Pavlov and His Dogs

I have a little story for people who support Joe Biden’s plan for a lockdown.

Argentina went into a lockdown extremely early. It didn’t even have its first dozen cases yet. This was one of the harshest lockdowns on the planet. It’s easy to do because 95% of the population is urban and a third of it lives in the capital. Yes, really.

Argentina’s lockdown is the longest in the world. The harshest and the longest.

Do you want to know what the situation is today? COVID mortality in Argentina is exploding and is much worse than in the US.

Before you tell me this is because Argentina locked down too early, let me tell you about Spain. It locked down hard but only when deaths started to explode. But since then it really locked down. Extremely harsh measures. Everybody masked. A population completely onboard with the idea of masks. Lockdown, lockdown, lockdown.

Do you want to know what the situation is today? COVID mortality us exploding and is much worse than in the US.

Then there is a story of Sweden. Sweden never locked down. Masks are very sporadic. It’s doing great, the mortality is a lot better than in all countries discussed above.

Unless you are an island nation or have a population with a very different genetic makeup from ours (Africa and Asia, for instance, are following a completely different path with COVID), lockdowns have been demonstrated, time and again, dramatically to increase COVID mortality. They also result in a dramatic increase of cancer mortality, dementia mortality, cardiovascular mortality, suicides, and overdose mortality.

I know I’m clamoring in the desert because everybody who was physiologically capable of absorbing this widely available information already has. The tragedy is that we are held hostage by Facebook and its political puppets. And the people who are physiologically incapable of any response beyond that of a Pavlovian dog are guarding the door of our jail.

49 thoughts on “Pavlov and His Dogs”

  1. Medical bankruptsy is the most common form of bankruptsy in the USA. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has shown itself to not only hospitalise large numbers of people, but also that it spontaneously resurges.

    Therefore, every infected person today may spontaneously fall ill at some point in future, followed by possibly being taken to hospital, stripped of all wealth, and thrown out the door.

    What that means is that the individual is expected to prioritise the business and economy of others at the expense of not only their own health, but possibly their finances as well.

    From a certain point of view, that sounds bit like communism with a time delay.

    Like

    1. I just checked. In my county, we have had zero deaths in a while and 71 people in hospitals with COVID. Most of them are in there eighties and would probably be in hospital anyway. That’s not a large number of people.

      In the meantime, numbers of people who didn’t get early cancer screenings or cardiovascular screenings and ate developing more advanced forms of the disease is growing. How about their health expenses? Dementia is developing at skyrocketing speeds because people are deprived of human contact. Drug addiction is exploding. How about these health costs?

      We are killing and hurting masses of people over an illness with a 99,875% survival rates. How is this not insane? And talking about insane, this is doing horrible things to mental health. Who’s going to treat that and at what cost? Three million people die in the US from all causes. COVID is one tiny blip but we are dismantling society over it.

      Like

      1. “We are killing and hurting masses of people over an illness with a 99,875% survival rates. How is this not insane? And talking about insane, this is doing horrible things to mental health. Who’s going to treat that and at what cost? Three million people die in the US from all causes. COVID is one tiny blip but we are dismantling society over it.”

        Clarissa, the survival rate is so good because Hospital ICUs have not been overwhelmed with COVID cases. COVID ICU utilization is the real metric to look at, because the moment that hits 100%, survival rates go down significantly due to lack of treatment. Everybody hurts then, even young people who cannot access ICU emergency treatment for non-COVID related injuries or disease. That’s what we’re all trying to avoid with masks, lockdowns etc.

        Unfortunately, COVID ICU utilization seems to be growing rapidly throughout the country due to increase cases.

        Like

        1. If hospitals weren’t overwhelmed back in March when mortality was a lot higher than now, why would they be overwhelmed now when mortality has plummeted? What is the logic?

          Like

          1. The issue is that bad cases of COVID tend to put people in the hospital for a really long time. My 49 year old friend who died of it was in the hospital for over a month and I know someone who had it in July and survived, but he was in the hospital for 15 days. The mortality for COVID has gone down as treatment has improved, but the bad cases are still staying in the hospital for weeks.

            Like

      2. Clarissa, respectfully, you haven’t said anything about the people who will go bankrupt due to medical bills.

        If it were you, I, and a handful of people on this blog who were badly sickened, hospitalised, and were hit with hospital bills so high that we lost our homes etc for the sake of propping up businesses at the local strip mall, would you feel the same about all of this?

        Oh and by the way, I have to reject your comment about a “99.875% survival rate”. Honestly it’s too soon to say such a thing, because the virus is too new, as mentioned several times on this blog.

        Like

        1. Nobody is propping up businesses at the strip mall. They are all dead. Everybody is propping Amazon, Facebook, and Uber. This is why Biden filled his transition team with their representatives and several dozen lobbyists. This COVID charade is an effort to transfer capital from small business to mega corporations. And it’s working.

          Like

          1. And by the way, there’s zero evidence that businesses at the mall are a spreading vector. COVID spreads where you live. There have been mountains of studies.

            People who die of COVID or get hospitalized with it are overwhelmingly retirees. They are on Medicare so they aren’t ruined by the bills.

            Like

          2. Businesses in strip malls etc are empty because jurisdictions are either locked down, or people have changed their behaviour to reduce risk, or because people don’t have money to spend in them. From what I understand, you are imploring people to reverse that by going about their business as if there were neither virus nor pandemic. This is where I do not agree with you.

            Also I don’t think that COVID is a charade. Imo it’s more like a failure that is being capitalised on by ruthless businesspeople and shameless politicians.

            Regarding your statement “there’s zero evidence that businesses at the mall are a spreading vector”, respectfully I can’t accept that because malls are generally enclosed, windowless spaces in which people are in generally close proximity, filled with goods that are often handled by many people that often include food businesses, which is exactly the kind of environment that viruses spread in.

            Regarding your statement about those being hospitalised being “overwhelmingly” retirees on Medicare – okay. Let’s speak about the ones who aren’t, because their number is already sizeable and growing.

            So – is it ethical to insist that younger people who are not on Medicare go out and work during a pandemic where practically no safeguards have been implemented, where infection risk has generally not been mitigated, when treatment options for infected people are generally poor, and where infection means financial destruction.

            Btw just to make clear, Clarissa, I’m probably a lot more upset than you are about what has been done, and what is still being done. Many of us yelled loudly from the beginning that a Melbourne, Australia type lockdown be implemented as a temporary measure only, only so that permanent measures could be put into place (such as the installation of hermetic quarantines and altered protocols in hospitals etc) which we now know would have stopped the virus in its tracks in 6 weeks.

            Instead, the governments of the world understated to the public about how dangerous the virus was, transferred responsibility for containment to the public without even bothering to educate people about infectious disease, implemented temporary measures as if they were permanent without actually altering the structures and systems that had to be altered which was necessary to make them function in pandemic or post/semi-pandemic conditions (eg hospitals and their protocols), made everything a global worst case scenario, and now seek to skate away as if the whole thing was an accident rather than massive criminal neglect.

            Like

            1. “Instead, the governments of the world understated to the public about how dangerous the virus was, transferred responsibility for containment to the public without even bothering to educate people about infectious disease, implemented temporary measures as if they were permanent without actually altering the structures and systems that had to be altered which was necessary to make them function in pandemic or post/semi-pandemic conditions (eg hospitals and their protocols), made everything a global worst case scenario, and now seek to skate away as if the whole thing was an accident rather than massive criminal neglect.”

              This is a rarely talked about point. There really has been very little education about proper mask use and protection. A lot of info about wearing a mask, but I have yet to see anything about how to properly wear a mask. This is just so basic, it’s mind boggling we are dropping the ball on that.

              Fact of the matter is most people are just not prepared to handle a pandemic on their own, and that’s certainly what these last few months have felt like. Very little leadership, very little accountability.

              As you mentioned, medical bankruptcy is a very real problem during an normal year, during a pandemic it can be a nightmare. Yet here we are, still waiting to see if the Supreme Court and Republicans throw out the only major health care legislation that tried to do something.

              Like

              1. “Fact of the matter is most people are just not prepared to handle a pandemic…”

                Stop right there. That’s it. No need for anything else.

                Like

            2. No, I’m imploring people to let me do what I want and I promise to let them do what they want. I do not believe that police should drag the terrified out of lockdown. To the contrary, I’m very supportive of those who want staying in lockdown forever. But I don’t believe that it’s fair for them to lock me up against my will.

              The argument about “overwhelmed hospitals” collapsed back in April. Since then, nobody even tried to come up with an argument for why I should relinquish my freedom to these people.

              And I actually have been going about my business as usual since April 1. I highly recommend it but would never impose it by force.

              Americans used to understand what I’m talking about but a bout of sniffles terrorized them so much they now completely forgot the word “freedom.”

              Like

              1. “Since then, nobody even tried to come up with an argument for why I should relinquish my freedom to these people”.

                I’m short on time, but will offer something.

                Human rights are equal to human responsibilities. What that means is that you have a right so long as you take upon yourself the responsibility of properly using that right. People who do not properly use their rights have the right withdrawn by the remainder of the community.

                To illustrate, we say that women have the right to give birth and rear children (which they do) so long as they uphold their responsibility to properly raise that child in a reasonable, safe environment and provide for sustenance etc. If a woman, say, abuses and starves the child, the remainder of the community withdraws the right to rear children by removing the child.

                This is normal. This is accepted. There is no argument here that rights can be withdrawn if the responsibility of using those rights reasonably isn’t properly upheld.

                So, in regards to the pandemic, everyone has the right to free movement, the right to work, to obtain food, to exercise, to recreate etc etc so long as they uphold their responsibility to use those rights reasonably, by following whatever reasonable measures are needed to protect themselves and others from the spread of whatever disease is going around.

                Well, since we know from the Melbourne, Australia example that a 6 week lockdown can practically eliminate the virus, while we know from the Italian example that unrestrained movement leads to mass death, it means that everyone has a responsibility to themselves and others to follow relatively strict measures to stay home for that period except to obtain the essentials of life, and even then by following still further precautionary measures like keeping a proper distance, wearing the correct safety equipment etc until such point that the threat is overcome.

                So there you go. That’s the argument.

                Btw the above has nothing to do with the taking or relinquishment of freedom, since all human beings are free to either uphold responsibilities/rights, or not. That is totally up to them.

                What isn’t totally up to them, though, are the consequences of upholding or not upholding those responsibilities/rights.

                Oh and btw Italian hospitals are overrun again. Read it earlier. Dead guy on a bathroom floor.

                Like

              2. The problem with this argument is who decides what constitutes a threat and a responsibility. People that hold a lot of power in our society have decided, for instance, that voting for Trump literally murders large numbers of people. How much coercion should they be able to inflict upon those whom they believe to constitute this threat? Who decides what constitutes a threat and what doesn’t? People have lost their jobs because somebody felt physically threatened by their political beliefs. Is that OK? Where does it end?

                Another question. Isn’t this kind of thing precisely what we are being trained to accept? The idea that somebody’s fear justifies stripping others of their essential liberties? Once you’ve made this argument for a virus, why not make it about racism, however loosely defined. Nobody will argue that racism didn’t kill more people than COVID. It’s definitely more mortal. Should you be locked up if somebody who has the power decides that you are racist?

                These are not hypothetical questions. We already see at least two supposedly democratic countries planning to jail people for expressing themselves because that verbal expression is deemed physically harmful and even mortal.

                Like

              3. @methylethyl: Same thing we do with other infectious diseases. Monitor for outbreaks via medical professionals reporting and/or testing programs, test and trace when outbreaks occur, quarantine the infected, treat/educate/medicate/heal the infected. Afterwards, target the public with educational and preventative campaigns.

                Like

              4. @ Clarissa “The problem with this argument is who decides what constitutes a threat and a responsibility.”

                Apologies – I didn’t see this last night.

                Anyway, I don’t think that there is a problem understanding those things. The threat is infectious disease. Everyone should self isolate when sick without being told anyway, just like people who have HIV shouldn’t engage in unprotected sexual behaviour.

                The ones who should decide what constitutes a threat of an infectious kind are, obviously, medical specialists in that field or anyone who has an evidence based logical argument & evidence (in other words, junior doctors or even regular peopel who know what they’re talking about who have evidence deserve to be listened to just as much as medical specialists, the latter of which of course is listened to be default).

                As for the responsibility, that is self evident. Since human rights and human responsibilities are equal, it means that all human beings have that right/responsibility.

                Like

  2. Sweden:
    Coronavirus Cases: 171,365
    Deaths: 6,122

    Norway:
    Coronavirus Cases: 26,511
    Deaths: 291

    Sweden has 21x more deaths than neighboring Norway. This is a more apt comparison. The Swedish model does not look so good here.

    Like

    1. In Norway there were no lockdowns and no mask mandates. I know people in Norway. There were announcements in public transport, “If you really feel like you need a mask it’s ok, but remember that your anxiety is harmful.”

      Like

      1. Don’t know much about Norway, but their numbers certainly look much better than Sweden. Maybe we should talk about Norway instead of Sweden.

        Like

      2. I don’t know who your sources are, but Norway was in lockdown early on (from 12 March). Schools, universities, and borders were closed and it was announced as a lockdown at the time.

        So the Swedish strategy (or lack of one) has caused much animosity in Norway. This morning the Norwegian prime minister was on Swedish radio to basically say that Swedes are still welcome in Norway and that Norwegians should treat foreigners well and stop blaming them for the spread of Covid. This came after reports of Swedish commuters being forced to wear masks in Norway.

        Like

        1. Yes, I apologize, Norway locked down for two weeks in March after which their health ministry stated that it had been a mistake and the lockdown wasn’t needed. They made a stupid mistake early on but recognized it and are now doing enormously better than we are.

          Like

          1. As for the mutual dislike between Swedes and Norwegians, this has existed forever. Neighbors don’t tend to like each other. Whatever. Let’s concentrate on the enormous disparity between countries with draconian lockdowns and mask mandates and countries without. The former have gigantically higher mortality.

            Like

            1. “Neighbors don’t tend to like each other.”

              Oh, I dunno. In general, Canadians like Americans well enough… and are also eternally grateful that they’re morally superior to them.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. “they’re morally superior…”

                Omigosh, should read – “eternally grateful that we’re morally superior…”

                (When you’ve got it, flaunt it; don’t hide your candle under a bushel; etc.)

                Like

            1. I will let this disrespectful language stand for once but after this I will start banning. Just a friendly warning.

              You are absolutely right, Norway has very recently started to succumb to the panic and issuing these new suggestions. The country has been doing great so far but with these new guidelines I predict they will soon leave Sweden far behind in COVID deaths.

              Like

              1. It’s interesting how nobody is even mentioning Spain and Argentina that I discussed at length. I’m guessing that at this point we have at least as much Hispanic population here in the US as people of Scandinavian origin, so these are relevant countries.

                But they don’t fit the narrative so to hell with them. Let’s instead pick on the currently insignificant differences between Sweden and Norway because that can somehow be massaged into the dogma if you squint real hard.

                Like

              2. Another example to add to your Spain and Argentina is France. They had a very harsh lockdown, and their death rate is also very high, although not as high as Spain.

                The mystery is in all this is Germany; I hear they had a harsh lockdown (from people I know there) but their death rates have remained quite low. Any ideas why?

                Like

              3. Personally I think that the Swedes and North Europeans in general are genetically resistant to the virus as compared to the Spaniards. Also, Swedes and other Northern Europeans generally behave in ways that naturally reduce the spread of disease as compared to the Spaniards, with an example being that they do not kiss each other on both cheeks when they greet.

                Anyway more will be revealed about it after this upcoming (very sad) winter.

                Like

    2. “Sweden has 21x more deaths than neighboring Norway.”

      What’s this even mean? Norway is the richest country in the world, has smaller cities/towns than its neighbour, and half Sweden’s population.

      Sweden has fewer plague deaths per million population than the U.K., France, Spain, Italy and Argentina. It has less than one-third the number of deaths per million of New York State.

      Norway, on the other hand, has more plague deaths than Japan, S. Korea, Hong Kong, Kenya, Algeria, and Monaco.

      Managing the plague is serious business – the tired and cheap ‘progressive’ talking point comparisons between “Sweden and its Nordic neighbours” are a lazy and dumb distraction.

      Like

  3. “lockdowns have been demonstrated, time and again, dramatically to increase COVID mortality”

    I get the idea (yeah, I know, crazy, paranoid, conspiracy theory, vamp til ready…..) that most of those imposing lockdowns do this consciously in order to increase covid mortality… (to keep people scared so they can get as much of the great reset done as possible before enough people catch on and stop them?) I know, crazy…..
    The second wave in Poland has been a lot worse than March-April and the government has introduced a few restrictions but consistently said a second lockdown was not on the horizon and have been jumping around trying to keep to that. Schools were closed but a tentative reopen date has been set (almost everybody I know hates remote learning and there aren’t glowing reviews in the media).
    And cities has seen a lot of protests (officially the abortion protests ended with the government backing down but some still go out regularly) and yesterday Warsaw had its annual celebration of soccer hooligans using Independence Day as an excuse to go around breaking things.
    At street level almost everybody wears masks or shields (often incorrectly) and goes about their business. Public transport is not following the passenger limits printed on the doors of buses and streetcars though some stores do limit numbers, causing lines outside (like old time….). When I go outside for walks I take off the mask and only put it on when there are people 5 meters or closer. A few people don’t wear masks and no one says anything…
    Against this and the large number of ‘new’ cases everyday the numbers that matter (hospitalizations, respirator use and fatalities) have plateaued and maybe started to fall a bit, not keeping up with the new case numbers.
    It’s almost as if this was just another seasonal illness that follows a particular cycle….

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Do people really think that we can eradicate it via lockdown and then…. what? Never let anyone into the country from any other country, ever again? Become a Hermit Kingdom like North Korea?

    Meanwhile, I talked to an out-of-state relative recently, and had bad news. They are living in a lockdown state up north, and the old folks in the family are all scared to go anywhere. The three remaining grandparents have all gone from independent living and very mild lapses of memory pre-covid, to very concerning symptoms of dementia, and starting to discuss long-term care facilities among the family. Everyone in the family agrees that having them cooped up in their apartments, not seeing the kids and grandkids and friends and lunch buddies they’d normally socialize with has been catastrophic to their health.

    So what are we doing this to them for?

    Like

    1. Gosh, I’ve seen it in my own family. My parents spent the entire pandemic taking care of my niece and nephew to let their parents work. Then a new lockdown hit in October and it’s very harsh. So they spent three weeks not seeing the grandkids or their friends. My father still works but my mom – the grandkids and the friends are get reason for living. So I noticed in those three weeks that they are starting to get loopy, weird, very depressed, and listless. Now they decided to disregard the quarantine and are back to taking care of the kids. This brought them back to normal. But a few months of this isolation and I don’t want to imagine the consequences. They say that living in isolation isn’t worth it. It’s no life. Why should we disregard their wishes? Because they are old? That’s kind of vile.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. @methylethyl: Nothing is being done ‘to’ anyone. What is happening is that a movement and activity prohibition is in place that is temporary for the sake of avoiding as many infections as possible so as to research and develop both prophylactics and treatments.

      If I had to guess, I would say that in about 9 or so months, people are going to feel optimistic about everything.

      Sadly though, I think that within about one month, people are going to be looking at Europe in horror and wanting to stay home.

      Like

      1. Oh, yeah, we’re scaring the crap out of old people until they’re afraid to leave their subsidized two-room efficiency apartments… for eight months now. We are totally not doing anything to anyone. Very temporarily. I’m sure they’ll feel much more optimistic once they’ve been moved from their own apartments into bleach-scented nursing homes.

        The kind of lockdown that would eradicate the disease isn’t actually possible. You still need people to stock shelves, make deliveries, slaughter animals, prepare food, work in hospitals, work in restaurants (even if it’s just delivery!), fix plumbing, put out fires, troubleshoot electrical wiring, repair refrigerators, work on the utility lines, pump out basements after water line breaks, cut down dead trees, sell hardware, run pharmacies, run grocery stores, run gas stations, drive ambulances, guard worksites, and ten thousand other activities that are not optional, can’t be done from home, and require some amount of contact with people outside one’s home. You can’t go six weeks without those activities.

        Right now, all over our coasts, there are shipyards working on essential military and civilian infrastructure that costs millions of dollars a pop: research vessels, ferryboats, coast guard ships, Navy cruisers, grain barges, oil tankers, resupply boats. None of those projects can be abandoned for six weeks without catastrophic losses, and there are hundreds of employees on every site: engineers, safety officers, welders, painters, foremen, inspectors, trainees, pipefitters, sandblasters, crane operators… every one of whom has to be checked in by a gate guard. None of these people can do their jobs from home, and no, you can’t just shut down a shipyard for six weeks and send everyone home. If the shipyard were to do that, current projects would be damaged by weather, contracts would be more than six weeks behind, and half the employees on the yard would move somewhere else looking for work, so that when they tried to resume operations, they’d have to start by repairing damage from neglect, and then they’d have to spend weeks or months reassembling a skilled workforce that has scattered across the country. All shipbuilding projects, from the Long Island ferry to the tugboats working the Baltimore ports, to the coast guard boats protecting our borders, to the ships that haul supplies out to the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, would be delayed by months. It would be a national crisis.

        It absolutely terrifies me that people can look at the lockdowns we already had, and conclude “we just didn’t lock down hard enough.” The country has survived far worse diseases without such extreme measures. We didn’t decide to throttle all industry in the US to eradicate Polio, or Measles, or Diptheria, or Tuberculosis. What kind of bubble do you have to live in, to think that we should sacrifice the livelihoods of millions to prevent the slightly-earlier deaths of thousands of already-very-sick people?

        Like

        1. Well, we didn’t lock down hard enough. Not when it counted right at the beginning, anyway. If we had locked down properly back in December 2019 or maybe even early February 2020 most of this could have been avoided.

          Now it probably doesn’t matter how hard anyone locks down, since without medical therapies to help people resist the virus and even easier testing methods, it probably wont work because something like 10% of the population wont go along with a lockdown for any reason.

          As for the elderly who have been scared out of their minds etc sure, to avoid arguing it is fair to say that some people in positions of power are doing things to them ie abusing them by locking them away without offering remedy or hope, just as it would be fair to say that some (most) medical professionals are acting for them by shielding them from known a known hazard in anticipation of reliable therapies that I would guess will be available sometime during/around wintertime in the Southern hemisphere.

          Like

          1. One of my best friends works in a nursing home right now. The employees get tested every week. Do you know what they do every time someone (staff or resident) tests positive (whether or not they have any symptoms– and this is crazy, given the false positive rate!)? The residents are all confined to their rooms for… ten days, I think? Their meals are brought to them. They spend hours and hours a day alone in their rooms.

            She is desperately searching for a new job, because she feels like a prison guard.

            Is this really, seriously, better than some of them dying from COVID?

            –Now it probably doesn’t matter how hard anyone locks down–

            I’m glad someone has caught on to this! Yay! Can we now move on, past the “coulda woulda shoulda” stage, and stop trying to enact punitive measures on the entire population that coulda woulda shoulda worked eight or nine months ago, but are far, far too late now? And just get on with our lives in the new “COVID is already out there in the population” world that we actually live in, instead of the fantasy world where we can have a lockdown now that will magically travel back in time to February and stop an airborne pathogen that’s now spread all over the country?

            Lockdowns are a fantasy of the rich, who can work from home, or who have BS jobs that don’t actually need to be done. If 100% of the rest of us stayed home for even 24 HOURS, there would be mass death and infrastructure failure. The power plant workers, the dudes who work at the water treatment facility and the sewage treatment plant: they can’t just stay home and work remotely. A month would effectively end life as we know it in America. If 50-60% of the workforce is essential, it’s NOT A LOCKDOWN anyway, it’s a selective vacation for office fauna and the people who fold shirts at Old Navy.

            Like

            1. @ methylethyl: In your post, you described a situation in a nursing home (which sounded awful) and then asked if it wouldn’t be better to let a few people die than to do that to people. Respectfully, since you didn’t mention the option that I’d prefer, which is to improve conditions in the nursing home while finding out when therapies will reasonably be available, then I can’t say yes or no.

              Regarding what you said about getting on with our lives, well, yes – but there are vaccines ready to be manufactured, as well as wider availability of things like masks etc while we are going into winter in the Northern hemisphere. So personally, I’d advocate to be as strict as possible, keep people locked down through winter, and then see.

              That being said, I find it criminal that governments around the world did not organise food and medicine delivery during lockdowns, and also that they did not suspend the mortgage payments that they control (since they control banking regulations, ultimately). So if there is to be an extended lockdown through winter etc, it should be done in a way that doesn’t risk those who go out to get food, nor torture those who have a house to lose.

              Regarding what you said about lockdowns being a fantasy etc – in the US, Canada, UK etc I agree absolutely. Half the population was locked down, while half wasn’t, which means that the measures in place were practically pointless (imo).

              Like

              1. “keep people locked down through winter, and then see.”

                “Regarding what you said about lockdowns being a fantasy etc – in the US, Canada, UK etc I agree absolutely. Half the population was locked down, while half wasn’t, which means that the measures in place were practically pointless ”

                This is like talking to someone who’s deaf in one ear.

                Like

              2. @ methylethyl: To clarify, what I mean to say is that what has been done so far is bad. Something has to change. We can’t keep going as we are.

                For the right decision to be made about what has to change, we should look around to see if there are new big learning experiences possible or any major factors likely to change in the very near future. By ‘near future’ I mean less than 4 weeks.

                Based on my learning, professional knowledge etc, I think that the two big things to look at for the upcoming short period of time are 1) the efficacy of newly produced vaccines in real life not the laboratory and 2) the number of cases and deaths in Europe as weather that is optimal for viral transmission sets in.

                If, hypothetically, the vaccines end up working without sending too many people to hospital while case numbers don’t change significantly in either direction in Europe, then there is an argument for changing things in the US in a way that you would like.

                If though, on the other hand, the vaccines are less effective than expected or deficient in some way, while the situation in Europe gets significantly worse, then it would mean that loosening everything up in the US just as optimal viral transmission weather sets in is basically mass murder.

                Since all of our countries have paid so dearly for the horrendous management of the past 10 or so months, it seems irresponsible to me to make a decision right now without just staying locked down a few weeks longer so as to learn things that are pivotal. That is why my messaging seems conflicted. Imo, we are at a juncture that is as important as that in February this year.

                Btw, I lean towards Europe melting down in the aforementioned time period and horrifying many of us with what we will see on television/the net. It’s hard to get excited while holding that opinion.

                Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.