94chem said:
Look at the chart for America. Now look at the chart for Brazil. Now look at the rest of the world.
Can anyone identify what was different?
I'll take testing, for $1000.
Mask order was issued on July 2nd, does that mean cases will drop starting Thursday?
10,527 Views |
94 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by reb,
I'll take testing, for $1000.
Because masks are a deterrent not a cure all.
Also, though California has had mask requirements for a long time, they did work while we were shelter in place and only making trips to the grocery store once a week. Once the SIP was lifted and people started congregating and gathering our rates increased. It's not that masks don't work, it's that they work with distancing and other disciplined practices that have fallen off.
Also, though California has had mask requirements for a long time, they did work while we were shelter in place and only making trips to the grocery store once a week. Once the SIP was lifted and people started congregating and gathering our rates increased. It's not that masks don't work, it's that they work with distancing and other disciplined practices that have fallen off.
It's odd to me the herd immunity crew never addresses this little fact.Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They dug their heels in on herd immunity early, and like everything else on this, people on both sides refuse to be flexible and roll with changes in our knowledge of this disease.
The lines in the sand have been drawn and lots of people on both sides won't budge off of them.
The lines in the sand have been drawn and lots of people on both sides won't budge off of them.
Virtually all the experts are in agreement that immunity almost certainly provides a benefit for years, not months. Why won't you listen to the experts? Do you hate science?Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
No immunity? Interesting considering Sweden recorded 17 deaths since July 8, and only 31 new cases yesterday, their lowest since the beginning of March. Yes the case count could increase as they update it, but they the death curve most certainly looks burned out.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
Player To Be Named Later said:
They dug their heels in on herd immunity early, and like everything else on this, people on both sides refuse to be flexible and roll with changes in our knowledge of this disease.
The lines in the sand have been drawn and lots of people on both sides won't budge off of them.
But then when people say look at the places that were hardest hit and they are not experiencing a second wave of case increases currently (Italy is sending kids back to school), they question is why? The answer could be an immunity has built up in addition to some additional measures the country has taken.
The science is on the side of immunity for the majority of viruses. Of course there are some who do not have immunity, but it would be shocking to have none at all.
We are only 6 months into this deal globally. Anyone claiming anything with certainty regarding immunity at this point just doesn't seem logical.
Maybe the immunity really is only 2-3 months. Guess we just have to wait and see what happens with the hardest hit regions of Italy in August and September.
Personally, the thing I dislike most about the COVID board is everything is used by each side to degrade someone else. It's just as exhausting as the media you have cut out of your life, Player.
By the way, a lot of people are dug in on a vaccine and guarantee it will be available, but if anyone shows a difference of opinion on that issue, the people dug in don't really consider it. It's a two way street, man. Everyone is dug in on what they think, which is complete dumb.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Do you hate the scientists in that article? Only like scientists that agree with you?fat girlfriend said:Virtually all the experts are in agreement that immunity almost certainly provides a benefit for years, not months. Why won't you listen to the experts? Do you hate science?Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
My point is it isn't settled science, so why be in a huge hurry to get as many sick as we can as fast as we can? That hardly seems like a solid plan.
bay fan said:It's odd to me the herd immunity crew never addresses this little fact.Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
It's also odd the vaccine crew never acknowledges the fact that a vaccine might not be made, much less effective. Every plan made always includes, "until a vaccine is made."
Maybe it goes both ways and we should stop trying to call people stupid in a passive aggressive way. It happens on both sides on his board and it's exhausting.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Beat40 said:Player To Be Named Later said:
They dug their heels in on herd immunity early, and like everything else on this, people on both sides refuse to be flexible and roll with changes in our knowledge of this disease.
The lines in the sand have been drawn and lots of people on both sides won't budge off of them.
But then when people say look at the places that were hardest hit and they are not experiencing a second wave of case increases currently (Italy is sending kids back to school), they question is why? The answer could be an immunity has built up in addition to some additional measures the country has taken.
The science is on the side of immunity for the majority of viruses. Of course there are some who do not have immunity, but it would be shocking to have none at all.
We are only 6 months into this deal globally. Anyone claiming anything with certainty regarding immunity at this point just doesn't seem logical.
Maybe the immunity really is only 2-3 months. Guess we just have to wait and see what happens with the hardest hit regions of Italy in August and September.
Personally, the thing I dislike most about the COVID board is everything is used by each side to degrade someone else. It's just as exhausting as the media you have cut out of your life, Player.
By the way, a lot of people are dug in on a vaccine and guarantee it will be available, but if anyone shows a difference of opinion on that issue, the people dug in don't really consider it. It's a two way street, man. Everyone is dug in on what they think, which is complete dumb.
That's my point. The science, IMO, isn't settled enough that we should just be racing to get as many people as we can sick as fast as we can get them sick. Seems like a pretty dumb plan, unless the science is absolutely settled. Even then, it still strikes me as pretty dumb.
I do not disagree with your post overall. It's bad to make a plan around something you don't know for sure.
Edited to say I think we're on the same page overall.
Just perceived something in a way I don't think it was meant to be through text. For that, I apologize.
Edited to say I think we're on the same page overall.
Just perceived something in a way I don't think it was meant to be through text. For that, I apologize.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I mean, did the people who seem to be clamoring for us to get as many folks sick with this thing as we can, as fast as we can, not watch Italy, Spain, New York, etc? Did that look like a good time to be had by all and an appropriate way to reach herd immunity IF herd immunity even exists?
It seems like some of that crowd thinks going through the hell that Italy and Spain did would be acceptable because, you know, herd immunity.
I have to think there's a better way to get there than just throwing our hands in the air and yelling out "God's Will!"
It seems like some of that crowd thinks going through the hell that Italy and Spain did would be acceptable because, you know, herd immunity.
I have to think there's a better way to get there than just throwing our hands in the air and yelling out "God's Will!"
Player To Be Named Later said:
I mean, did the people who seem to be clamoring for us to get as many folks sick with this thing as we can, as fast as we can, not watch Italy, Spain, New York, etc? Did that look like a good time to be had by all and an appropriate way to reach herd immunity IF herd immunity even exists?
It seems like some of that crowd thinks going through the hell that Italy and Spain did would be acceptable because, you know, herd immunity.
I have to think there's a better way to get there than just throwing our hands in the air and yelling out "God's Will!"
Plus, I think the economy would have been worse off in that situation.
Based off my travel this weekend, compliance is currently 95%+.
Everyone in any gas station or store I entered was masked. Bucees was nothing but masks.
Everyone in any gas station or store I entered was masked. Bucees was nothing but masks.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Must not have seen Ted Cruz while out and aboutMouthBQ98 said:
Based off my travel this weekend, compliance is currently 95%+.
Everyone in any gas station or store I entered was masked. Bucees was nothing but masks.
To be fair, nobody was drinking through their masks.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I am mostly kidding, but also doesn't take me close to 2 hours to drink my coffeeMouthBQ98 said:
To be fair, nobody was drinking through their masks.
It is good for most people around me that this is the case
Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
My only question IF this is indeed true, is how long are you willing to mask up and put events on hold etc. going forward. B/c if this is true than that potentially means the vaccine, if there really ever is one, wouldn't work potentially. 2 years, 5 years, forever? That's the issue I have with the phrase "the new normal". We can't have this be a "normal". At some point we will have to unmask and face realities that unless treatment makes the virus relatively harmless (which for the majority it already is), Covid is with is for the long haul. Legit question given the reality that we are not a compliance society.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm not worried about a vaccine. I think the focus should be put on spending $$$ to research treating the severely ill instead.
Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
If immunity only lasts 2-3 months, show me some confirmed cases of people getting infected twice. It's been around Europe and here since February so there should be a ton of reinfections if they're right about 2-3 months.
Are there a lot of reinfections? Are there any?
Are there any reports of double infections? I mean, legitimate ones? There might have been false positives, but this thing has been going on 8 months. If 2-3 months were legit, we'd hear about a ton of double hospitalizations. I can't think of a single one across the world, or at least so minimal, that seems like fear based drivel.
The 2-3 month thing seems to be a worst case thought process with minimal to no evidence to back it up. Especially if the t cells were true, in that all they have to go off of is that some people's antibodies(and certainly not all) may only last that long. But as has been discovered, antibodies don't seem to be the only thing protecting us from this virus.
The 2-3 month thing seems to be a worst case thought process with minimal to no evidence to back it up. Especially if the t cells were true, in that all they have to go off of is that some people's antibodies(and certainly not all) may only last that long. But as has been discovered, antibodies don't seem to be the only thing protecting us from this virus.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You go counter their research if you want to. I'm not sold one way or the other yet. Note I said "may" only last for a few months.GAC06 said:Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
If immunity only lasts 2-3 months, show me some confirmed cases of people getting infected twice. It's been around Europe and here since February so there should be a ton of reinfections if they're right about 2-3 months.
Are there a lot of reinfections? Are there any?
So do you think getting as many people sick as we can, as fast as we can, is a solid plan here? Should we follow the Italy, Spain, New York path on purpose?
Some of you sound like the folks who would seriously go throw a "Covid Party" just to catch it on purpose.
Player To Be Named Later said:
I'm not worried about a vaccine. I think the focus should be put on spending $$$ to research treating the severely ill instead.
I tend to agree. Treatment seems a better route. Plus I'm not sure how interested I'd be in being the first to have the vaccine. Since I'm "at risk" I'd be eligible but I'm a little concerned if any bugs they'd need to iron out than get it the second waive of the vaccine. Kinda of like not buying the first year of a new model car. Let the first buyers find the kinks and than buy hear 2 or 3. But treatment options seem like a more realistic thing right now.
My question is just that what if it takes years to get a good treatment or enough treatments for everyone. Do we keep canceling events, ****ting down, wearing masks etc for years? Is anyone really willing to live like that?
Capitol Ag said:
Is anyone really willing to live like that?
Yes. And they're willing to force it on you.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Also being in the higher risk category, I'd much prefer we found workable treatments for serious progressions of the disease than a vaccine that we don't know will work for any real length of time.
And with herd immunity not being really settled science just yet, that just reinforces my thought that treatments > vaccines. And I think treatments can probably be worked up faster than a vaccine. Look at the difference in treatments now vs just a few months ago.
And with herd immunity not being really settled science just yet, that just reinforces my thought that treatments > vaccines. And I think treatments can probably be worked up faster than a vaccine. Look at the difference in treatments now vs just a few months ago.
Player To Be Named Later said:You go counter their research if you want to. I'm not sold one way or the other yet. Note I said "may" only last for a few months.GAC06 said:Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
If immunity only lasts 2-3 months, show me some confirmed cases of people getting infected twice. It's been around Europe and here since February so there should be a ton of reinfections if they're right about 2-3 months.
Are there a lot of reinfections? Are there any?
So do you think getting as many people sick as we can, as fast as we can, is a solid plan here? Should we follow the Italy, Spain, New York path on purpose?
Some of you sound like the folks who would seriously go throw a "Covid Party" just to catch it on purpose.
I countered their research by pointing out that immunity obviously does last more than 2-3 months. Otherwise people would be getting sick again. It's common sense. So why do people like you keep bring it up? As for the rest, nice straw man. Calm down.
Player To Be Named Later
Joined:
Sep 22, 2003
Posts:
23,247
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't know, ask the scientists who just said it isn't "obvious" and ask them why they are saying they're not sure.
Pretty much nothing about this disease remotely should be considered "settled science" yet.
Pretty much nothing about this disease remotely should be considered "settled science" yet.
It's fine they're "not sure". That makes perfect sense. The lack of reinfections is pretty clear. Is it 4,5,6 months? I don't claim to know. It's clearly not 2-3 months or people would be getting reinfected
I think there's a prevailing theory that immunity to COVID-19 isn't just antibodies. It also has to do with T-Cells and B-Cells which, as I understand it, wouldn't show up in antibody tests. I'm sure there are way more qualified people on here who could give more insight into that.
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
San Antonio actually issued mask mandates to local businesses along with stricter regulations regarding bar and restaurant capacity towards the end of June and we have started to see a reduction in the rate of rise of cases going back the last week or so which coincides exactly with when they started cracking down. Certainly public awareness could also be a factor, however.
Yea it looks like we are starting to flatten slightly here in Bexar County:
Says the guy who says masks don't help.fat girlfriend said:Virtually all the experts are in agreement that immunity almost certainly provides a benefit for years, not months. Why won't you listen to the experts? Do you hate science?Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
You answered your own question. The entire effort to stop Covid is about preventing hospitals from getting overloaded. As a doc on here on another thread indicated: his hospital is nearly to the point where they won't be able to handle non-Covid cases.fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
Herd immunity is a moot point... you let it run rampant, you run the risk of clogging hospitals, and then it becomes a risk to everyone because you can't get proper care for all the other crap that might kill you.
I think it makes total sense to widely use masks when the hospitals are in danger of being overwhelmed. I don't think it makes sense to use them for really any other time or reason. So, of course, whether or not it makes sense for someone to use a mask is dependent on their local community and local hospital, mostly - although neighboring communities and neighboring hospital also should factor in.deadbq03 said:You answered your own question. The entire effort to stop Covid is about preventing hospitals from getting overloaded. As a doc on here on another thread indicated: his hospital is nearly to the point where they won't be able to handle non-Covid cases.fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
Herd immunity is a moot point... you let it run rampant, you run the risk of clogging hospitals, and then it becomes a risk to everyone because you can't get proper care for all the other crap that might kill you.
So the problem is that we don't operate in isolated communities. Someone can easily drive from Houston through several small west Texas towns en route to California. And along the way they can spread this thing to gas station workers, who then spread it to others in the community and other travelrs going elsewhere. Some of those communities can get overwhelmed with 2 critical COVID patients.fat girlfriend said:I think it makes total sense to widely use masks when the hospitals are in danger of being overwhelmed. I don't think it makes sense to use them for really any other time or reason. So, of course, whether or not it makes sense for someone to use a mask is dependent on their local community and local hospital, mostly - although neighboring communities and neighboring hospital also should factor in.deadbq03 said:You answered your own question. The entire effort to stop Covid is about preventing hospitals from getting overloaded. As a doc on here on another thread indicated: his hospital is nearly to the point where they won't be able to handle non-Covid cases.fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
Herd immunity is a moot point... you let it run rampant, you run the risk of clogging hospitals, and then it becomes a risk to everyone because you can't get proper care for all the other crap that might kill you.
The Marines recently rotated out a few hundred Marines in Okinawa. That island hadn't had a single case of COVID since 4/30. Now there are a huge number of positive Marines on the island (can't disclose actual numbers), and several locals that are positive.
Additionally, if you had asked New York public health officials in February if they thought they'd get over run with COVID they would've laughed at you. The infectivity of this virus leads to the possibility of it very easily getting out of hand. It makes much more sense to not fight the masks and keep this under control than choose not to wear a mask and then have to claw back at high rates of infection with draconian measures, such as massive shut downs and stay-at-home orders.
Here's an exampel of 2 positive hair stylists that wore masks, as well as all their clients - no one got sick yet. Masks may be crucial to starting to open things back up. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6928e2.htm It is somewhat anecdotal, but it's still some evidence that it may be worth the discomfort.
Honestly, it might prove to be the best route for the world, the country, and/or our state as whole. No one knows for sure. This meddling around may just cause more hardship and a longer road ahead, all the while killing off nearly as many, if not completely as many over an 18 or 24 month period anyways. Or maybe the few people you saved from it die off before being able to live a life they want to live anyways.Player To Be Named Later said:You go counter their research if you want to. I'm not sold one way or the other yet. Note I said "may" only last for a few months.GAC06 said:Player To Be Named Later said:Well, there's the small detail that active immunity may only last for 2 or 3 months. If that's the case, what is the benefit to hurrying and letting everyone get sick as quickly as possible?fat girlfriend said:Here is my question...why do we want to slow the spread, except to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed? Wouldn't it be better to go ahead and get it behind us? If masks don't actually stop people from getting sick, but rather merely delay people from getting sick, then shouldn't we acknowledge that?bigtruckguy3500 said:
Mask mandates do not stop this virus. And they certainly do not guarantee compliance.
Social distancing, good hygiene, and steps to mitigate respiratory droplet contamination combine to slow the spread.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-new-uk-study-shows-antibodies-fade-after-three-weeks-2020-7
If immunity only lasts 2-3 months, show me some confirmed cases of people getting infected twice. It's been around Europe and here since February so there should be a ton of reinfections if they're right about 2-3 months.
Are there a lot of reinfections? Are there any?
So do you think getting as many people sick as we can, as fast as we can, is a solid plan here? Should we follow the Italy, Spain, New York path on purpose?
Some of you sound like the folks who would seriously go throw a "Covid Party" just to catch it on purpose.
I'm not saying throw a covid party or get as many people sick as we can as quickly as we can, but I also question if we are doing too much and just delaying things, while making many other matters far worse. So I do question is it really worth it for our society as a whole? I have my serious doubts.
Only time will tell what all was right and wrong during this. Unfortunately, we won't have the full answers for a long time.
Featured Stories
See All
McMillan makes SEC Tourney debut on Thursday
by Olin Buchanan
8:02
4h ago
794
TexAgs On-Site: Music City Madness is already underway
by Luke Evangelist
Scouting Report: #6 Texas A&M vs. #11 Oklahoma (SEC Tournament)
by Tom Schuberth
Five A&M recruiting storylines to following this spring
by Ryan Brauninger
20:40
13h ago
3.4k