What happens if

[neckster87]

I've not seen any testing plan or what happens when someone does test positive. How many testseare false positive? Once someone tests positive they've already contaminated several player's?
I miss sports but... someone's life!

 

[Purdue85]

I've not seen any testing plan or what happens when someone does test positive. How many testseare false positive? Once someone tests positive they've already contaminated several player's?
I miss sports but... someone's life!

okay... nobody wants people to get infected, but again... all this action was taken to keep from overwhelming our medical facilities. Period.

People are going to get the virus.

That is unavoidable.

The goal never has been to keep people from being infected.

 

[FirstDownB]

The reason you haven't seen that plan yet is because the media has scared everyone half to death about this thing. And there is no consensus on where the bar is set for what constitutes "safe behavior". You have politicians playing to the media, saying things like saving one life is worth shutting the entire country down.

My question is what is the acceptable casualty rate for living life, including sports? It obviously isn't zero. How many people die each year on the road traveling to or from sporting events? Apparently everyone is ok with that number. Or they don't care because the media isn't constantly telling them to be afraid of that. And how many athletes suffer serious long-term injury playing sports? Easily in the thousands. How many fans suffer each year due to excess drinking during sporting events? How many people will develop skin cancer due to overexposure to the sun during sporting events? People trade their comfort and security every single day for the pleasures of life. Ryan Newman just got back into his race car after a life threatening wreck.

I'm not promoting reckless behavior, but if sports can be conducted in such a way that any increase on the spread of Covid-19 is small in comparison to all the inherent risks of living life, then we need to start getting back to that life and not allow fear of this one thing to dictate every decision. Get a testing regiment going for the athletes and have a plan for additional spacing in the stands and let's get going.

 

[purduepat1969]

okay... nobody wants people to get infected, but again... all this action was taken to keep from overwhelming our medical facilities. Period.

People are going to get the virus.

That is unavoidable.

The goal never has been to keep people from being infected.

Agreed. It seems the goalposts on pandemic management has become more focused on nobody catching it. The original goal was to not overwhelm healthcare facilities. In my opinion, nothing more than the media and Democrats putting a spin on it to keep the economy down during an election year...

 

[pharoutengineer]

Agreed. It seems the goalposts on pandemic management has become more focused on nobody catching it. The original goal was to not overwhelm healthcare facilities. In my opinion, nothing more than the media and Democrats putting a spin on it to keep the economy down during an election year...

Oh good lord, get a grip.

 

[purduepat1969]

Oh good lord, get a grip.

What's inaccurate about what I said around the goal posts moving? I could give a sh1t less about your disagreement on the media and economy. But if you don't believe hospitals are operating at well below capacity right now, you're being disingenuous. With that being the case, what is the goal now?

 

[New Pal Boiler]

okay... nobody wants people to get infected, but again... all this action was taken to keep from overwhelming our medical facilities. Period.

People are going to get the virus.

That is unavoidable.

The goal never has been to keep people from being infected.

The goal has gone from flattening the curve, to flattening the economy...till November 4th.

 

[spradecki]

okay... nobody wants people to get infected, but again... all this action was taken to keep from overwhelming our medical facilities. Period.

People are going to get the virus.

That is unavoidable.

The goal never has been to keep people from being infected.

 

[Boilerscuz]

The goal has gone from flattening the curve, to flattening the economy...till November 4th.

Well if you f’ it up enough in May, June, and July you’re almost assured the economy will still be ass by November. Took two weeks to destroy, will take two years to rebuild.

 

[Purdue85]

Well if you f’ it up enough in May, June, and July you’re almost assured the economy will still be ass by November. Took two weeks to destroy, will take two years to rebuild.

?

What is there to "f" up?

What was predicted didn't happen.

Yes, this is all uncharted territory, but from a scientific standpoint, this has been an absolute f'd up mess. Nothing the "scientists" predicted has happened. Not even close.

We cannot ... CANNOT ... go through life with a frightened mentality of what COULD happen.

Be safe and aware, yes. But, what has gone on is absurd.

 

[HarrysPostGame13]

?

What is there to "f" up?

What was predicted didn't happen.

Yes, this is all uncharted territory, but from a scientific standpoint, this has been an absolute f'd up mess. Nothing the "scientists" predicted has happened. Not even close.

We cannot ... CANNOT ... go through life with a frightened mentality of what COULD happen.

Be safe and aware, yes. But, what has gone on is absurd.

Well said. I live in Chicago and see establishments open for 50+ years starting to close from this. People’s life work down the drain.

 

[JRowdy20]

Hey if there is no football you will see a lot of sports dropped at Universities. Football funds a lot of the non-revenue sports. Cincy already cut Boys soccer Furman cut cross country and Baseball. Bowling Green just canceled baseball too. Gotta have some sort of Football and basketball, or things are going to get really bad in College sports.

 

[bananabucket]

Well said. I live in Chicago and see establishments open for 50+ years starting to close from this. People’s life work down the drain.

The authoritarians, Karens, and doomsdayers don't care whose livelihoods they destroy so long as they can virtue signal about saving granny.

History is not gonna look fondly upon these people.

 

[SCBoiler1]

The reason you haven't seen that plan yet is because the media has scared everyone half to death about this thing. And there is no consensus on where the bar is set for what constitutes "safe behavior". You have politicians playing to the media, saying things like saving one life is worth shutting the entire country down.

My question is what is the acceptable casualty rate for living life, including sports? It obviously isn't zero. How many people die each year on the road traveling to or from sporting events? Apparently everyone is ok with that number. Or they don't care because the media isn't constantly telling them to be afraid of that. And how many athletes suffer serious long-term injury playing sports? Easily in the thousands. How many fans suffer each year due to excess drinking during sporting events? How many people will develop skin cancer due to overexposure to the sun during sporting events? People trade their comfort and security every single day for the pleasures of life. Ryan Newman just got back into his race car after a life threatening wreck.

I'm not promoting reckless behavior, but if sports can be conducted in such a way that any increase on the spread of Covid-19 is small in comparison to all the inherent risks of living life, then we need to start getting back to that life and not allow fear of this one thing to dictate every decision. Get a testing regiment going for the athletes and have a plan for additional spacing in the stands and let's get going.

The problem is that no one knows the solution to the current problem. No one at a national level has had a consistent plan or approach to handling the situation. As a result we are all left with making our own evaluations of what is safe and what isn't. I agree we can't go on with our economy "closed" but to be honest I wake up conflicted each day whether I'm being too aggressive or conservative in my families "reopening up plan".

The problem I have with your analogies is that they are flawed. 30,000 people die of car accidents annually. The numbers dieing driving to football games is probably relatively small. I would think the number of folks who get skin cancer or die because they get too drunk at games is small as well. Lets be clear, there have been nearly 100,000 people die in the US of this virus in 2 months. We are still losing over 1,250 people every day.

There are numerous reports of large percentages of people getting infected from a single person during large gatherings prior to the "lockdown".

See the link below as an example (there are many others):
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/13/us/coronavirus-washington-choir-outbreak-trnd/index.html

As for the players, look what happened to the guys in the NBA. When they discovered one guy had it, they went back and traced players he'd played against and several of the players where positive. Four guys on the Nets tested positive (25% of their roster) when there were less than 10,000 cases in the US.

I don't know what happens if you open up Ross Ade Stadium or Mackey Arena but its the same virus. It's out there at much higher rates than before we shut the country down. Is it worth playing the games? I don't know but the risk seems to be much higher than the risk you mention above.

 

[Purdue85]

The problem is that no one knows the solution to the current problem. No one at a national level has had a consistent plan or approach to handling the situation. As a result we are all left with making our own evaluations of what is safe and what isn't. I agree we can't go on with our economy "closed" but to be honest I wake up conflicted each day whether I'm being too aggressive or conservative in my families "reopening up plan".

The problem I have with your analogies is that they are flawed. 30,000 people die of car accidents annually. The numbers dieing driving to football games is probably relatively small. I would think the number of folks who get skin cancer or die because they get too drunk at games is small as well. Lets be clear, there have been nearly 100,000 people die in the US of this virus in 2 months. We are still losing over 1,250 people every day.

There are numerous reports of large percentages of people getting infected from a single person during large gatherings prior to the "lockdown".

See the link below as an example (there are many others):
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/13/us/coronavirus-washington-choir-outbreak-trnd/index.html

As for the players, look what happened to the guys in the NBA. When they discovered one guy had it, they went back and traced players he'd played against and several of the players where positive. Four guys on the Nets tested positive (25% of their roster) when there were less than 10,000 cases in the US.

I don't know what happens if you open up Ross Ade Stadium or Mackey Arena but its the same virus. It's out there at much higher rates than before we shut the country down. Is it worth playing the games? I don't know but the risk seems to be much higher than the risk you mention above.

Re your last sentence, the risk of what?

As you stated, we know infections have (and will continue to) occur.

We also know the risk of death seems to be mostly confined to those already compromised.

We also know the dire predictions never happened, even with martial law factored into the expectations.

I don't have the answers, either, but what's going on isn't working. What's more: it's wrong.

AND... ! ... if I was a resident of one of these states where the politicians are seemingly drunk on their own power, it would be d@mn near "torches and pitchforks".

 

[BoilerGrad02]

It was said many times at the start.

If social distancing and lockdowns are effective, people in hindsight will say we overreacted.

And now you have people stating that the “dire predictions never happened!”

Exactly.

 

[Lifetimeboiler]

It was said many times at the start.

If social distancing and lockdowns are effective, people in hindsight will say we overreacted.

And now you have people stating that the “dire predictions never happened!”

Exactly.

Okay so it was successful, now get the hell back to normal before we really f something up and we can’t recover as a country.
Also if numbers of suicides go up like they expect from the economy crumbling, child abuse rates continue being high like they have been since the lockdown started, and people continue dying from illnesses not related to the virus because they’re afraid to go to the hospital then yes, we overreacted.

 

[Purdue85]

It was said many times at the start.

If social distancing and lockdowns are effective, people in hindsight will say we overreacted.

And now you have people stating that the “dire predictions never happened!”

Exactly.

Well, no, it really wasn't.

There was nothing but compliance and understanding from the start.

There were also dire predictions of what was to come even with the lockdowns.

There's also information coming out that we might be doing more harm than good with the lockdowns.

No doubt, being a "Monday morning quarterback" is easy. "Hindsight...", and all that. It comes with the territory, and is to be expected in such a circumstance as this.

ESPECIALLY ... ! ... when we've achieved our lone, singular objective (flattening the curve), and we still have those in authority attempting to lock us down.

 

[FirstDownB]

Okay so it was successful, now get the hell back to normal before we really f something up and we can’t recover as a country.
Also if numbers of suicides go up like they expect from the economy crumbling, child abuse rates continue being high like they have been since the lockdown started, and people continue dying from illnesses not related to the virus because they’re afraid to go to the hospital then yes, we overreacted.

The abuse thing is definitely real. Not only children but women too. There is nowhere to hide. My company has laid a bunch of people off and there are real impacts of that too.
Not to sound too callous, but how many of the 100,000 deaths were to people who were probably going to die soon anyway? I believe the athletes are at much less risk of the virus than the sports themselves. Can you name one young person in phenomenal shape who has even made it as far as the hospital due to this virus? That’s what we are talking about with these athletes. The top 1% of physical specimens the human race has to offer. Distance the fans and let the athletes decide if they want to participate.

 

[Gemini95]

Not to sound too callous, but how many of the 100,000 deaths were to people who were probably going to die soon anyway? I believe the athletes are at much less risk of the virus than the sports themselves. Can you name one young person in phenomenal shape who has even made it as far as the hospital due to this virus? That’s what we are talking about with these athletes. The top 1% of physical specimens the human race has to offer. Distance the fans and let the athletes decide if they want to participate.

Correct. Average age of Covid death is higher than average life expectancy. I bet total deaths for the 12 months March 1, 2020 to March 1, 2021 will be relatively normal, as many people who would have died from June to next March were accelerated into March-May 2020. It stinks that many of these people died alone and unexpectedly and like you said this is not intended to be callous. But it is what it is. The extremely bad reactions to the virus among the relatively young and healthy are probably about the same as the bad reactions to vaccines, bees, and peanuts. We can be cautious while resuming 95%+ of normal life.

 

[Gemini95]

P.S your thread title stinks. Do better next time.

 

[SCBoiler1]

Re your last sentence, the risk of what?

As you stated, we know infections have (and will continue to) occur.

We also know the risk of death seems to be mostly confined to those already compromised.

We also know the dire predictions never happened, even with martial law factored into the expectations.

I don't have the answers, either, but what's going on isn't working. What's more: it's wrong.

AND... ! ... if I was a resident of one of these states where the politicians are seemingly drunk on their own power, it would be d@mn near "torches and pitchforks".

To what dire predictions are you referring? What do you mean they never materialized? The CDC (White House supported numbers) predicted on March 31, we would have between 100,000 to 240,000 Covid deaths if we took the measures the White House recommended. Most states followed the CDC recommendations for at least 5 or 6 weeks. We are almost at 100,000 deaths and still recording deaths at around 1,250 per day. The most current models predict there will be approximately 145,000 deaths from Covid by August 1. The fact is we did shut down the economy and the number of deaths are falling within the range predicted by the CDC. There is no way of knowing (at least by you or I) what would have happened if we didn't shut down the economy because we did.

As for another poster that says and I'm paraphrasing... these people would have died shortly anyway.... There have been scientific modeling that suggest that people dying of Covid are dying more than 10 years earlier than they would have been expected to if they had not contracted the disease. See the link below:

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...died-from-covid-19-lost-more-than-a-decade-of

Look, I'm getting out and I'm even at the beach this weekend. I do my best to try and understand the risk and make decisions but trying to under or over play the risk for political gain doesn't help anyone.

 

[Gemini95]

As for another poster that says and I'm paraphrasing... these people would have died shortly anyway.... There have been scientific modeling that suggest that people dying of Covid are dying more than 10 years earlier than they would have been expected to if they had not contracted the disease. See the link below:

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...died-from-covid-19-lost-more-than-a-decade-of

Look, I'm getting out and I'm even at the beach this weekend. I do my best to try and understand the risk and make decisions but trying to under or over play the risk for political gain doesn't help anyone.

My statement had nothing to do with political gain and I'm not trying to downplay anything, but there is absolutely ZERO chance that this study is correct. The average age of corona death is 81. The average life expectancy of ANY 81 year old is 7-9 years. But somehow the average of those who died, with all their underlying conditions, is 12-14 years? Nah.

 

[GaffneyBoiler]

The average life of any restaurant is five years from start. Sorry, I care more about the life of my parents than any business. All these people who want to be liberated from wearing a mask can go to h*** for all I care. They are just whiney snowflakes.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

The average life of any restaurant is five years from start. Sorry, I care more about the life of my parents than any business. All these people who want to be liberated from wearing a mask can go to h*** for all I care. They are just whiney snowflakes.

These aren’t mutually exclusive outcomes. If you’re a Purdue grad, you should understand this. People can live their lives, WHILE your parents stay home and stay safe.

 

[Gemini95]

These aren’t mutually exclusive outcomes. If you’re a Purdue grad, you should understand this. People can live their lives, WHILE your parents stay home and stay safe.

He totally crushed that 'mask' strawman though.

 

[GaffneyBoiler]

I didn't say it was mutually exclusive if you could read. I was just mentioning that you only downplayed the length of the life of a person and not the business. It's called balanced perspective. I would think someone with a high school education could understand that.

 

[Purdue85]

To what dire predictions are you referring? What do you mean they never materialized? The CDC (White House supported numbers) predicted on March 31, we would have between 100,000 to 240,000 Covid deaths if we took the measures the White House recommended. Most states followed the CDC recommendations for at least 5 or 6 weeks. We are almost at 100,000 deaths and still recording deaths at around 1,250 per day. The most current models predict there will be approximately 145,000 deaths from Covid by August 1. The fact is we did shut down the economy and the number of deaths are falling within the range predicted by the CDC. There is no way of knowing (at least by you or I) what would have happened if we didn't shut down the economy because we did.

As for another poster that says and I'm paraphrasing... these people would have died shortly anyway.... There have been scientific modeling that suggest that people dying of Covid are dying more than 10 years earlier than they would have been expected to if they had not contracted the disease. See the link below:

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...died-from-covid-19-lost-more-than-a-decade-of

Look, I'm getting out and I'm even at the beach this weekend. I do my best to try and understand the risk and make decisions but trying to under or over play the risk for political gain doesn't help anyone.

Since you brought up predictions on deaths... I read an article recently re-visiting the predictions. Early on, with the lockdown, 2,200,000 deaths were predicted (while other medical experts predicted up to 4).

I'll repeat: The lockdown was NOT implemented to reduce the number of deaths, but to flatten the curve. Which, by the way, was expected even with the 'shelter in place', "lockdowns", or martial law.

Factories were taken over to produce ventilators, because we were going to be so over-run we wouldn't be able to keep up. Now, I'm reading that we're giving them away to other countries.

No matter how this is spun, what we were told was going to happen has not come close.

I don't have a big problem with that, as I understand how serious the experts thought this would be. HOWEVER ... ! ... now that we know it is NOWHERE NEAR that serious, it's time for politicians to stop with their nonsense.

That, my friend, is to what I am referring.

 

[Purdue85]

The average life of any restaurant is five years from start. Sorry, I care more about the life of my parents than any business. All these people who want to be liberated from wearing a mask can go to h*** for all I care. They are just whiney snowflakes.

Sorry, brother, it's not the life of a 'restaurant', it's the lives of the people who OWN, run, and work in these 'restaurants' that are being destroyed.

Tossing out the b.s. "I care more about the life of my parents than any business" is a non-starter... a straw man. You should care about your parents. I care about mine! I also care about those live being destroyed by this ongoing martial law.

 

[GaffneyBoiler]

Sorry, brother, it's not the life of a 'restaurant', it's the lives of the people who OWN, run, and work in these 'restaurants' that are being destroyed.

Tossing out the b.s. "I care more about the life of my parents than any business" is a non-starter... a straw man. You should care about your parents. I care about mine! I also care about those live being destroyed by this ongoing martial law.

I care about those people's lives also, but I wasn't the one who was discounting the lives of the victims of the disease. You need to discuss the issue of balance with the ones who are discounting their lives.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Since you brought up predictions on deaths... I read an article recently re-visiting the predictions. Early on, with the lockdown, 2,200,000 deaths were predicted (while other medical experts predicted up to 4).

I'll repeat: The lockdown was NOT implemented to reduce the number of deaths, but to flatten the curve. Which, by the way, was expected even with the 'shelter in place', "lockdowns", or martial law.

Factories were taken over to produce ventilators, because we were going to be so over-run we wouldn't be able to keep up. Now, I'm reading that we're giving them away to other countries.

No matter how this is spun, what we were told was going to happen has not come close.

I don't have a big problem with that, as I understand how serious the experts thought this would be. HOWEVER ... ! ... now that we know it is NOWHERE NEAR that serious, it's time for politicians to stop with their nonsense.

That, my friend, is to what I am referring.

I think @Tony79 was the first person on here to mention “risk stratification”, and that’s the idea I had banging around in my head but didn’t know the term for it: identifying the folks who are at risk of dying from this virus, and getting them partitioned off from society until there’s a vaccine, while everyone else gets the economy rolling again.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I didn't say it was mutually exclusive if you could read. I was just mentioning that you only downplayed the length of the life of a person and not the business. It's called balanced perspective. I would think someone with a high school education could understand that.

No offense, but your post was all over the place. What do restaurants and masks have to do with your parents?

 

[FirstDownB]

I care about those people's lives also, but I wasn't the one who was discounting the lives of the victims of the disease. You need to discuss the issue of balance with the ones who are discounting their lives.

Nobody is discounting life, only how best to move forward. Fear based decisions are not the answer. Keeping high risk people in low risk situations, while allowing low risk people the freedom to live their lives seems pretty rational. To 85’s point, that was the entire point of the lockdowns, to flatten the curve such that medical resources do not get overwhelmed. Beyond that the risk to you and your family is basically in your own hands.

 

[Gemini95]

I care about those people's lives also, but I wasn't the one who was discounting the lives of the victims of the disease. You need to discuss the issue of balance with the ones who are discounting their lives.

Nobody did that.

 

[Purdue85]

I care about those people's lives also, but I wasn't the one who was discounting the lives of the victims of the disease. You need to discuss the issue of balance with the ones who are discounting their lives.

Who was 'discounting lives'?

Discussing the issue of BALANCE is exactly what I've been advocating. Especially in light of the singular REASON we were put in quarantine to begin with.

 

[SCBoiler1]

Since you brought up predictions on deaths... I read an article recently re-visiting the predictions. Early on, with the lockdown, 2,200,000 deaths were predicted (while other medical experts predicted up to 4).

I'll repeat: The lockdown was NOT implemented to reduce the number of deaths, but to flatten the curve. Which, by the way, was expected even with the 'shelter in place', "lockdowns", or martial law.

Factories were taken over to produce ventilators, because we were going to be so over-run we wouldn't be able to keep up. Now, I'm reading that we're giving them away to other countries.

No matter how this is spun, what we were told was going to happen has not come close.

I don't have a big problem with that, as I understand how serious the experts thought this would be. HOWEVER ... ! ... now that we know it is NOWHERE NEAR that serious, it's time for politicians to stop with their nonsense.

That, my friend, is to what I am referring.

Facts are a stubborn thing. Please show me in any article where anyone projected that 2.2 million people would die with the lockdown in place.

I believe the 2.2 million number people are throwing around relates to a number mentioned in a Ferguson/Imperial College report. That number was assuming nobody did anything to curve the spread. When they say nobody, they mean governments, businesses or even individuals. The report itself says this would be unlikely because if the government wouldn't act people would. Imagine 2 million dead and you say, "hey honey let"s go to Applebee's for dinner". Not a big libertarian but read the article from the Cato Institute.

https://www.cato.org/blog/how-one-model-simulated-22-million-us-deaths-covid-19

Look, at this point we agree that we need to get back to some degree of normalcy, but to say the President and the task force over hyped the risk, is just not true. The predictions by the CDC and the White House have pretty much matched what happened in reality.

 

[SCBoiler1]

My statement had nothing to do with political gain and I'm not trying to downplay anything, but there is absolutely ZERO chance that this study is correct. The average age of corona death is 81. The average life expectancy of ANY 81 year old is 7-9 years. But somehow the average of those who died, with all their underlying conditions, is 12-14 years? Nah.

If you could provide where you came up with the average age of Covid death is 81 it would be helpful. Some of the best data available for a large population in the USA comes from NY state and according to their website 39% of the people who died of Covid were 80 or over. Another 26% where between 70 and 79 and 35% were 69 or younger.

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.go...ker-Fatalities?:embed=yes&:toolbar=no&:tabs=n

Now I'm not an actuary or a statistician but I did go to high school (and college). Based on these numbers its statistically impossible for the average age of the people in NY dying from Covid to be 81. In fact since 15% are under 59 and only .0173% of the US population live to be 100, my guess is the average age would be in the low 70s (I'm guessing the mean age would probably be in the mid to upper 70s).

Even if I believe that you are more informed than the University of Glasgow Researches who are being quoted in the "liberal fake news" like the Business Insider, The Hill and ABC News and we take your response above at face value, how is this going to all even out within the next year? You yourself say (and the actuarial tables will support it) someone who is 80 has a life expectancy of 7-9 years.

https://www.health.ny.gov/health_care/medicaid/publications/docs/adm/06adm-5att8.pdf

Like I've said before, I agree with many on here that we need to start opening up the economy again and I don't know how I got into this debate on a football board but I guess I'm just so tired of people throwing around their uninformed opinions about a serious topic.

We're not talking about who should start at quarterback.

 

[Purdue85]

Facts are a stubborn thing. Please show me in any article where anyone projected that 2.2 million people would die with the lockdown in place.

I believe the 2.2 million number people are throwing around relates to a number mentioned in a Ferguson/Imperial College report. That number was assuming nobody did anything to curve the spread. When they say nobody, they mean governments, businesses or even individuals. The report itself says this would be unlikely because if the government wouldn't act people would. Imagine 2 million dead and you say, "hey honey let"s go to Applebee's for dinner". Not a big libertarian but read the article from the Cato Institute.

https://www.cato.org/blog/how-one-model-simulated-22-million-us-deaths-covid-19

Look, at this point we agree that we need to get back to some degree of normalcy, but to say the President and the task force over hyped the risk, is just not true. The predictions by the CDC and the White House have pretty much matched what happened in reality.

Yes, facts are a stubborn thing. For the life of me, I cannot fathom what you think you're arguing.

One, I never... EVER wrote, stated, implied or hinted that "the President and the task force over hyped the risk". To state such a thing destroys your credibility.

Two, if you're interested in any projections about the 2.2M figure, do some of your own (darn) research. Here's an article (LINK). I don't recall if it's the exact article I read, as I have read countless articles tossing out the 2.2M figure, as well as higher numbers from different medical "experts".

Three, it is abundantly clear that the medical experts have been all over the board on this virus, from initially downplaying it to claiming mortality rates that never materialized. That's not on Trump, it's not on the CDC, it just is. I'm sure there are a variety of reasons for it. I've already recognized we were faced with circumstances never before seen, and have also recognized that 'something had to be done'. With that said, it's now approaching time to critically assess all those steps, what was necessary, what was not, in what ways we overreacted, in what ways we did not, etc. You can get your boxers in a wad over that, but it's unnecessary.

Finally, you can cite the CDC all you like, and that's perfectly fine, but there are a variety of other medical organizations that are turned to for expertise.

Good grief, man...

 

[SCBoiler1]

Yes, facts are a stubborn thing. For the life of me, I cannot fathom what you think you're arguing.

One, I never... EVER wrote, stated, implied or hinted that "the President and the task force over hyped the risk". To state such a thing destroys your credibility.

Two, if you're interested in any projections about the 2.2M figure, do some of your own (darn) research. Here's an article (LINK). I don't recall if it's the exact article I read, as I have read countless articles tossing out the 2.2M figure, as well as higher numbers from different medical "experts".

Three, it is abundantly clear that the medical experts have been all over the board on this virus, from initially downplaying it to claiming mortality rates that never materialized. That's not on Trump, it's not on the CDC, it just is. I'm sure there are a variety of reasons for it. I've already recognized we were faced with circumstances never before seen, and have also recognized that 'something had to be done'. With that said, it's now approaching time to critically assess all those steps, what was necessary, what was not, in what ways we overreacted, in what ways we did not, etc. You can get your boxers in a wad over that, but it's unnecessary.

Finally, you can cite the CDC all you like, and that's perfectly fine, but there are a variety of other medical organizations that are turned to for expertise.

Good grief, man...

Why should I research the number you represented? If you make the claim, then you should be able to back it up. If I make a claim, I'll back it up. Its really pretty simple.

I'd heard the 2.2 million number before as well. I did a quick Google search on it and found the 2.2 million number has been used as a "what if" number assuming we did nothing. I was just pointing out that you may have been mistaken. If you have other information please share.

 

[SunnyFL24]

Agreed. It seems the goalposts on pandemic management has become more focused on nobody catching it. The original goal was to not overwhelm healthcare facilities. In my opinion, nothing more than the media and Democrats putting a spin on it to keep the economy down during an election year...

Touche!!! Couldn't agree more..............