Coronavirus pandemic

[jemacedo9]

I agree that a mindset of looking to make lemonade out of a lemon is more helpful in fighting lockdown blues.

At this stage, however, as compliance with stay-at-home restrictions decays, I am becoming increasingly concerned that there may be no overlap between what we are willing to do to fight the virus and what we need to do to defeat it.

I think most people would be willing to comply with restrictions and make the most of it. However, there are rich fuckers in this country that are sad because they'll make only one million dollars this year instead of ten million, so they're spending money to agitate people who don't know any better into fighting the lockdowns.

The unfortunate thing about the United States of America is that it has turned from a free country to a for-profit enterprise, where life doesn't matter, only profit. We may soon get to see how much profit a dead body turns. My suspicion is not much.

"If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."  - Ebenezer Scrooge

[hbelkins]

  (5) Talk show hosts need to quit scolding Wyoming for not issuing a statewide stay-at-home order.  Seriously, they already flattened what little curve they ever had.

South Dakota, too, which still doesn't have a statewide order, despite a highly-publicized outbreak in Sioux Falls in the southeast corner of the state. But it does have a state order covering the two counties with about 90% of the state's cases. Meanwhile, the three counties in the northwestern corner of the state have no known cases at all. Many of the other counties in the western half of the state have no known cases or just one or two. One of the exceptions (Pennington County, including Rapid City) has only 11 cases (out of over 2000 statewide) and the city is considering relaxing its local restrictions.

I like the governor's resistance to the statewide order bandwagon, and her focus on where restrictions are most needed and a lighter (not no) touch where they aren't needed so far.

South Dakota's major problem has nothing to do with retail businesses or church services or anything like that. The hotspots in South Dakota are meat processing plants. The governor there has taken a reasonable approach to the situation, and their economy will rebound faster than other states that are imposing more draconian restrictions.

Kentucky has long been compared with Tennessee for a lot of reasons. Tennessee eats our lunch economically. They were well behind us in ordering businesses to be closed, and are reopening faster. If Kentucky wasn't already far behind Tennessee, it's going to be a lot worse because there's no reopening in sight here.

[bandit957]

I think Kentucky is starting to reopen businesses, but it's very slow.

[bandit957]

Also, some of the rural states are really eating everyone else's lunch in one regard: contact tracing apps.

Utah and North Dakota just put out apps that anyone can download that facilitate contact tracing. North Dakota's app has been picked up by South Dakota too. I downloaded both these apps, and they imply that they will be picked up by other states too.

[tradephoric]

The mortality rate of H1N1 was relatively low.

Is that the reason we're doing it now, though??  I thought the reason for the shutdowns was to prevent everyone from getting sick all at once and flooding the hospitals.  Now you're telling me it's to prevent deaths.  Which is it?

The result of a hospital system being overrun is more deaths as the hospitals can't adequately care for the influx of patients.  It's the whole scenario where two people need a ventilator but only one ventilator is available.  Once a health care system in a region gets overrun the mortality rate of the virus will increase in that region. 

[webny99]

I have a fundamental problem with the government excluding religion from a list of "necessary" activities.  I can order my groceries online and have them delivered, yet I am also allowed to go to the grocery store in person if I so choose.  I can watch an online sermon, yet I am not allowed to go to church in person if I so choose.

If there are less than 10 persons present, and you adhere to social distancing guidelines, who's to stop you?
But after all, and I hesitate to get into this, because we've already been reminded about the forum guidelines re: religion... but what is this time if not a time to prove inward reality and dependence, and not just dependence on the outwardly visible and social aspects of religion?
(And I'm happy to continue this conversation via PM, as I mentioned upthread.)

Is that the reason we're doing it now, though??  I thought the reason for the shutdowns was to prevent everyone from getting sick all at once and flooding the hospitals.  Now you're telling me it's to prevent deaths.  Which is it?

It's both. It is to prevent deaths, but the #1 way to prevent deaths is to prevents the healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Ultimately, if we go "back to normal" tomorrow, the healthcare system will get overwhelmed wherever a hot spot emerges, and that will be the case until there's a vaccine. Everyone would love for there to be a quick fix, but the nature of the situation dictates otherwise.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

If our hospitals are overwhelmed with coronavirus patients, what about heart attack/stroke victims? Car accidents? They'll die too if there's nowhere to put them.

[US71]

If our hospitals are overwhelmed with coronavirus patients, what about heart attack/stroke victims? Car accidents? They'll die too if there's nowhere to put them.

Already happening from what I'm hearing.

[US71]

You're still touching everything everyone else has.  You're still going out, and while you're out, you might as well stop at a few other places, again touching what other people have touched.

A church isn't a magical place where everyone is suddenly touching base and no one will get sick. 

The same is true of the grocery store.  I have a fundamental problem with the government excluding religion from a list of "necessary" activities.  I can order my groceries online and have them delivered, yet I am also allowed to go to the grocery store in person if I so choose.  I can watch an online sermon, yet I am not allowed to go to church in person if I so choose.

The government has always had the right to put reasonable limitations on first amendment rights.  You think we are "now" setting the precedent?  You should probably look a little deeper into our history.

Yes, and I realized that as I was typing it.  But I kept it in my post because two precedents are more than one precedent.  We could have instead set the opposite precedent of deciding the other way.

And the reason we didn't do this for the swine flu is because this is more deadly.

The mortality rate of H1N1 was relatively low.

Is that the reason we're doing it now, though??  I thought the reason for the shutdowns was to prevent everyone from getting sick all at once and flooding the hospitals.  Now you're telling me it's to prevent deaths.  Which is it?

Congregation at liquor stores, supermarkets, Walmart, etc. should not be happening.  That is pretty much why I am deferring a coolant drain and fill in my daily driver (this service is not overdue enough to justify a trip to Walmart to pick up antifreeze and distilled water) and trying to limit trips to Dillons as much as possible.  Why expose oneself unnecessarily to other people's poor impulse control?

I still consider the risk of contracting the virus at the grocery store to be quite small.  So I don't really see going shopping as "exposing myself unnecessarily" to anything.  Certainly not much more than I consider it as "exposing myself unnecessarily" to myriad other airborne respiratory diseases that are always going around any other year.  But to answer the question more directly, one might choose to go to the store in order to feel some sense of normalcy by doing a normal routine activity.

I don't know of any US jurisdiction that has forbidden people to go outside for exercise.

I don't either, but I know several people who live in countries that do prohibit such.  The first people we heard that sort of news from live in South Africa.  I know there have been such orders passed in Italy, although I don't know anyone who lives there.  Our best friends in Mexico need to make a border run to try and get new FMMs and vehicle permits (which may or may not happen, depending on whether INM is issuing FMMs right now), and they need to drive through the city of Monclova in order to do so;  in Monclova it is now prohibited to walk down the street without having "good reason" to be outside your home, and no more than two people are allowed to be driving in a car at the same time;  hopefully, their family of five isn't detained by the police while driving through town.

Health emergencies are qualitatively different because they are time-limited and necessity is a matter of scientific proof.

If it were a matter of scientific proof, then there would be no argument.  Science does not prove that the government should have the right to prohibit people gathering and practicing their religion.

So we should do like Walmart and limit the number of people inside at one time?  First 15 parishioners get a free sermon. Everyone after that gets free communion until we run out.

[J N Winkler]

If our hospitals are overwhelmed with coronavirus patients, what about heart attack/stroke victims? Car accidents? They'll die too if there's nowhere to put them.

Our ERs and ICUs have plenty of spare capacity, but there have been problems with patients trying to tough out serious symptoms at home because they fear there may not be a bed for them or that they may be exposed to COVID-19.  This has resulted in cases of appendicitis being caught late, stroke patients arriving past the window of effectiveness for clotbusters, and so on.

[kphoger]

If our hospitals are overwhelmed with coronavirus patients, what about heart attack/stroke victims? Car accidents? They'll die too if there's nowhere to put them.

Our ERs and ICUs have plenty of spare capacity, but there have been problems with patients trying to tough out serious symptoms at home because they fear there may not be a bed for them or that they may be exposed to COVID-19.  This has resulted in cases of appendicitis being caught late, stroke patients arriving past the window of effectiveness for clotbusters, and so on.

I think that's an understandable reaction.  It's quite natural to avoid hospitals at a time when you believe them to be full of very contagious people.  One might figure his chances are better just toughing it out.

[kphoger]

But after all, and I hesitate to get into this, because we've already been reminded about the forum guidelines re: religion... but what is this time if not a time to prove inward reality and dependence, and not just dependence on the outwardly visible and social aspects of religion?
(And I'm happy to continue this conversation via PM, as I mentioned upthread.)

I'll keep my reply brief, as I was already stepping over the religion line (and the politics one) a while before the purple text appeared.  All I'll say in reply is that it was true and refreshing for the first few weeks, but now that "new car smell" of revitalized inner faith is quickly fading and I'm ready for "normal" again.  If you want to talk more about that, then I'm open to a PM conversation.  I'll leave it up to you.

[bandit957]

I think that's an understandable reaction.  It's quite natural to avoid hospitals at a time when you believe them to be full of very contagious people.  One might figure his chances are better just toughing it out.

I got a very intense pain in my heart when the lockdowns began, and it's only started to fade in the past couple days. It's the kind of pain that you usually experience for about a second when you feel fear, except it's lasted 5 weeks. I didn't see a doctor, because I wanted medical resources to be used for coronavirus patients instead.

My days are numbered. The average coronavirus patient has more years ahead.

I don't want society destroyed just to save me. When it's my time to go, and if destroying society is the only way to save me, I'd rather just go.

[kphoger]

So we should do like Walmart and limit the number of people inside at one time?  First 15 parishioners get a free sermon. Everyone after that gets free communion until we run out.

Probably still wading in the shallows of political discussion here, but...  My preference would be to say something like "businesses, places of worship, and the like may re-open but must adopt special measures to ensure social distancing, limited personal contact, etc, etc, etc."  Then leave it up to them to figure out what those measures are, rather than dictating how they should operate.

I just don't get why it's assumed businesses (and churches and others) aren't able to make good decisions on their own.  Some grocery stores around here started implementing good ideas that weren't dictated by government, and that's a great thing.  I personally think some of them should remain after the crisis is over–specifically one-way aisles.  I think businesses (and churches and others) are quite capable of making good decisions like that while remaining open, especially now that were a couple of months in and a lot of good ideas have been percolating.

[Roadgeekteen]

I think that's an understandable reaction.  It's quite natural to avoid hospitals at a time when you believe them to be full of very contagious people.  One might figure his chances are better just toughing it out.

I got a very intense pain in my heart when the lockdowns began, and it's only started to fade in the past couple days. It's the kind of pain that you usually experience for about a second when you feel fear, except it's lasted 5 weeks. I didn't see a doctor, because I wanted medical resources to be used for coronavirus patients instead.

My days are numbered. The average coronavirus patient has more years ahead.

I don't want society destroyed just to save me. When it's my time to go, and if destroying society is the only way to save me, I'd rather just go.

Dude... what's wrong?

[bandit957]

I think that's an understandable reaction.  It's quite natural to avoid hospitals at a time when you believe them to be full of very contagious people.  One might figure his chances are better just toughing it out.

I got a very intense pain in my heart when the lockdowns began, and it's only started to fade in the past couple days. It's the kind of pain that you usually experience for about a second when you feel fear, except it's lasted 5 weeks. I didn't see a doctor, because I wanted medical resources to be used for coronavirus patients instead.

My days are numbered. The average coronavirus patient has more years ahead.

I don't want society destroyed just to save me. When it's my time to go, and if destroying society is the only way to save me, I'd rather just go.

Dude... what's wrong?

I think the lockdowns destroyed my heart. I seriously thought I wasn't going to make it.

This has been among the roughest 5 weeks of my life.

[Roadgeekteen]

I think that's an understandable reaction.  It's quite natural to avoid hospitals at a time when you believe them to be full of very contagious people.  One might figure his chances are better just toughing it out.

I got a very intense pain in my heart when the lockdowns began, and it's only started to fade in the past couple days. It's the kind of pain that you usually experience for about a second when you feel fear, except it's lasted 5 weeks. I didn't see a doctor, because I wanted medical resources to be used for coronavirus patients instead.

My days are numbered. The average coronavirus patient has more years ahead.

I don't want society destroyed just to save me. When it's my time to go, and if destroying society is the only way to save me, I'd rather just go.

Dude... what's wrong?

I think the lockdowns destroyed my heart. I seriously thought I wasn't going to make it.

This has been among the roughest 5 weeks of my life.

Hope you're feeling better.

[kphoger]

Dude... what's wrong?

From the little bits of info I've picked up here and there, I'm guessing there are quite a few little things "wrong" with bandit957, but not a whole lot of major ones.  (Correct me if I'm wrong, of course.)  If one doesn't think his condition is serious, then it's quite natural to avoid medical treatment.  But something like "very intense pain in my heart" is a different beast.

I had sharp chest pain for several days last year, and it started just a couple of days after I had experienced shortness of breath and a racing heart during a backyard project.  I was very concerned, as anyone would be.  But then I realized the two were connected and no reason to be alarmed:  I had been digging post holes by hand in the middle of July, and I have a desk job.  So, (1) my stamina isn't what it was back when I did manual labor for a living, and I had started to get heat exhaustion and dehydration by the time afternoon rolled around.  Then, later, (2) those chest muscles I hadn't used in ages were sore, so just breathing or sneezing or whatever was starting to cause them pain.  Basically, my "heart" symptoms were just the product of doing hard work while out of shape.

It's possible Bandit957 similarly decided that what he was experiencing wasn't really likely to be a serious heart condition that required medical attention.  Most things like that, after all, aren't.  However, his comment about destroying society by saving him makes me think otherwise.

Bandit957:  Seriously, if you're honestly concerned about your heart, then go see someone.  Around 10% of people who get a heart attack die from it.  The survival rate for COVID-19 is much higher.  You are the more critical patient.

[webny99]

But after all, and I hesitate to get into this, because we've already been reminded about the forum guidelines re: religion... but what is this time if not a time to prove inward reality and dependence, and not just dependence on the outwardly visible and social aspects of religion?
(And I'm happy to continue this conversation via PM, as I mentioned upthread.)

I'll keep my reply brief, as I was already stepping over the religion line (and the politics one) a while before the purple text appeared.  All I'll say in reply is that it was true and refreshing for the first few weeks, but now that "new car smell" of revitalized inner faith is quickly fading and I'm ready for "normal" again.  If you want to talk more about that, then I'm open to a PM conversation.  I'll leave it up to you.

OK, I get that, and I'm as ready as anyone else to put this in the history books too. But nothing this large in scale happens without good reason, so I feel it's important to be prepared to accept whatever comes. I could go on various tangents from there, but that's as good a spot as any to leave it, as far as I'm concerned. 

[US71]

I think the lockdowns destroyed my heart. I seriously thought I wasn't going to make it.

This has been among the roughest 5 weeks of my life.

I hope you're joking. These last 3-4 weeks haven't been easy with being quarantined at home , but I'm surviving so far.

[ozarkman417]

Being the no-life, video gaming hermit I am, my life hasn't really changed a whole lot since the start of the pandemic, with the biggest difference being not going to school, which has destroyed my sleep schedule. I'm also fortunate that one of my parents work in the healthcare industry (not dealing directly with COVID patients), so they get to keep their job for the time being.

I also just miss my friends, but at least there is Discord

[bing101]

https://www.ksbw.com/article/monterey-county-intends-to-extend-shelter-in-place-order/32275040#




Monterey County, CA in talks to extend their shelter in place orders.

[Duke87]

I got lucky, my wedding was last year.  I couldn't fathom having that day ruined because some governor told me that that I needed to stay at home because I might be spreading a virus that probably has a less than 1% chance of killing those it infects. I look back at my parents and see what they had to struggle through at the ends of their lives with disease after doctors told them that "staying home" and "sticking to the plan" was the best course of action. I can't imagine that either of them if they were alive today would look at the situation at hand and agree that staying home for an undefined amount of time was the right way to live.

Essentially this happened to one of my wife's friends. She was supposed to be married on March 28th, with a church ceremony and subsequent reception. Instead... they actually made a decision to call off the ceremony themselves before any executive order forced them to. But they saw things falling apart and didn't want to get stranded with an expired marriage license, so they rushed to the courthouse to get legally married while it was still open.

But I think the important point here is that the real reason their wedding was cancelled was because under the circumstances it was seen as inadvisable to gather a large number of people, some of them elderly, together in one place. If an executive order hadn't mandated the wedding be canceled, they would have cancelled it themselves anyway. And if they hadn't cancelled it themselves, a lot of people would have bailed and not showed up.

It is not the fault of the executive order that they were denied this experience.

If the quarantine makes you feel like life is not worth living, that means you are not making use of the time properly.

Realize that to a lot of people, hearing this sort of thing is unhelpful and just comes across as condescending/judgmental.

Given how Maslow's hierarchy of needs works, people will generally need to feel that their more basic needs for safety and security are met before they can focus on fulfilling any higher level self-actualization related needs. This is normal, and it is not a personal failing if anyone isn't productive during this time.

If you've successfully disengaged yourself from the situation enough that you are still able to focus on accomplishing other things, well... more power to you. But not everyone is going to be capable of doing this, and being told they should isn't going to change that.

[Max Rockatansky]

https://www.ksbw.com/article/monterey-county-intends-to-extend-shelter-in-place-order/32275040#




Monterey County, CA in talks to extend their shelter in place orders.

Don't have the link myself but I'm to understand that South Lake Tahoe will be fining anyone caught in the City on "unessential travel" $1,000 dollars.  That's the second City that I'm aware of that is talking actual citations in California, it would be nice to known what the others are...there are definitely far more.

[Scott5114]

I just don't get why it's assumed businesses (and churches and others) aren't able to make good decisions on their own.  Some grocery stores around here started implementing good ideas that weren't dictated by government, and that's a great thing.  I personally think some of them should remain after the crisis is over–specifically one-way aisles.  I think businesses (and churches and others) are quite capable of making good decisions like that while remaining open, especially now that were a couple of months in and a lot of good ideas have been percolating.

Churches are a thing that I'm not addressing in this comment, since I don't know enough about how they operate, and there's a good degree of emotional attachment involved that complicates matters. And it's against forum policy, too.

But the reason that it's assumed businesses aren't able to make good decisions on their own is because any business always has an inherent conflict of interest. The purpose of any business is to make money. Fine, this is a capitalist society. But the problem is that so many businesses have proven that the profit motive is their only motive, and they will pursue making a profit over and above all other interests, such as employee safety, the overall benefit of society, etc.

The only thing that stops this is when business leadership is cognizant enough of the conflict and chooses to act in the public good, which is, strictly speaking, against the business's own self-interest. However, if the business is a publicly-held corporation, such leadership is accountable to a faceless group of shareholders, who will remove leadership which does not maximize the shareholders' return on investment. This means the only way to make such a corporation behave in the public interest is to make doing so compulsory.