nasty disease is not being a sheep or a coward.

    N95s indeed are not meant for long-term use. They are too uncomfortable and you get a bit dizzy from poor gas exchange if you wear one for a long time. They are meant to protect the worker who is fulfilling some specific short-term task, such as tending to a COVID-19 patient or working with dangerous particulate materials in a construction site. Once the task is done, they should be removed.

    But regular facemasks, with three rubber bands to make them more efficient, no downsides, and they aren't uncomfortable.

    Why go for a mask with low viral particulate filtration if you can have one with high filtration?
    _________________________
    Please take COVID-19 seriously; don't panic but don't deny it; practice social distancing (stay 6ft from people); wear a mask, wash your hands a lot, don't touch your face, don't gather with too many people, so that you help us contain it.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to CenterField For This Useful Post:

    Peter1469 (05-28-2020)

  5. #84
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CenterField View Post
    You're welcome.

    I feel that this thread should be split into two questions.

    1) Was the lockdown wrong? I'd reply to this one with an emphatic "NO!" You guys need to think of the dire consequences if we had allowed everybody to contract this illness at about the same time, overwhelming the health care system. It would have been a full-blown disaster. When you think that this illness is just a problem for the elderly (well, it is not, actually, but that's another discussion), at least think of the collateral damage: if we had allowed the peak to happen in a way that would surpass hospital capacity, every other condition that needs hospital assistance - including a child's severe asthma attack, or a teenager's trauma from a car crash - would suffer from lack of hospital beds and equipment, and lack of healthcare workers, all tied up with a flood of COVID-19 patients.

    Also, the protocols have evolved so every time gained in delaying infections did help with saving lives. For example, at first, we thought that intubation and invasive ventilation early was the way to go. We've realized by now that the prolonged invasive ventilation that COVID-19 requires actually damages the lungs and kills more people than it helps so now we're delaying ventilation until the last moment. We learned that low Vit D makes a difference so we're encouraging supplementation. We learned that hydroxychloroquine makes COVID-19 patients particularly prone to cardiac arrhytmias unlike lupus and rheumatoid arthritis patients. We learned that anticoagulants and steroids need to be given early to avoid the blood clots and damage from an overactive immune system.

    The bottom line is, you're better off catching COVID-19 now than 2 months ago because we know more about how to treat it. So, the lockdown did help.

    2) Is the lockdown wrong, as in, its long continuation? To that, I'd say yes; we just can't take so much economic impact, and also people are desperate, suicide is up, many have lost their paychecks, people with other serious conditions are being neglected because hospitals cancelled elective procedures, and so forth. It's time to open up.

    But can't we open up prudently? Can't we at least avoid getting too close to other people, and wear masks? These are easy, cheap, and prudent measures that don't hurt anybody, and it is regretful that they've been made into a political statement.

    At this point I care little for politics. I care for saving the lives of fellow Americans and for putting paychecks into the pockets of fellow Americans, again. If to do this we need to go to the ridiculously small inconvenience of wearing a facemask and keeping some distance between us and the next person, I don't see what's the downside.
    I agree with 1 and 2.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    CenterField (05-28-2020)

  7. #85
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CenterField View Post
    Look, why not make it efficient too?

    Simple facemasks with the three rubber band technique I've been advocating are comfortable and very protective.

    And again, this word sheep, and above you said cowards... being prudent to avoid a nasty disease is not being a sheep or a coward.

    N95s indeed are not meant for long-term use. They are too uncomfortable and you get a bit dizzy from poor gas exchange if you wear one for a long time. They are meant to protect the worker who is fulfilling some specific short-term task, such as tending to a COVID-19 patient or working with dangerous particulate materials in a construction site. Once the task is done, they should be removed.

    But regular facemasks, with three rubber bands to make them more efficient, no downsides, and they aren't uncomfortable.

    Why go for a mask with low viral particulate filtration if you can have one with high filtration?
    I like my multicam dust mask.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  8. #86
    Points: 7,671, Level: 20
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 79
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    CenterField's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    510
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    1,587
    Points
    7,671
    Level
    20
    Thanks Given
    143
    Thanked 500x in 395 Posts
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    I like my multicam dust mask.
    But you said yours is useless for viruses. I don't want you to catch the virus. Seriously. If you've decided to wear one already, why not wear one that does catch the virus?
    _________________________
    Please take COVID-19 seriously; don't panic but don't deny it; practice social distancing (stay 6ft from people); wear a mask, wash your hands a lot, don't touch your face, don't gather with too many people, so that you help us contain it.

  9. #87
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CenterField View Post
    But you said yours is useless for viruses. I don't want you to catch the virus. Seriously. If you've decided to wear one already, why not wear one that does catch the virus?
    I will be fine.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  10. #88
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FindersKeepers View Post
    Caution, when applied to healthy individuals who need to work to feed their children, and enforced by strong-arm tactics certainly is oppression.
    Strong arm tactics? Where was that. The law is what it is. Strong arm tactics my ass.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  11. #89
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Cure for TB - TB Facts - Information about TB - TBFacts

    https://tbfacts.org/cure-tb
    TB can usually be completely cured by the person with TB taking a combination of TB drugs. TB is a curable disease The only time that TB may not be curable is when the person has drug resistant TB.


    Lets see.....in the 1968 Hong Long flu that raged across the US killing 130k. The Demos were in power. No lockdowns. No Physical distancing and no big deal wearing masks. Looks like 130k was acceptable.


    That being said.....on one hand you have a country. On the other hand you have a state. Such as new York. Whats that Population?


    The one does not outweigh that of the many.


    Let me know if you need other examples of whats acceptable.
    The Hong Kong flu killed a hundred thousand here and that was for two years.

    What has NY got to do with it?

    I was cured by penicillin. Guess babies were special.

    I asked a simple question and you avoided it. How many deaths are acceptable tpo you?
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  12. #90
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    No it isn't. Doctors use a course of treatment that lasts at least 6 months.
    Guess I was special then.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts