Covid-19

[AWP]

Few reasons. I wanted to put the account to a different email, As I wanted to become more involved in the community, receiving emails to my primary account, with the already obnoxious amount of emails I get from amazon and every other site, I didn’t want to miss conversations I was involved in.

I felt my username was a poor choice, I had logged in to post a clip for someone and felt it reflected badly and I hadn’t seen till after I made my new account the thread about the ability to change it once every 6 months. I plan on deleting the account as it’s not needed and I apologize if this caused an issue.

I have been doing extensive research for years, picking my friends brains on SF. I had begun to train and put my effort into prepping for the journey but (insert long story of my crazy ex getting pregnant on purpose and my 2 year court battle) my son was born. The age limit was 32 and people had stated getting a waiver was meh. So I began looking into other options, and I found CCT in the ANG, who’s age limit was 39. Recently, however, the age limit of SF was raised to 35, so it became an option again. Since I had only made like 2 posts, and I was already planning on reworking my account, I used the same details so that way I was still me and could again pursue my goal of SF.

I apologize if I should have stated i had the other account or something, again I was going to delete it.

I'm good with this, but here's why I had the initial skepticism:

We've had incidents where a member would create multiple accounts and then either quote themselves with the other account or use multiple accounts to get around bans or bad behavior. It reflects poorly on the individual and since there is the option to request a name change, your decision is a bit perplexing and a bad look.

 

[amlove21]

And to ALLLLLLLLLL the cats worldwide that think they’re really sussing out numbers, ‘finding the hidden truth’, yet somehow telling others they’re not woke.....


yipes.

 

[Juggrnaut]

I'm good with this, but here's why I had the initial skepticism:

We've had incidents where a member would create multiple accounts and then either quote themselves with the other account or use multiple accounts to get around bans or bad behavior. It reflects poorly on the individual and since there is the option to request a name change, your decision is a bit perplexing and a bad look.

I understand. All I can say is I had no malicious intent or any attempt to deceive anyone. The other account isn’t banned or have anything negative against it, I think it literally has 3-4 posts and I don’t have a problem naming it if you don’t already know. I don’t expect you to trust me. It’s my fault for not searching through the forum beforehand for a solution. In the end it’s your judgement and actions have consequences regardless of the intentions. I do apologize again.

 

[amlove21]

I understand. All I can say is I had no malicious intent or any attempt to deceive anyone. The other account isn’t banned or have anything negative against it, I think it literally has 3-4 posts and I don’t have a problem naming it if you don’t already know. I don’t expect you to trust me. It’s my fault for not searching through the forum beforehand for a solution. In the end it’s your judgement and actions have consequences regardless of the intentions. I do apologize again.

Fair enough. press.

 

[Dame]

And back to Covid...

Woman Dies After Catching COVID-19 for a Second Time​

So even with all the restrictions people get re-infected. And the second go-around is worse.
Can I take the mask off now?

 

[Juggrnaut]

COVID-19: Herd Immunity and Reinfection


This idea has been passed around a lot, the fact we’re isolating ourselves is making it more likely the virus will continue to spread over and over again. Rather, we should be allowing it to take over as many as possible, while putting protections in place for the very very few it would hurt (pre existing conditions folks).

 

[GOTWA]

She was 89 years old and on chemo. I mean, should I be shocked?

 

[Dame]

She was 89 years old and on chemo. I mean, should I be shocked?

Shocked? No. But re-infection implies that even now these mandatory masks and waiting for a rushed vaccine is just more BS.

 

[Juggrnaut]

She was 89 years old and on chemo. I mean, should I be shocked?

Isn’t this kinda the theme? They use people with pre existing conditions as the example every time, like no ones gonna notice she’s 89 on chemo...

 

[Locksteady]

Shocked? No. But re-infection implies that even now these mandatory masks and waiting for a rushed vaccine is just more BS.

What are you assuming about the purpose of trying to get everyone to slow the spread of the virus until they create an initial vaccine that people can retake every three months (or less) until they figure out a more lasting solution that makes it BS vs, say, just what you've decided is past your personal limit for tolerating enforced public healthy safety measures?

 

[Devildoc]

If the .gov put just as much headspace--no, half as much--into combatting opioid and alcohol abuse, we'd legit save so many more lives. But no, "wear masks and devastate the economy" makes so much more sense to maybe mitigate the risk for that 0.5% of high risk population.

You know the seasons are changing when a lot of people in the medical and public health community are coming out and saying "you know, maybe all of this wasn't such a great idea...."

 

[Juggrnaut]

If the .gov put just as much headspace--no, half as much--into combatting opioid and alcohol abuse, we'd legit save so many more lives. But no, "wear masks and devastate the economy" makes so much more sense to maybe mitigate the risk for that 0.5% of high risk population.

You know the seasons are changing when a lot of people in the medical and public health community are coming out and saying "you know, maybe all of this wasn't such a great idea...."

Too much money in the opioid and alcohol market. We combat it, but only to control the flow of it.

Can label it “tin foil hat” speak, but with everything that’s happened, how the evidence is growing it was manufactured and released on purpose and that once again it’s around election time all these crazy events just happen to pop up; just another thing to destabilize our country and try and boot Trump.

 

[Locksteady]

If the .gov put just as much headspace--no, half as much--into combatting opioid and alcohol abuse, we'd legit save so many more lives. But no, "wear masks and devastate the economy" makes so much more sense to maybe mitigate the risk for that 0.5% of high risk population.

That would require the kind of healthcare and funding that this administration prefers to continue allocating to other initiatives like defense spending. Additionally, consumption-based reversible health issues like these are far less of an uncontrollable factor than, say, a communicable lethal disease that is spread through people -not- exercising social distancing and contact avoidance.

You know the seasons are changing when a lot of people in the medical and public health community are coming out and saying "you know, maybe all of this wasn't such a great idea...."

That isn't a fair characterization of, at least, what WHO officials have been stating this entire time.

 

[Devildoc]

That would require the kind of healthcare and funding that this administration prefers to continue allocating to other initiatives like defense spending. Additionally, consumption-based reversible health issues like these are far less of an uncontrollable factor than, say, a communicable lethal disease that is spread through people -not- exercising social distancing and contact avoidance.

That isn't a fair characterization of, at least, what WHO officials have been stating this entire time.

I trust the WHO about as much as I trust gas station sushi, and my lack of trust goes back through 30 years of dealing with some of their policies (in a civilian setting and a military setting)..... I like the Great Barrington Declaration, as does many physicians and public health experts I know. I do not know what you do or what your creds are, and I'd like to know, because I would like to know if I can have an eye-to-eye convo, or have to break down things Barney-style given my 30+ years of healthcare experience.

You really want to blame this administration? We've known for decades how to clamp "consumption-based reversible health issues", but NO administration has seriously wanted to take it on. If we could do that, the number of lives we would save and/or prolong would much more significant than those with COVID. I do realize people are rightly concerned about an illness with a devastating >99% survival rate /sarc, but maybe if we target the people who are at-risk balanced with lifting restrictions for those at less risk we can strike a balance.

 

[GOTWA]

That would require the kind of healthcare and funding that this administration prefers to continue allocating to other initiatives like defense spending. Additionally, consumption-based reversible health issues like these are far less of an uncontrollable factor than, say, a communicable lethal disease that is spread through people -not- exercising social distancing and contact avoidance.

That isn't a fair characterization of, at least, what WHO officials have been stating this entire time.

Then ban tobacco products as they kill 500k people a year due to cancer. You know, twice the amount of people covid will kill this year.

 

[Locksteady]

I trust the WHO about as much as I trust gas station sushi, and my lack of trust goes back through 30 years of dealing with some of their policies (in a civilian setting and a military setting)..... I like the Great Barrington Declaration, as does many physicians and public health experts I know.

I agree in principle but I certainly don't think a national health care response to a pandemic should be based on it, as it is very challenging to fully identify all the members of vulnerable populations in a society. What reinfection cases would also indicate is the 'herd immunity' strategy promoted by the Declaration may no longer be a plausible approach to addressing the virus.

Less related is the fact that the Declaration incorrectly asserts that governments prefer to do extended full lockdowns as a primary measure to curb the virus until a vaccine is created.

It also doesn't help the Declaration at all that people like "Dr. Johnny Bananas" are among the legitimate medical signatories on the Declaration.

I do not know what you do or what your creds are, and I'd like to know, because I would like to know if I can have an eye-to-eye convo, or have to break down things Barney-style given my 30+ years of healthcare experience.

You are welcome to break things Barney-style as much as you feel. For the most part all of the information I present comes from second-hand, citable open-sourced statements from medical officials working on COVID-19 (or generalists).

You really want to blame this administration? We've known for decades how to clamp "consumption-based reversible health issues", but NO administration has seriously wanted to take it on. If we could do that, the number of lives we would save and/or prolong would much more significant than those with COVID. I do realize people are rightly concerned about an illness with a devastating >99% survival rate /sarc, but maybe if we target the people who are at-risk balanced with lifting restrictions for those at less risk we can strike a balance.

My statement doesn't absolve any responsibility from prior administrations. It highlights the priorities of this administration, which is the only one positioned to address the problems you chose to bring up.

Then ban tobacco products as they kill 500k people a year due to cancer. You know, twice the amount of people covid will kill this year.

If you feel that strongly, challenge the administration to do so.

 

[Devildoc]

I agree in principle but I certainly don't think a national health care response to a pandemic should be based on it, as it is very challenging to fully identify all the members of vulnerable populations in a society. What reinfection cases would also indicate is the 'herd immunity' strategy promoted by the Declaration may no longer be a plausible approach to addressing the virus.

It's not super hard to identify at-risk populations now; we do it for RSV, flu, immunocompromised. It's not trying to invent something new.

Less related is the fact that the Declaration incorrectly asserts that governments prefer to do extended full lockdowns as a primary measure to curb the virus until a vaccine is created.

Lockdowns are what the governments want to do (with masks and SD); or at least, what they are doing/did. At least it's what is going on in NC from our governor, whose multi-phased plans are economically crippling and non-sensical.

 

[Cookie_]

We've known for decades how to clamp "consumption-based reversible health issues", but NO administration has seriously wanted to take it on.

For myself and anyone else not knowledgable about this:

Are these methods other than straight abolition you're referencing? If so, what methods?

 

[Juggrnaut]

While I agree we should try and save as many lives as possible as far as health goes, and continue trying to prolong life as much as possible; the world is already beyond 7 billion people and can’t continue to sustain itself. How do you combat a humanitarian effort that is essentially destroying the earth at the same time? The most populated places are the biggest shit holes, and it’s spilling over into well established places, as is the case in countries like Sweden and our own country.

 

[Devildoc]

For myself and anyone else not knowledgable about this:

Are these methods other than straight abolition you're referencing? If so, what methods?

Regarding opioids, historically they are easy to prescribe, easy to dispense. That has S-L-O-W-L-Y been changing; a lot of docs in NC can't prescribe narcotics any longer, and if they do, it's limited to a one- or two-time script. Understanding the pathophysiology of addiction is leading to different management techniques. This will mitigate the issue from that end. Pain clinics are becoming more popular.

Mitigating second- and third-generation adverse health behaviors in high-risk populations like smoking in the black population and drinking in the Hispanic population are where investments need to be made. There have been small studies with good result with diet control and smoking cessation amongst low-income black populations.

These things take time, like two or three generations. But people want the magic bullet, and they want it now. What we DO know is abolition does not work, at all. The over 'lives saved' will be enormous and savings to health care will be in the billions.