GRAND OPENING - GRAND CLOSING (Florida)

[TLSnell1981]

People are what causes it to spread. IMO to live with this virus means wearing a mask and keep physical distancing in place. As well as enforcing those rules. Its not that hard but for many its like building the pyramids.

This virus will likely be will us for quite a while. How long do you think we should stay in place? It's really not a practical or realistic solution long term. Masks may help a bit but not like some claim. Otherwise we'd be in sports stadiums and Disney would be wide open. We don't know if a vaccine will be effective. Bill Gates is now suggesting we will need multiple doses.

 

[jlwhitney]

There's only one reason really - travel. If a person doesn't move around neither does the virus. If everyone in the world could stay at home for 2-3 weeks starting today, it would be over.

If a person has to move, a mask can help minimize the risk of movement though.

It still won't be over, it will not be eradicated. This virus is going to circle around spiking in different areas with high population of vulnerable until it starts to run out, and then will most likely fall into a more seasonal pattern. The good news is that in time it won't be novel anymore, that is why its so bad right now.

 

[lovethesun12]

It still won't be over, it will not be eradicated. This virus is going to circle around spiking in different areas with high population of vulnerable until it starts to run out, and then will most likely fall into a more seasonal pattern. The good news is that in time it won't be novel anymore, that is why its so bad right now.

If no one moved for 2-3 weeks, how would it spread if everyone in the world had recovered?

(FTR - I said if we could, I know for essential workers that's impossible, but it was a hypothetical...if we actually could, it really would be gone wouldn't it? It takes 2-3 weeks to recover from it....).

I'm genuinely asking. Can someone spread it if they recovered? I didn't think they could.

 

[sam_gordon]

If everyone in the world could stay at home for 2-3 weeks starting today

Didn't most places do that? Businesses were closed (except for essentials), people worked from home, entertainment was eliminated. For us, it lasted about 6 weeks. Sure, it cut things down, but "over"? Nope.

 

[lovethesun12]

Didn't most places do that? Businesses were closed (except for essentials), people worked from home, entertainment was eliminated. For us, it lasted about 6 weeks. Sure, it cut things down, but "over"? Nope.

No one did that. Again I meant it as a hypothetical. Airline workers still worked, grocery workers still worked, etc.

I meant, hypothetically, if we just said "freeze" right now, and no one in the world moved for 2-3 weeks, wouldn't it be over?

I think what I said might have sounded literal, but I meant it hypothetically.

 

[Farro]

No one did that. Again I meant it as a hypothetical. Airline workers still worked, grocery workers still worked, etc.

I meant, hypothetically, if we just said "freeze" right now, and no one in the world moved for 2-3 weeks, wouldn't it be over?

No. Viruses are never over.

Once we start to move about the country/world again, virus will pop up again.

 

[wombat_5606]

This virus will likely be will us for quite a while. How long do you think we should stay in place? It's really not a practical or realistic solution long term. Masks may help a bit but not like some claim. Otherwise we'd be in sports stadiums and Disney would be wide open. We don't know if a vaccine will be effective. Bill Gates is now suggesting we will need multiple doses.

 

[TLSnell1981]

View attachment 513494

"If". I see lots of ifs, up to (insert percentage), possibly... Numbers are all over the place.

 

[lovethesun12]

No. Viruses are never over.

Once we start to move about the country/world again, virus will pop up again.

Cool. So someone who recovered from coronavirus could have it reactivated without transmission? I didn't know that.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

If we locked down for 4-8 weeks, as a country, the virus would LARGELY go away. It would certainly be contained to the point where we could do proper contact tracing.

But we are selfish and not willing to do that.

 

[sam_gordon]

I meant, hypothetically, if we just said "freeze" right now, and no one in the world moved for 2-3 weeks, wouldn't it be over?

Well, it would probably have to be closer to a month first.
Second, is that realistic?
People still need food (or do you want everyone to stock up for a month?).
People still need to do home repairs.
Someone still needs to maintain the electrical grid and the sewer system.
Someone still needs to fight fires and maintain peace.
Someone still needs to staff medical facilities.
Since people still need to get out, you still need people to staff gas stations.
Those are the "bare bones" I can think of (and I'm sure there's more).

 

[lovethesun12]

You do realize it not possible to just "freeze" everyone

"If".

Yes, lol. I think this came across way more literally to most when I meant it hypothetically, so apologies for my phrasing.
That's why I said "if everyone could".

 

[sam_gordon]

If we locked down for 4-8 weeks, as a country, the virus would LARGELY go away. It would certainly be contained to the point where we could do proper contact tracing.

But we are selfish and not willing to do that.

OK, you're locked down for two months now. How are you going to pay your mortgage or your rent? How will you pay for food? For medical insurance?
"I can work from home." Will your business still be open? Why? No one can do business with them.

 

[sam_gordon]

Yes, lol. I think this came across way more literally to most when I meant it hypothetically, so apologies for my phrasing.
That's why I said "if everyone could".

And "if everyone could" fly, we wouldn't need airlines. I don't mean to be snarky (ok, maybe a little).

 

[wombat_5606]

"If". I see lots of ifs, up to (insert percentage), possibly. Numbers are all over the place.

Watch this and I'll let you decide. Perhaps seeing is believing.

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CDE-yWuhPhu/?igshid=v5ewx4gj2193

 

[lovethesun12]

Well, it would probably have to be closer to a month first.
Second, is that realistic?
People still need food (or do you want everyone to stock up for a month?).
People still need to do home repairs.
Someone still needs to maintain the electrical grid and the sewer system.
Someone still needs to fight fires and maintain peace.
Someone still needs to staff medical facilities.
Since people still need to get out, you still need people to staff gas stations.
Those are the "bare bones" I can think of (and I'm sure there's more).

Again, no it isn't realistic. It was a hypothetical situation - movement is what causes it. To the best of my knowledge if we could (hypothetically - emphasize it this time, lol) stay in place for 2-3 weeks we should get rid of it. But apparently someone said the virus could be reactivated; I wasn't aware of that so it may be incorrect even hypothetically.

Guys this wasn't meant to be a debate at all, sorry it came across that way. When I posted I honestly didn't think that was something that could actually happen.

 

[Farro]

Cool. So someone who recovered from coronavirus could have it reactivated without transmission? Cool I didn't know that.

Is that what I said? You said the virus goes away - I said a virus never "goes away". It will pop up again. Just like the common cold. May take a while if we all somehow lock-down for at least 6 weeks at same time, but unless everyone is suddenly vaccinated - everyone - it will still be here.

 

[kdonnel]

View attachment 513494

I wonder where the NPR got their evidence of a potential 30% effectiveness?

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/

This recent crop of trials added 9,112 participants to the total randomised denominator of 13,259 and showed that masks alone have no significant effect in interrupting the spread of ILI or influenza in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.

And that is with medical grade masks.

Masks, especially poorly worn homemade cloth masks, may reduce transmission 0%. The NPR should publish that same graphic with the left and right sides identical because that could just as well be the case.

The value I see in masks is that requiring them makes a portion of the population willing to get out and about and live their life.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

OK, you're locked down for two months now. How are you going to pay your mortgage or your rent? How will you pay for food? For medical insurance?
"I can work from home." Will your business still be open? Why? No one can do business with them.

The government needs to step in and pay for folks to stay home. That's the only way this is going to work.

 

[wombat_5606]

"If". I see lots of ifs, up to (insert percentage), possibly... Numbers are all over the place.

Then read this study. It's a long read, so I will highlight a sentence or two.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.20069567v2.full.pdf
The 3M brand mask worn as designed had a mean removal efficiency of 75%; with the exception of the Charcoal Air Pollution facemask and Sewn Mask J, which came close to this removal efficiency, all other masks achieved removal efficiencies of less than 60% (range of 30-60%) when worn as loose-fitting masks. The addition of a nylon stocking overlayer improved the removal efficiency for all loose-fitting masks, including commercial medical-type masks, by 15 to 50 percentage points and also decreased the time-based standard deviation (indicating more consistent particle removal); this provides a recommendation for mask efficacy improvement that can Assessment of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks in Terms of Particle Filtration Efficiency Updated April 17, 2020 8 easily be implemented by individual mask wearers. W

You can find a mask that protects you by 30% or more.