Thank you Aaron, this is exactly what I was looking for. Much appreciated
3 Likes
I think ultimately, regardless of health risks they are going to open. If a projected vaccine is still a year off, the economy will simply have to open so that people can work. But I donât think it has to reopen like it was before. We can still implement 6 feet distance, and push for people to pay with their phone limiting contact even with debt cards and so on.
But the economy wonât just stay shut down all spring and summer when everyone says the virus pop back may be in fall and winter. So maybe open up so people can get in enough money and hopefully save before it shuts back down in fall.
But either way the majority of the country has citizens who never actually built up any savings and canât go until a vaccine comes out to not work.
But time will tell what choices are made and what consequences happen because of it. Even all medical concerns put aside, I prefer the shut down for dozens of personal reasons. But I know it wonât last. At least earth seems to be getting some micro steps forward in some places.
Yes, that is reality. Eventually we accommodate the risk and grow more comfortable with it. I just wish people could do that while honestly acknowledging the risk.
I think many people are aware of the risks and honestly most donât care. To the majority of the workforce I think the mentality is growing and growing that they mostly donât have nothing to worry about because for their age and health bracket they fall into a less than .5% range or something . So they are not afraid for themselves, and they still see everyone going walking and shopping, even though itâs maintaining distance, and so they think if everyone can shop at Walmart and go through drive thru then why canât the boot store or whatever it is they work at open as well. When youâre not facing a immediate threat , itâs harder to see past your concerns such as paying bills. So their immediate threat is different from the one a 70 year old Stroke victim is facing.
Yes, I agree we tend to put our self interests first. I see quite a few in their 60âs however who are militant about opening up. Many are business owners, and I understand how the fixed overhead of a business closed down can turn a nice retirement income into bankruptcy in short order. I guess it is just human nature to rationalize it and try to justify it by distorting facts, but it doesnât give me a very good outlook on humanity. Calvin was right about the total depravity part, anyway.
News update: Associations of EM physicians have come out to publicly condemn the opinions of these doctors. @jpm @Dale
3 Likes
Iâm sure there are people pushing for opening the economy out of self-interest, but to apply that broadly is an error, I think. Opening the economy is about more people dying of starvation and malnutrition. Iâm trying to understand both sides, but ignoring this issue and acting like economy openers are only concerned about pocketbooks strikes me as a caricature. 
Perhaps. But the most vocal ones I read are well fed, and not volunteering at the food bank. It is a complex issue, and frankly I am on the side of opening as quickly as possible, knowing there is risk of rebound, but not denying it. I agree with you that there is a rational arguement that is not based on self interest.
2 Likes
Chrisloewen
Thank you for this update. This is very helpful. I wish there were more details though, but maybe thatâs all the time they have for those yahoos.
1 Like
How does the situation in Sweden speak to ours in North America?
I couldnât read that article due to paywall but hereâs one that explains some: Coronavirus: Has Sweden got its science right? - BBC News
Most people are practicing voluntary social distancing. Which is apparently more than we can ask Americans. (sarcasm because people can barely follow rules) Their population density is also much lower. But it seems that they still have a very large number of deaths comparatively, and people are unsure that they didnât just engage themselves in the riskiest experiment.
2 Likes
On the flip side, I could argue that other very vocal proponents of staying shut down are the very ones who have the means to do so. But neither of these observations addresses the issues raised by either side. We seem to be in agreement on that.
1 Like
Ethical dilemmas always involve compelling arguments and important values on both sides. Thatâs what makes them dilemmas. But no side should be lying to make their arguments look better. And itâs irresponsible when the media gives an outlet to deceptive people who are misrepresenting facts.
4 Likes
Youâve just described a massive portion of what gets posted on Facebook and YouTube. 
I completely agree. Perhaps you would agree with me that both sides are guilty. What would you propose as the antidote, though?
People getting their information primarily from reputable NGOs, universities, and scientific institutions, not political pundits and celebrities. And then actually dealing in facts instead of rhetoric. That would be a good start.
1 Like
Hereâs a statement:
âThe American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) jointly and emphatically condemn the recent opinions released by Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi. These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical societies and are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19. As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the publicâs health.â
3 Likes
I would wish for this also. But what are some ways to achieve that?
Well, I am doing my part by staying off Facebook for a few days, and getting my news from AP rather than filtered thru another news source at the suggestion on someone here. We will see.
1 Like
I donât know. Prayer? Hope? Unbridled optimism?
2 Likes