• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Coronavirus (COVID-19) is too exciting for adults to discuss (CLOSED)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
MililaniBuckeye said:
The curve has been flattened for well over a month now...
Click to expand...
Some states yes, some states no. No state has met all 4 guidelines from the CDC for opening. Flattening the curve is just one aspect of the "Gating". A Testing/Tracking Program must be established. But states are ignoring the Gating Guidelines and doing their own thing whatever that is. There is no consensus on following the CDC or WH guidelines. The WH has created a "free for all" putting the onus on states. .

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/cdc-issues-guidelines-reopening
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Taosman said:
Some states yes, some states no. No state has met all 4 guidelines from the CDC for opening. Flattening the curve is just one aspect of the "Gating". A Testing/Tracking Program must be established. But states are ignoring the Gating Guidelines and doing their own thing whatever that is. There is no consensus on following the CDC or WH guidelines. The WH has created a "free for all" putting the onus on states. .

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/cdc-issues-guidelines-reopening
Click to expand...
The onus should be on the states since every state's situation is unique.
 
Upvote 0
Karen said:
When someone suggest a possible outcome that is not a fact. 100,000 dead people are a fact.
Click to expand...

Correct, It is one fact. It is also a fact that the lockdown has had significant negative impact on well more than the 100,000 dead. And, while quantified in other ways than body counts, the sum total of those impacts are pretty significant — covering the spectrum of mental health to physical health to one’s ability to afford basic needs during the shelter in place.

But yeah, nothing to see here beyond body counts.

Keep up the good work! Stay inside and man your keyboard to keep us all safe.
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
Correct, It is one fact. It is also a fact that the lockdown has had significant negative impact on well more than the 100,000 dead. And, while quantified in other ways than body counts, the sum total of those impacts are pretty significant — covering the spectrum of mental health to physical health to one’s ability to afford basic needs during the shelter in place.

But yeah, nothing to see here beyond body counts.

Keep up the good work! Stay inside and man your keyboard to keep us all safe.
Click to expand...

You won't be "keeping anyone safe" bye carrying a virus to your local Krogers or bar. There is no actual data on the effects of the lock-down. Are we going to argue the theory of possible lives lost vs the dead? Because that's what you and others are doing.
 
Upvote 0
Taosman said:
Mitch Albom ways in.
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/...rus-100-000-covid-19-memorial-day/5251822002/
Click to expand...

Interesting article. It cites 100,000 as dead but then the writer starts speculation about projections if we open things up so I quit reading. I’ve learned from my reading here that only ex post facto statistics are facts and the only thing to be taken as credible.

Pick a side Taos... either projections can be used to support an argument or they can’t.
 
Upvote 0
Taosman said:
You won't be "keeping anyone safe" bye carrying a virus to your local Krogers or bar. There is no actual data on the effects of the lock-down. Are we going to argue the theory of possible lives lost vs the dead? Because that's what you and others are doing.
Click to expand...

No, to the contrary. I’m arguing that people who only recognize body counts from the virus to justify what is happening to the others who are negatively impacted are doing more harm than good.

I’m arguing that your simple ‘lock it down’ solution solves only one problem and creates another.

I’m arguing that a more nuanced approach that includes state / local governments taking a responsible approach to prescribe social distancing measures, use of masks, and opening where it makes sense while continuing shelter in place for the vulnerable population is a solution that can simultaneously minimize negative impacts across the physical, mental and economic KPIs.

Until your rhetoric starts to include prescriptions for how to address the negative impact of a lock down, your voice is nothing but a drone... adding volume but no rhythm or melody.
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
Interesting article. It cites 100,000 as dead but then the writer starts speculation about projections if we open things up so I quit reading. I’ve learned from my reading here that only ex post facto statistics are facts and the only thing to be taken as credible.

Pick a side Taos... either projections can be used to support an argument or they can’t.
Click to expand...
I posted the article because Albom is more eloquent than I could ever be. I agree with him. Tell us how many of your family are you willing to sacrifice to open a state? My view is we should have waited for a successful , widely available treatment before starting the process of opening. Been more patient with treatments. And how long do think it will take to put 40 million back to work? 6 months won't put a dent in 40 million unemployed. It will take years to recover those jobs.
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
No, to the contrary. I’m arguing that people who only recognize body counts from the virus to justify what is happening to the others who are negatively impacted are doing more harm than good.

I’m arguing that your simple ‘lock it down’ solution solves only one problem and creates another.

I’m arguing that a more nuanced approach that includes state / local governments taking a responsible approach to prescribe social distancing measures, use of masks, and opening where it makes sense while continuing shelter in place for the vulnerable population is a solution that can simultaneously minimize negative impacts across the physical, mental and economic KPIs.

Until your rhetoric starts to include prescriptions for how to address the negative impact of a lock down, your voice is nothing but a drone... adding volume but no rhythm or melody.
Click to expand...
I'm not gonna change what you believe. I'm just advocating for more patience in the process. We have no weapons in this war but social distancing, masks and tracking. That's about what they had in 1918.
 
Upvote 0
Taosman said:
I posted the article because Albom is more eloquent than I could ever be. I agree with him. Tell us how many of your family are you willing to sacrifice to open a state? My view is we should have waited for a successful , widely available treatment before starting the process of opening. Been more patient with treatments. And how long do think it will take to put 40 million back to work? 6 months won't put a dent in 40 million unemployed. It will take years to recover those jobs.
Click to expand...

Ok, Karen. You’re right.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top