Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Part IX- Now Featuring More Lockdowns

[Bomber0104]

You should learn to listen then. No one here is saying there shouldn’t be restrictions. No one here is saying to let people die. That’s ridiculous, just absurd.

The arguments for a do-nothing approach suggest just that.

The argument many are making here is that there is a more effective strategy than simply locking down and closing small businesses. A strategy, which realistically should’ve been implemented much sooner. The plan from the beginning should’ve been to focus on protecting the vulnerable and people that are most at-risk and basing a strategy with that as the central focus. They’ve had 9 months to develop an effective strategy, and nothing.

This is idealistic at best.

When you pick and choose which regions/businesses need to shut down to control the spread what you find is people skirt the measures and then travel to the nearest alternative outside their own region.

This is why you now have businesses in Niagara carding people based on where they live to even set foot inside their business/restaurant to protect their own community.

They are turning away business to keep infectious regions away.

Think about that.

I suggest you get better educated before you start blabbing off about why the local hot sauce shop and spin studio is worth human lives.

And you have the balls to call me sociopathic?

 

[yubbers]

I know people who have lost everything by thinking they could run a restaurant, years before COVID.

COVID is just another reason why you don't go all restaurant.

Most restaurants are just another ego trip.

You get the point though

 

[yubbers]

The Justice Dept could have but didn't because they know that the federal government's incompetence (issuing confusing or outright wrong directives to the states) would have received way too much attention. Cuomo had them by the cajones.

He won a fricking Grammy!
Clown world.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

Maybe there were too many boutique shops and designer cupcake makers in the first place?

Businesses that close or can't survive a pandemic probably didn't have enough roots grounded in the first place.

There's an underlying risk in any business venture you take and global pandemics are one of them.

That's life.

In the next 100 years if humanity continues on its current trajectory, we're likely looking at additional pandemics as well as climate issues/peak oil concerns.

You know, if you said this back in April, I likely would have agreed with you.

Now? I think it is a completely ignorant comment. Not necessarily through fault of your own.

 

[Bomber0104]

Your word/opinion is not law or fact, hell its not even based in reality. It’s a biased and ignorant perspective with not a shred of empathy. Anyone’s business that they depend on to feed themselves and their families is what I consider essential.

Actually it's based on the precise logic that pretty well all epidemiologists prescribe to but hey, what do they know?

Future on a hockey forum believes that Jessica's Hot Yoga Studio in a poorly ventilated commercial space is essential..

Let's risk people's lives for it!

I’m not fooled by people that hold this perspective. They feel strict lockdowns are justified to “save lives”, and they feel that by holding this viewpoint it makes them inherently good. But they consistently ignore the dark side to these lockdowns. And instead of demanding a better and more effective strategy that accommodates everyone, or even just something better, they continue to dig their heels in and support the incompetence. We should all be demanding better.

I demand better of the public the same way as you demand better action by government.

Wear masks properly, keep your distance, wash your hands, and don't gather unless absolutely necessary...

People aren't doing it and thus, here we are...

“Run outside” this guy says.

I do.

By yourself and away from people.

 

[Future]

The arguments for a do-nothing approach suggest just that.



This is idealistic at best.

When you pick and choose which regions/businesses need to shut down to control the spread what you find is people skirt the measures and then travel to the nearest alternative.

This is why you now have businesses in Niagara carding people based on where they live to even set foot inside their business/restaurant to protect their own community.

They are turning away business to keep infectious regions away.

Think about that.

I suggest you get better educated before you start blabbing off about why the local hot sauce shop and spin studio is worth human lives.

And you have the balls to call me sociopathic?

Who is advocating for a do-nothing approach?

Not even going to address the rest of that. It’s nothing that hasn’t already been addressed previously.

 

[Bomber0104]

Who is advocating for a do-nothing approach?

Not even going to address the rest of that. It’s nothing that hasn’t already been addressed previously.

I'll take that as admission that you're just whining for the sake of whining about basically every government on the planet's response to the pandemic, on a hockey forum...

 

[stealth1]

Who is advocating for a do-nothing approach?

Not even going to address the rest of that. It’s nothing that hasn’t already been addressed previously.

The one thing that gets me is how many of you are so quick to blame the government for lockdowns and businesses being closed. When a good portion has to do with us. There have been studies showing that majority of spread is from gatherings. If people really wanted businesses to be open they would limit their gatherings at home.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

If countries like ours clamped down on China as quickly as they are on the U.K. now with this new variant, maybe we wouldn’t be in this mess.

 

[Future]

I'll take that as admission that you're just whining for the sake of whining about basically every government on the planet's response to the pandemic, on a hockey forum...

Who is advocating for a do-nothing approach?

As opposed to making fun of people who’s lives have been ruined, or may have fallen into poverty during a global pandemic?

I personally think it’s nice to hear other peoples’ perspectives that are outside my own personal bubble yet are in the same situation. I also feel free to share my own thoughts. Isn’t that why most people are here in this thread?

 

[Bomber0104]

Who is advocating for a do-nothing approach?

As opposed to making fun of people who’s lives have been ruined, or may have fallen into poverty during a global pandemic?

I personally think it’s nice to hear other peoples’ perspectives that are outside my own personal bubble yet are in the same situation. I also feel free to share my own thoughts. Isn’t that why most people are here in this thread?

I think people pouring out their feelings online to cope with things that are beyond their control is perfectly OK.

Don't take it out on me though.

 

[Bomber0104]

You know, if you said this back in April, I likely would have agreed with you.

Now? I think it is a completely ignorant comment. Not necessarily through fault of your own.

SIR models are quite simple.

Or a bit complex.

Or chaotic.

Depends on how you perceive it I guess...

 

[Future]

The one thing that gets me is how many of you are so quick to blame the government for lockdowns and businesses being closed. When a good portion has to do with us. There have been studies showing that majority of spread is from gatherings. If people really wanted businesses to be open they would limit their gatherings at home.

That’s a fair and tough question. I read that home gatherings are responsible for about 75% of the spread. I don’t see business shutdowns as a way to combat that.

Do you think those that have already been flouting the rules will adhere to lockdown restrictions?

 

[stealth1]

That’s a fair and tough question. I read that home gatherings are responsible for about 75% of the spread. I don’t see business shutdowns as a way to combat that.

Do you think those that have already been flouting the rules will adhere to lockdown restrictions?

No they probably won't adhere to lockdown restrictions but if they have do where to go they limit how many people in public they can spread Covid too. This is unfortunately when a few people mess it up for everyone else.

 

[Future]

I think people pouring out their feelings online to cope with things that are beyond their control is perfectly OK.

Don't take it out on me though.

Do not have a problem with you. I just think there’s a certain level of sensitivity that needs to be had when discussing this issue. Whether it’s toward the posters here that have lost loved ones or those that have been crippled financially. None of this is black or white, and I don’t view it as one side versus the other. We all want the same thing, I’m sure.

 

[Polaris1010]

Do not have a problem with you. I just think there’s a certain level of sensitivity that needs to be had when discussing this issue. Whether it’s toward the posters here that have lost loved ones or those that have been crippled financially. None of this is black or white, and I don’t view it as one side versus the other. We all want the same thing, I’m sure.

Exactly, agree completely with what you are saying.

I don't really discuss this topic much anymore here.

It is kind of obvious that the death rate is too high, and the pandemic is not under control and running rampant. The vaccine is the only hope, which will probably come later next year.

The economic consequences are dire. A double dip recession seems to be in the cards. More stimulus is needed.

Mandatory vaccination for this coronavirus could be in the cards, I do not see how that is avoidable. In the long run, austerity is coming too, meaning people who work for the government will see a pay cut, and suffer along like the rest of us.

 

[GQS]

It is kind of obvious that the death rate is too high, and the pandemic is not under control and running rampant. The vaccine is the only hope, which will probably come later next year.

Serious question. By what measure are we doing 'worse' in the 2nd wave vs the 1st wave?

1st wave - 3 months from beginning of April to end of June was about 2,700 deaths
2nd - almost 3 months from beginning of October to almost end of December we're at 1,300 deaths or so

1st wave - positivity rate 3-8% on most days
2nd wave - positivity rate 3-5% on most days despite 3-4 times more testing vs during the 1st wave which accounts for pretty much all the higher total daily positive cases when you have a lower positive testing rate than the 1st wave

1st wave - peak hospitalization 1,050 cases in early May, ICU about 264 in early April
2nd wave - peak hospitalization 932 currently in mid December, ICU about 263 a few days ago

So it took maybe 1 1/2 months to reach that hospital peak in the 1st wave and we're almost at the end of 3 months in the 2nd wave and we're still below 1st wave numbers.

So am I missing something? Going by the facts how are we doing 'worse' than the 1st wave that warrants another shutdown right now when all the numbers are looking better than the 1st wave?

Seems like our experts, politicians and the media are all working together to not put the high infection numbers in context. IE lower positivity rate in the 2nd wave but much higher daily testing numbers is the reason why the number of infections looks so much worse right now. Recently we're averaging 50-60k tests daily vs during the 1st wave where we rarely even reached 20k daily tests. Why not drop our current number of tests back down to 20k and then see if our daily positive case numbers don't magically look much better?

Mandatory vaccination for this coronavirus could be in the cards, I do not see how that is avoidable. In the long run, austerity is coming too, meaning people who work for the government will see a pay cut, and suffer along like the rest of us.

Not sure why we need to make it mandatory unless this virus mutates into something much more dangerous than it is now. Until then just vaccinate the vulnerable, those that really require it like healthcare workers and those that want the shot and that should be it.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Maybe there were too many boutique shops and designer cupcake makers in the first place?

Businesses that close or can't survive a pandemic probably didn't have enough roots grounded in the first place.

There's an underlying risk in any business venture you take and global pandemics are one of them.

That's life.

In the next 100 years if humanity continues on its current trajectory, we're likely looking at additional pandemics as well as climate issues/peak oil concerns.

Do you know what else is life? Dying from a virus when you're old and frail but we're taking unprecedented steps and doing everything we can to help those people. Why so callous when it comes to someone losing their business that they probably sunk everything they own into? You seem to be somewhat selective about "what's life".

And you're wrong anyway. There have been many stories of businesses shutting down that have been around for many decades. HBC is on the brink and they've been around centuries. I'm guessing they've seen a pandemic or two. What they've never seen in their 350 year history is a government locking down citizens and businesses.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

You're considering parts of the population disposable too, no?

The do-nothing approach results in scores of avoidable deaths, according to basically every epidemiological study out there...

Are businesses worth more than human life in your opinion?

I expect your answer is probably different than a nurse who has to prioritize critical care.

Or the families of those who lost loved ones who "at no fault of their own" simply had co-morbidities that they were born with.

So why don't we focus on protecting those people instead of the scorched earth approach we're taking?

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Serious question. By what measure are we doing 'worse' in the 2nd wave vs the 1st wave?

1st wave - 3 months from beginning of April to end of June was about 2,700 deaths
2nd - almost 3 months from beginning of October to almost end of December we're at 1,300 deaths or so

1st wave - positivity rate 3-8% on most days
2nd wave - positivity rate 3-5% on most days despite 3-4 times more testing vs during the 1st wave which accounts for pretty much all the higher total daily positive cases when you have a lower positive testing rate than the 1st wave

1st wave - peak hospitalization 1,050 cases in early May, ICU about 264 in early April
2nd wave - peak hospitalization 932 currently in mid December, ICU about 263 a few days ago

So it took maybe 1 1/2 months to reach that hospital peak in the 1st wave and we're almost at the end of 3 months in the 2nd wave and we're still below 1st wave numbers.

So am I missing something? Going by the facts how are we doing 'worse' than the 1st wave that warrants another shutdown right now when all the numbers are looking better than the 1st wave?

Seems like our experts, politicians and the media are all working together to not put the high infection numbers in context. IE lower positivity rate in the 2nd wave but much higher daily testing numbers is the reason why the number of infections looks so much worse right now. Recently we're averaging 50-60k tests daily vs during the 1st wave where we rarely even reached 20k daily tests. Why not drop our current number of tests back down to 20k and then see if our daily positive case numbers don't magically look much better?



Not sure why we need to make it mandatory unless this virus mutates into something much more dangerous than it is now. Until then just vaccinate the vulnerable, those that really require it like healthcare workers and those that want the shot and that should be it.

The second wave is not worse the first wave (so far). I've proven that fairly definitively a couple of pages back.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

I don't think a hot sauce shop in downtown Burlington is as essential as supplying almost all our grocers which are being left open during lockdown.

Yeah it was featured on the Hot Ones one time but sorry, society will survive without it..

That hot sauce shop was pretty essential to whoever owned it. Like I said: callous.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Well I'm happy everything is OK with you but as far as this debate is concerned it seems as though you're prioritizing the survival of businesses above the survival of people, and not just people but vulnerable people...

This thread is funny for me because a lot of people whose opinions on Leafs matters I agree with and respect are on a totally different side on the argument of Covid/public health/policy...

You're another one now!

Why do the two ideas have to be mutually exclusive? Are you saying it's impossible to preserve life and our economy at the same time?

As to you second point, amen brother. This thread has been a godsend in weeding out people that I will mercifully never be subjected to again. I suspect you and I are talking about different people though.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

TBH restaurants flop all the time, so this really isn’t a good example. It’s a risky business.

140 bars and restaurants that closed in Toronto since the start of the pandemic

Some of these restaurants have been around since the 50s. Seems they were over the hump, no?

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

You should learn to listen then. No one here is saying there shouldn’t be restrictions. No one here is saying to let people die. That’s ridiculous, just absurd.

The argument many are making here is that there is a more effective strategy than simply locking down and closing small businesses. A strategy, which realistically should’ve been implemented much sooner. The plan from the beginning should’ve been to focus on protecting the vulnerable and people that are most at-risk and basing a strategy with that as the central focus. They’ve had 9 months to develop an effective strategy, and nothing.

Exactly. It's getting very tiring explaining that just because I don't want to ruin people financially I'm automatically in favour of sacrificing the vulnerable. I've literally said otherwise dozens of times yet every day someone accuses me of it.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

The arguments for a do-nothing approach suggest just that.

This is binary and myopic. "You're either with us or with the terrorists." Sound familiar?