(05-14-2020 07:25 AM)nogretheogre Wrote:  

(05-14-2020 04:45 AM)nj alum Wrote:  I signed up for “flattening the curve” to protect our hospital and medical resources.

Then, the goalposts moved.

I did not, nor will I, sign up for “eradication”.

As for the alleged lack of debate, three things.

First, this dependence upon science, and medical experts, to the exclusion of all other considerations is (fill in the blank), especially when modern day science in other areas has been politicized.

Second, as with anything, it’s all about numbers, and numbers can be used to support any position. As of last weekend, Virginia had been shut down for almost two months because of 800 deaths, 400 of which had occurred in long range care facilities. Really? We shut down for this? Who knew that bio terror has such a hold on our society, when we scarcely blink at seasonal flu deaths, annual auto and drug deaths, and daily abortion deaths?

Third, the executive branches of state and federal governments are running the show; the legislative branches have disappeared. There can be no debate under those circumstances, as we are being DICTATED to by the executive branches. Fortunately, there are some signs of life in the judicial branch on this issue.

Open it up! Let’s roll! Tip of the spear!

BTW, the number one casualty of this, after lives lost ... academia at all levels. W&M needs to be fully open in three months. How about debating that?

Part of the problem is that the govt was obviously sandbagging on info initially to prevent absolute panic and chaos. The goalposts havent moved, they were always placed at this position to continue these mitigation efforts indefinitely until there was a cure or reliable treatment. The experts stated these things, but swallowed the more easily to justify "14 day plan" in the face of giving riot-inciting news. Laughable to think 14 days would be enough for anything. Then it was 30 days. The problem with this approach is exactly as you say...it is perceived as moving the goalposts. But the public doesnt want to hear it...and then there is extreme pressure from the public to reopen, regardless of the fact that we dont have control.

Good example is the initial recommendation AGAINST wearing masks. Why would we not wear them at all? There are obvious benefits that are common sense for a respiratory virus. The virus was reportedly highly infectious and spreading in the community in China and Italy well before it was here. The point was to preserve the stockpile for hospitals obviously because we didnt have enough even for them. We still dont have enough, with need to reuse masks for a week even though theyre theoretically contaminated. The recommendation is single-use. Also, people still couldnt get tested when they thought they were exposed until about 2 weeks ago (still not everywhere). We have been playing catchup the entire time.

They are certainly not "excluding all other considerations," but until we have better intel on this, its like us committing a Pearl Harbor. Is it wise to go to battle without knowing exactly what youre getting into?

Science is one of the few places that is not particularly politicized. This is due to the process involved. Journal articles are peer reviewed by large committees. Someone speaking at a microphone is not Science. Stats and Data are not opinion. Its not hard to find a scientist throwing opinion out there, but the majority will back down when confronted with actual data. When entire scientific organizations put out position statements, that is not opinion.

Who's fault is it that the legislatures have disappeared, locally and nationally? We should demand that they stand up. I dont think youd have many people upset about that. America has let the Executive become to powerful in every corner of government.

There are great articles about quarantine fatigue etc and how this is expected, but it is actually more dangerous than the initial spread because people are no longer scared, but instead angry and indignant toward a serious threat.

In the US, where a political and cultural war on masks is now playing out while the virus continues to surge, the Trump administration's top public health experts recently defended their decision to recommend against wearing masks in the pandemic's earliest days, saying it was necessary to prevent a run on equipment that was in short supply.

"I don't regret that," Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said during congressional testimony last week. "At that time, there was a paucity of equipment that our health care providers needed... we did not want to divert masks and PPE away from them."