Sorry, but did you say it was selfish to wear a mask? How is wearing a mask selfish? How is a mandate that is designed to help others, selfish? I mean shame on the majority for trying to help those 10s of millions who are frail against this virus. To me, that's the ANTITHESIS of being selfish!
I don't get it, honestly. How friggin hard is it to wear a mask, really? The only difference is I'm not dramatically increasing the risk of infecting multiple people and potentially killing someone just by existing and not masking. It's that perspective that got us here today and is making things worse for tomorrow.
If the anti-maskers (and people who don't wear masks at small gatherings) and young didn't have all these get togethers, college parties, etc... we'd likely be in much better shape. Community spread is out of control. I fear now that the 'good news' about a vax came out, it's going to get even worse unless changes are made.. I expect those same anti-maskers and voluntary high-risk takers to now show even more bravado and care even less.
EDIT: No lockdowns in ohio again... but in a couple of weeks if things aren't trending, those high risk places (restaurants, bars, and gyms) will be closed.
I was referring to this, not the masks. Should have made that more clear.
Narrow minded, ineffective and doing more harm than good.
People who are frail should be the ones taking extra special precautions. Trying to guilt trip the rest of us for a virus that is easily transmitted and became unstoppable once it had left it's point of origin is more than a bit sad.
Once again it's time to reiterate, nothing is stopping this virus! It is everywhere! Our only choice is to live with it, to take it on and let it run it's course. Protecting the vulnerable is what we need to focus on. Not the whole populace, just the vulnerable. Shut-downs/lock-downs WILL NOT WORK! For such to work, every person on the planet would need to completely isolate and we would need to kill any and all animals that catch and carry the virus. That's just not going to happen. Calling ANYONE selfish for wanting to get on with life is itself an act of selfishness, not to mention foolish ignorance.
Well... yes, that's what I said
But that is to say, it still remains to be seen how we would pick out every single vulnerable individual and somehow isolate them from the rest of society, which in that scenario, is assumed to be propagating the disease in a largely unhindered manner (that's how it's presented here in FL, anyway.) It would somewhat work, in theory. But we have NEVER managed that with any disease, without a vaccine. Barring that, there is no known way to simply keep the most vulnerable in any population from getting exposed. It gets extra difficult with a novel disease, because we don't necessarily have a reliable way to identify who is vulnerable. Not to mention, the most vulnerable people are as intertwined with society as everyone else. It is a logistical nightmare.
The point I'm really making is that part of protecting the vulnerable IS minimizing the spread among everyone else. It's the same approach we use with every disease we vaccinate for, only we don't yet have that accessible and effective vaccine. Not everybody can get certain vaccines, and some of those people will be extremely vulnerable. Others simply will not be successfully immunized. Everyone else gets vaccinated regardless of how low the chances are of them contracting it in the first place may be, let alone having a serious go of it... because it reduces the chances of that disease getting to the people who can't be protected otherwise exponentially. The vaccines are given to protect not only healthy people who are at lower risk, but the people who are much more vulnerable than them. Reducing the exposure risk is a large part of vaccination's MO.
And that seems like a small thing, but it is the number one thing that keeps many diseases from routinely knocking out sizeable chunks of vulnerable people who also share this world with the rest of us. Abstract that last sentence out: keeping the majority of people from getting a transmittable disease also keeps the smaller number who would otherwise die from that disease alive. Everything that we do is compensating for the lack of a vaccine - the intended effect is about the same in its nature.
You know you're probably all right and all wrong at the same time.
There is no cure-all for this type of thing. Look at flu. We have vaccines, but we still get it. It still costs society a shitload of money every few seasons. We've learned to live with that expense, and we've reduced the measures to 'vaccinate the most vulnerable' alongside regular 'stay at home, get better' principles. We all share that principle, too. If you have the flu, anyone with common sense would ask you NOT to come to work because you might infect others, making the damage on that little scale, just as 'exponential' as Covid does now on a global scale. We also use general 'distancing' measures if you think of it. You won't be hugging everyone around you when you're all sweaty and feeling shitty.
Because that's what we're STILL looking at. 1M, 2M, 5M deaths on a world pop of our size is nothing. The vast majority of people who gets it, gets mild symptoms and moves on without issues. A smaller percentage seems to have longer lasting issues. And an even smaller percentage will get a severe impact of it, often a combination of high exposure + weak/frail/old physique.
Thing is, and that is where
@lexluthermiester 's ideas end and the ones of
@robot zombie and
@EarthDog begin... we have always taken measures to protect as many people as possible. The definition of 'possible' however has shifted massively since the end of WW2 in the Western world. The state would take care of you in most countries. Healthcare became a big thing, and even today it is taking up an ever bigger chunk of the gross national income year over year. We've gotten used to taking care of ALL vulnerable people - humanism and altruism has defeated evolutionary limitations. With that, the definition of 'common sense' wrt healthcare has also shifted. We say its common sense to save people. Is it, really, on a macro scale? Overpopulation is the root of all of our current issues - including Covid. Covid is merely a symptom of overpopulation - and more will follow, and have already followed and the frequency of those events is increasing
rapidly. Check a timeline on it... its perfectly synced with our rate of population growth. In my short life I've seen MKZ, BSE, H5xx (bird's flu), SARS, MERS... the list is growing rapidly - and that's just over 34 years. Its almost a bi-yearly event now that we need to cull or kill something off.
And that is where the discussion goes wrong and we also see generational divides. Older people tend to lean towards 'take care of everyone' because they've seen the rise of better healthcare, but not its downfall and they're not living the working life anymore, for the most part - they're on the
receiving end of healthcare. Younger people are and have shown to be willing to take care of everyone too, but 'up to some sort of limit'. This includes many middle-aged/working class people too, and more often than not
they're fueling the healthcare system and
not on the receiving end of it. And when they do receive - they notice they're paying a bigger, and bigger part of their monthly salary towards healthcare. Insurance cost rises every year, alongside all those other expenses while we're trying to
build up our lives. Studies have shown that elderly are going to - or are already -
eating up 2/3rd or 3/4th of the national healthcare bill, depending on the average age expection per country. A big part of that is the population pyramid that's slowly turning upside down which means less hands to feed more mouths, but also the never ending technological progress and we quickly say 'if we cán do it, we should' - especially when its 'one of our own', all rationale goes out the window.
And for everyone regardless of age, we have an instinctive response to save as many as possible and procreate to survive. Our general mindset is: more/better/faster/stronger and it defines everything we do and think.
The necessary discussion that is not open enough for debate right now... is that generational divide and our general stance on the limitations of healthcare, the cost of healthcare on society and when 'enough is enough'. Yes, there is a price tag to a human life and even on every year of living it by basic standards, and yes, we're exceeding that beyond every point of reason when it comes to handling Covid.
I think its very logical people question the current modus operandi, as its becoming clearer every day we can't sustain it.
