To: Lane3 who wrote (164946 ) 5/21/2020 10:06:28 AM From: i-node Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 362854 >> There is plenty of evidence of that. A million and a half infected people plus nearing 100K deaths. Sorry for the long post you may just prefer to skip it. It is all my opinion responding to the 100K deaths (infected people who aren't hospitalized I see as "normal course of business"). As the gov of FL pointed out yesterday, people have been claiming for weeks that "getting back out there" would cause an escalation in the case rate. Didn't happen. Hasn't happened in Texas (although there was a meat packing plant that added a lot of cases). The elephant in the room is the fact that hardest hit places are are blue states. NY. NJ. MA. MI. CT. DC. PA. Even LA, a Red State, was hit hard but primarily in the blue part of the state (NOLA). Maybe just correlation, but one has to question whether there is a behavioral aspect of it. Perhaps these areas should look at Red States as a guide to how to do it right. Most importantly, the US would have come through this with relatively little death without NYC. Most of us have recognized the place is filthy for years; but I think this provided great proof of it. Without the 50K deaths from the worst blue state losses, this would have been roughly equivalent to a mildly elevated annual flu event. So, we need to figure out what's going on there. So, your metaphor -- "Unless you don't acknowledge a wet pavement as evidence that it has rained, you acknowledge sickness as evidence that getting out there is problematic" -- really doesn't "hold water" so to speak. Transmission of the virus is far more nuanced. I do believe the masks probably help in limited circumstances. If I were trying to attend a rock concert, for example, I would feel it was essential as people are packed into spaces of maybe 2-4 square feet for an extended period of time. You're probably going to come out with it. But we've seen this door swing both ways. In Cummins prison in Arkansas (the prison about which the movie "Brubaker" was written), the idiots had 700 inmates who were infected. Not surprising, but some state bureaucrat had his head totally up his ass to allow it to happen. OTOH, the local jail in the town we used to live in in Arkansas -- a much smaller operation at about 500 inmates -- has not seen much spread. While the facility is beyond capacity, they have been able to quarantine new arrivals for 14 days and provide testing for complicating factors (TB, other lung disease) quickly and handle it appropriately. As a result, a crowded facility in a town loaded with drug abuse seems to have averted disaster until now at least. I consider this dichotomy as an example of right vs. wrong. I'm quite sure there are no masks in jail, other than maybe the guards. My point here is the spread of this disease isn't as arbitrary as it may appear. Things are being done in ways that cause particular outcomes. Any notion that the medical establish knows what to do must be dispelled by the HCQ screw up. They're fumbling around like the rest of us.