[Discussion Post] Should we stay locked down for the COVID-19 pandemic or open up?
100 percent of the liquid rewards for this post will go towards rewarding engaging and insightful comments. . .
Hello everyone! My has this week flown by! I did not realize that it was already time to write up another discussion post; I then saw that last week's post paid out. I decided for this week to make the discussion about something on all of our minds: should we end the coronavirus lock down, or continue it?
Video
Here is an hour and a half of debate on the matter that my father (@remlaps) shared to his facebook page.
What do you think?
So to clarify, this post is meant for you to discuss in the comments your opinion on the matter. Please remember that it is not a black and white issue. There is middle ground between opening everything, and keeping everything closed. Please feel free to discuss what you think is necessary at this time. Since this is a heated topic for us all, I ask that you remain respectful in the discussion! But please comment your opinion on how you think we should proceed. I will upvote any comments that I view as engaging so that the author will get a share of the post's liquid rewards.
The Initiative
Right now, it is important to develop the discussion aspect of Steem. In order to do this, the experimental account, @penny4thoughts was created by @remlaps.
If the account (@penny4thoughts) is set as a beneficiary, it will evenly distribute the liquid portion of the post's rewards to the authors of comments that the post author upvotes with 100 percent voting power. For this post, and all future [Discussion Posts] in the category 'penny4thoughts', I will be setting @penny4thoughts as a beneficiary for 100 percent of the posts' rewards, and I will monitor the discussion and upvote valuable contributions.
Additional Information About My Use of Bidbot(s)
I am using bidbots to try to increase the amount of liquid rewards of these discussion posts so that there is more stake for rewarding engaging discussions. I know that the use of bidbots has been looked down upon, but I think an exception can be made when trying to enhance the community through rewarding positive discussion.
I think that locking down or opening up is directly related to Region and not a National or International discussion
Have you seen any data to support the idea that lockdowns actually reduced fatality rates in any location at all (as compared to less extreme and more targeted mitigation efforts)? I haven't scrutinized the math/stats, but I have seen a number of sources claiming that the results are indistinguishable between locations that instituted lockdowns and those that didn't.
For example
I haven't stumbled across anyone who looked at the numbers and then claimed to find an empirical effect, although that could be due to selection bias arising from the sites that I chose to include in my RSS feed. I'm interested to know if anyone's making that claim.
And of course, there are the counterexample countries like Sweden, Japan, Taiwan, etc...
I agree that mitigation decisions should be made regionally or locally, but I'm not totally convinced that lockdowns are actually necessary or useful anywhere as a mitigation tool (with the likely exception of huge international hubs like NYC).
I can not show any data, in fact there is some that seems to counter it.
On the other hand... The dense populations are struggling, so I less contact seems good.
In anycase to treat New York and Montana the same, makes zero sense.
An interesting initiative for engagement @cmp2020. and @remlaps...
I'm hesitant to deliver my thoughts about the question posed, simply because I do not feel as if the Government has been completely transparent on the Covid-19 matter; possibly for security reasons.
'If' the truth has all been laid out and there is 'nothing' else, potentially more serious/dangerous coming down the pike, that the lockdown is meant to protect us from, then I'm for opening up :>)
Sorry I didn't set @penny4thoughts as beneficiary...I'm not quite sure how to do that in 'Comments'.
Stay well and happy.
Thanks for the reply! The penny4thoughts beneficiary is just for the top-level post, so there was nothing special that you needed to do in your comment. In order to encourage engagement, @penny4thoughts will redirect rewards from @cmp2020's post to the authors of substantive and relevant replies.
I agree with your point that it seems like things have not been completely transparent during this lockdown.
Got'cha...Thanks for the clarification.
People in at risk groups are doing a good job isolating themselves. Even if we ended the government imposed lock down, we will see at risk groups staying in self-imposed isolation.
Businesses do not want their employees getting sick. We will see all businesses engaged in extra sanitation measures and continuing with isolation efforts and still wearing masks.
I think the debate should include science about our immune system response. Human immune systems seem to work best during the Spring and Summer.
If the US delayed the lock down until Fall, we would miss the best window for an immune response.
The lock down only slowed the spread of the disease. The disease is going to creep through all of homes and communities. This is especially true of people living in apartments, urban areas or in crowded neighborhoods.
The schedule for removing the lockdown should be determined by local communities. Communities at the peak of the outbreak might want to hold off on ending the lock down.
BTW, some businesses like the NBA will have a hard time reviving because sane people will not go to such big ticket events.
Sit down restaurants will have a hard time getting their customers back.
I favor ending the government imposed lockdown.
I think your point about immune system response is HUGE. It is good to build immunity while that is on our side. In addition, the fall and winter come with flu season. If we have not built immunity by that point, we will likely see a lot more deaths with the two illnesses happening at the same time.
I agree with you about local communities deciding how to proceed.
The thing we call "flu season" might be a result of our immune system. It is likely that our immune system follows the seasons. We are more likely to get the flu in the winter because our immune systems aren't active in the winter.
We can see this in vitamin D. Vitamin D is activated by direct sunlight on our skin. We do not have as much activated vitamin D in the winter. Because our immune systems are open, people are more prone to get the flu.
Do some web searches on vitamin D and the immune system. Nestled among all the companies trying to sell supplements, you will occasionally find a decent article about the immune system.
Good point about the seasonality of the immune system. Another component is the recent concern that the healthcare system might be overwhelmed if a second COVID-19 wave hits in the fall at the same time as the flu returns. Along with possibly harnessing the seasonality of the immune system, opening up now could also separate the two threats and balance the load on the healthcare system.
I agree about businesses like the NBA. In order to survive, it seems like they might need to space out the seats, limit the arenas to smaller crowds, and raise ticket prices.
If "The flu season" is caused by seasonal variations in our immune system; then we might want to think about the way that we respond to the flu. Right now we face flu like it was something caused by a specific virus and that we have to fight that specific virus. If it is being caused by natural fluctuations in our immune response; then we should adjust our approach to the season and develop a regime for immune system enhancement instead of just a vaccine aimed at a specific virus.
Some basic information that I did not know until recently, and this is not my area of expertise so please correct me if it is yours. Coronavirus is a general term used to identify a subfamily of related viruses. COVID-19 is a general term used to identify disease caused by a particular coronavirus strain, which was recently identified as SARS-CoV-2. Researchers have traced some variants of this strain labelled Type A which mutated into Type B and Type C, and there are other reports identifying hotspots for each type. I assume there will be different overall antibody numbers and mortality rates in different regions due to the particular type of infection. The numbers reported in the US are from Johns Hopkins University & Medicine who are tracking COVID-19 disease under the following guidelines:
The CDC guidelines state the following:
Testing is limited and varies by region, and without time for peer review it's difficult to be certain of much right now. Meanwhile the media is notorious for sensationalizing science and using the term coronavirus, making it unclear if they mean COVID-19.
As much as we know, this virus hurts at-risk population the most, so a lockdown protects that demographic, but there is also damage to be measured from halting society, and I think the focus should be on long-term care for how to manage large populations living with this virus including vaccinations and natural antibody immunity but also changing our health standards around at-risk populations and when using public facilities like wearing a mask and disinfecting surfaces frequently. From a broader viewpoint, I think this is an indication of the financial value of scientific investment because the healthier nations will have better economies.
I think that businesses have a natural incentive to try to slow the spread through requiring masks and cleaning frequently. No one wants to be blamed for deaths due to neglect.
I think the big problem right now is that we have reacted in a way that is preparing for the absolute worst case scenario without knowing if it will actually work. Though the common cliche goes "prepare for the worst, and hope for the best," I would point out the longer we keep everyone locked down, the more long term damage we are doing. I think it is important that we leave the decision to local governments and businesses on how to best proceed. Worst comes to worse, those at risk are free to take any measures necessary to protect themselves.
As you said, I think the media is blowing this whole situation way out of proportion. People seem to forget that death and disease happen. Yes, it is scary, but we should not shut down all of society for 45 days if we do not even know if it is doing anything substantial to prevent it. What we do know is that the long term effects of this shut down are grave. We should take measures to ensure social distancing, and local communities should decide what is best for themselves going forward.
I am not an expert either and your use of terms seems looks basically right. COVID-19 refers to the disease. SARS-CoV-2 refers to the virus.
There is one linguistic hair to split: You said: " COVID-19 is a general term."
I think " COVID-19" is considered a specific term. It refers a specific disease that was first identified as a novel disease at the end of 2019. The disease turned into a pandemic in 2020. Each case of COVID-19 is an incident of the disease.
I suspect historians will consider the pandemic to be a single event ... even though it was huge. I suspect that we will see COVID-19 used as the name for this pandemic. It is still specific referring to a specific pandemic.
It appears that people are now using COVID as the general term for this class of disease. I think they were using SARS before.
Some typographical systems consider the dash to be white space; so they treat COVID-19 and COVID19 as the same term.
Thanks for the info on the CDC and Johns Hopkins guidelines. I was not aware of their stated criteria for counting cases and fatalities.
I agree with your point on protecting at-risk populations. I once had a coworker who, when talking about "action items" from meetings, used to say: "If everyone owns it, then no one owns it." Along the same lines, I think it's likely that expenses diverted to "protecting everyone" could have been better used if they were focused on protecting the people who are actually at high risk.
thanks a lot for your support !!!
(if you dont want these or consider it spam then please leave a reply to this comment instead of downvoting and i will follow up)
unless stated otherwise, you receive these because you voted on a @goldmanmorgan post
$trendotoken
Congratulations @tyrnannoght, you successfuly trended the post shared by @cmp2020!
@cmp2020 will receive 0.27349650 TRDO & @tyrnannoght will get 0.18233100 TRDO curation in 3 Days from Post Created Date!
"Call TRDO, Your Comment Worth Something!"
To view or trade TRDO go to steem-engine.com
Join TRDO Discord Channel or Join TRDO Web Site
Congratulations @cmp2020, your post successfully recieved 0.2734965 TRDO from below listed TRENDO callers:
To view or trade TRDO go to steem-engine.com
Join TRDO Discord Channel or Join TRDO Web Site
Thanks for participating in the discussion! If you wish to join this week's discussion, feel free to share your favorite pet stories!