Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#55,976
#55,976
BowlBrother85 said:
... and in order to know who the asymptomatic carriers of the Coronavirus are, in order to isolate them from the high-risk members of society, we need mass testing. Without this mass testing, more people will contract the Coronavirus, who are at risk of becoming seriously ill from it.
Click to expand...

The onus of isolation needs to fall to the high-risk members of society, not the other way around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, 0nelilreb, RavinDave and 2 others
#55,977
#55,977
BowlBrother85 said:
... and in order to know who the asymptomatic carriers of the Coronavirus are, in order to isolate them from the high-risk members of society, we need mass testing. Without this mass testing, more people will contract the Coronavirus, who are at risk of becoming seriously ill from it.
Click to expand...

That is a completely different argument than if we had less testing we would have less confirmed cases. How can you not see this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
#55,979
#55,979
hog88 said:
That is a completely different argument than if we had less testing we would have less confirmed cases. How can you not see this?
Click to expand...
The objective should be to reduce the number of cases involving people who become seriously ill from the Coronavirus... who cares about reducing the number of cases involving asymptomatic people? Only Donald Trump, because he thinks that reflects poorly on his administration's response... and because politics are at the forefront of his every concern and consideration - that comes first.
 
#55,980
#55,980
BowlBrother85 said:
... and in order to know who the asymptomatic carriers of the Coronavirus are, in order to isolate them from the high-risk members of society, we need mass testing. Without this mass testing, more people will contract the Coronavirus, who are at risk of becoming seriously ill from it.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how absurd that is? Should we test every asymptomatic American? If so, how frequently -- every day? Twice a week? Hell, why don't we devote 50% of our healthcare spending to just testing everyone over and over again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, Matt2496, 0nelilreb and 5 others
#55,981
#55,981
BowlBrother85 said:
The objective should be to reduce the number of cases involving people who become seriously ill from the Coronavirus... who cares about reducing the number of cases involving asymptomatic people? Only Donald Trump, because he thinks that reflects poorly on his administration's response... and because politics are at the forefront of his every concern and consideration - that comes first.
Click to expand...
Trumps messaging is crap. So is the media’s. We should be talking about how testing is increasing, hospitalization percentages and death rate percentages are going down as the denominator grows, as supposed to the continued fear porn. “Oh my god more people tested positive.” How about the truth. This thing isn’t as deadly as we once thought and less likely to cause hospitalization.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, hog88, 0nelilreb and 3 others
#55,982
#55,982
BowlBrother85 said:
... and in order to know who the asymptomatic carriers of the Coronavirus are, in order to isolate them from the high-risk members of society, we need mass testing. Without this mass testing, more people will contract the Coronavirus, who are at risk of becoming seriously ill from it.
Click to expand...

Are we going to test daily? Or just before being allowed out to grocery shop?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and VolsAgainstTheWorld15
#55,984
#55,984
kiddiedoc said:
Do you have any idea how absurd that is? Should we test every asymptomatic American? If so, how frequently -- every day? Twice a week? Hell, why don't we devote 50% of our healthcare spending to just testing everyone over and over again.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that. LOL. We should test everyone we can whose job it is to come in contact with the general public on a daily basis. If you work in an assisted living center? Yes, you should be tested. If you work in a pharmacy? Yes. Testing is not "overrated". That is what I was saying.
 
#55,985
#55,985
BowlBrother85 said:
I didn't say that. LOL. We should test everyone we can whose job it is to come in contact with the general public on a daily basis. If you work in an assisted living center? Yes, you should be tested. If you work in a pharmacy? Yes. Testing is not "overrated". That is what I was saying.
Click to expand...

This isn’t anywhere close to your first statement.

For those working in the assisted living facilities, for example, how often would they be tested?

What about people who go to work in an office everyday with 100+ other people?
 
#55,987
#55,987
DC_Vol said:
This isn’t anywhere close to your first statement.

For those working in the assisted living facilities, for example, how often would they be tested?

What about people who go to work in an office everyday with 100+ other people?
Click to expand...
In an assisted living center? Not every day, but definitely once a week. Those places will have to shut down from not having any patients left otherwise. As for the people who work in an office, that depends on how many (if any) cases there have been in that office, and how many people are at risk of becoming seriously ill in such an office if they contract the Coronavirus. There are a lot of people getting sick in Iowa meat packing factories right now, because they work in close contact with each other and the testing in those facilities has been insufficient... and there are many at-risk people employed there.
 
#55,988
#55,988
BowlBrother85 said:
In an assisted living center? Not every day, but definitely once a week. Those places will have to shut down from not having any patients left otherwise. As for the people who work in an office, that depends on how many (if any) cases there have been in that office, and how many people are at risk of becoming seriously ill in such an office if they contract the Coronavirus. There are a lot of people getting sick in Iowa meat packing factories right now, because they work in close contact with each other and the testing in those facilities has been insufficient... and there are many at-risk people employed there.
Click to expand...

Are you making this up as you go along? Or is there some kind of reference chart to help me understand.

Also, I believe the meat packing breakouts have more to do with 3-5 families living in a single family house with stay at home orders than it does close contact work environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#55,989
#55,989
DC_Vol said:
Are you making this up as you go along? Or is there some kind of reference chart to help me understand.
Click to expand...
No, it's true... Google "Iowa meat packing COVID-19 outbreak". The Coronavirus has infected 1,653 meatpacking workers at 4 plants. It has reached a point, that these plants are having to shutdown. This could have been prevented if they had started testing people when the outbreak began... but they didn't.
 
#55,990
#55,990
BowlBrother85 said:
No, it's true... Google "Iowa meat packing COVID-19 outbreak". The Coronavirus has infected 1,653 meatpacking workers at 4 plants. It has reached a point, that these plants are having to shutdown. This could have been prevented if they had started testing people when the outbreak began... but they didn't.
Click to expand...

I doubt they had to shut down. Probably forced to. Most of the infected were fine.
 
#55,991
#55,991
BowlBrother85 said:
No, it's true... Google "Iowa meat packing COVID-19 outbreak". The Coronavirus has infected 1,653 meatpacking workers at 4 plants. It has reached a point, that these plants are having to shutdown. This could have been prevented if they had started testing people when the outbreak began... but they didn't.
Click to expand...

I believe it’s true. It’s been discussed in this very thread if memory serves me correctly.

I was asking if you were making up BB’s rules for testing frequency as you typed. It kind of seemed like it was put together on the fly.
 
#55,992
#55,992
BowlBrother85 said:
No, it's true... Google "Iowa meat packing COVID-19 outbreak". The Coronavirus has infected 1,653 meatpacking workers at 4 plants. It has reached a point, that these plants are having to shutdown. This could have been prevented if they had started testing people when the outbreak began... but they didn't.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the real story how many had it and don’t need hospitalization?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, 0nelilreb, VolsAgainstTheWorld15 and 2 others
#55,995
#55,995
allvol123 said:
This. Just think of the naval outbreaks from weeks ago. You would have thought we were on the verge of having to surrender to Estonia's navy.

Now its crickets.
Click to expand...
As long as positives increase while hospitalizations and death decrease, we are actually getting stronger as a society. It should be celebrated rather than used as fear porn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002, hog88, 0nelilreb and 5 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top