Tacenda Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 3 hours ago, pogi said: Thanks. That is a misleading list though. Those are simply the primary indicators of severe disease with Covid. The vast majority of cases don’t actually present with shortness of breath or difficulty breathing. Those are the symptoms you have to have for them to test for Covid in the states, but it can, and mostly does present with all of the symptoms listed in the flu. They are trying to screen who is being tested because of limited supplies and poor organizational efforts. We simply are dropping the ball. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu%3famp=true Thanks, good to know, glad for the correction Pogi.
Bernard Gui Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 2 hours ago, pogi said: I am not naive enough to pretend like there are instant solutions, cures etc. I don’t expect any of that. I don’t pretend that Trump can stop this outbreak. But I do expect, at the very least, appropriate monitoring and testing so that people who truly are infected will know it and can be appropriately isolated. We have had way more time to prepare for testing than China ever did and have simply failed to execute it. I don’t blame trump for the outbreak, but I think it would be foolish to not assess the response, just like I am sure we did with the Polio epidemic and made improvements based on those assessments of response. That’s different than politicizing the outbreak and using it as a cudgel to beat one’s opponents, which is what is happening in many quarters (perhaps not your intention) right now. Such things magnify and exacerbate the chaos surrounding emergencies. They are the opposite of helpful. 2
Bernard Gui Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Navidad said: I knew my post would not be popular. However, I don't think I voiced objection to anything. I voiced discomfort... my own personal discomfort, nothing more. To answer your question however, I would also be equally uncomfortable with a worship service talk or hymn focusing on a reformer. I get so confused about this forum. I will remember in the future that expressions of discomfort or uncertainty are not allowed. Which is a considerable over-reaction to my simply providing a few of many examples of hymns from other churches that extol figures other than the Godhead. Do they disturb you as much as Praise to the Man? Oh, and I know it won't matter but if I were a Mennonite pastor I would never schedule a sermon about Menno Simons for a worship service. Why not? Because I would be equally uncomfortable with that. Why would that not matter? If I were there as a visitor, I would have no problem if you did do that. I would find it informative and interesting. It would help me understand why you chose to be a pastor for your faith. I would have no reason to question your commitment to God. Edited March 10, 2020 by Bernard Gui 2
pogi Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Just ran across this. Gives reasons to be optimistic about containing the virus: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/coronavirus-ten-reasons-not-to-panic I think that is a good article and assessment of the situation. I totally agree with the conclusion that there is reason to be concerned but not panic. I don’t think it gives reasons to be optimistic about containing the virus before it spreads throughout the US and world though. The first step in containment is effective surveillance, which is why I have zero hope for this being contained in the US because of anything we are doing. The only hope I have is that it fizzes out with the changing season. If I lived in a nursing home in the US, I’d be rightfully a little more than concerned however. 2
Calm Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) 34 minutes ago, pogi said: The first step in containment is effective surveillance, which is why I have zero hope for this being contained in the US because of anything we are doing. Not only that, how do you study the spread of a disease and its impact if you only track the serious cases? The US has its own culture and environment and while other countries' approaches can be applied, it would make more sense to me that for future planning of future epidemics, a broader awareness of the impact at all levels of the illness be studied. For example, we wouldn't really have a clue about the actual cost of alcoholism to our society is we ignored missed days at work, lowered productivity, accidents caused by, etc and instead only tracked hospitalizations and deaths. Edited March 10, 2020 by Calm 2
Teancum Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 14 hours ago, mfbukowski said: I do not sing that song. I will stand or sit, whatever the congregations do, I do not want to "protest", I just do not sing. I too think it is inappropriate Well apparently you are just wrong. So says Scott Lloyd at least. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 10, 2020 Author Posted March 10, 2020 3 hours ago, ksfisher said: The link isn't working. Worked for me just now. Try again.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 10, 2020 Author Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Teancum said: Well apparently you are just wrong. So says Scott Lloyd at least. I already told him that. No need to pile on. Edited March 10, 2020 by Scott Lloyd
Teancum Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: I’ve been paying attention to the frequent updates and news conferences from the task force under Vice President Pence. If and when I see clear indication of mismanagement or neglect, I’ll be right there with you. But so far, I’ve not seen it. Just partisan bellyaching from some who gleefully anticipate the efforts at containment will fail just so it will bring down Trump’s presidency. A reprehensible motive, in my view. Shame on them. During earlier times, we in this country it through periods of war and crisis by pulling together; we need to do the same now. For updates, warnings and advice go to coronavirus.org. I thought politics were off base on this board? 2
Teancum Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I already told him that. No need to pile on. 😋
Scott Lloyd Posted March 10, 2020 Author Posted March 10, 2020 5 minutes ago, Teancum said: I thought politics were off base on this board? Heaven help us if we can’t call for an end to politicizing a health crisis without being accused of politicizing a health crisis. 2
bsjkki Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 I'm not sure the church should hold general conference with a live audience. My sister plans to travel from Oklahoma. She is in a high risk category. She should not get on a plane but still wants to go. Anyone over 60, with heart issues, lung issues or diabetes should not attend conference or travel by plane. The church should support CDC guidelines and discourage people who are in these groups from attending conference. (Does that wipe out the apostles and GA's from attending?) What a nightmare it will be if conference is a contagion point. 1
ksfisher Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 24 minutes ago, bsjkki said: I'm not sure the church should hold general conference with a live audience. My sister plans to travel from Oklahoma. She is in a high risk category. She should not get on a plane but still wants to go. Anyone over 60, with heart issues, lung issues or diabetes should not attend conference or travel by plane. The church should support CDC guidelines and discourage people who are in these groups from attending conference. (Does that wipe out the apostles and GA's from attending?) What a nightmare it will be if conference is a contagion point. Q. If traveling on a plane, how do I stay safe? It's not the cabin air you need to worry about. It's keeping your hands clean. Monday's Q&A: How can someone with coronavirus (but no symptoms) infect others? Always be mindful of where your hands have been, travel medicine specialist Dr. Richard Dawood said. Airport handrails, door handles and airplane lavatory levers are notoriously dirty. "It is OK to touch these things as long as you then wash or sanitize your hands before contaminating your face, touching or handling food," Dawood said. "Hand sanitizers are great. So are antiseptic hand wipes, which you can also use to wipe down armrests, remote controls at your seat and your tray table." Q. Since a plane's cabin keeps circulating air, will I get sick if another passenger is sick? Most viruses don't spread easily on airplanes because of how the air circulates and is filtered, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. Modern commercial jets recirculate 10-50% of the air in the cabin, mixed with outside air. "The recirculated air passes through a series of filters 20--30 times per hour," the CDC says. "Furthermore, air generally circulates in defined areas within the aircraft, thus limiting the radius of distribution of pathogens spread by small-particle aerosols. As a result, the cabin air environment is not conducive to the spread of most infectious diseases." Still, try to avoid contact with anyone sneezing or coughing. And if you're feeling sick, cover your entire mouth and nose with the inside of your elbow when you cough or sneeze. https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/10/health/coronavirus-q-and-a-tuesday-march-10/index.html 1
Navidad Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: I respect everything you said. It simply is a matter that I am not you and you are not me. Yes, any of those songs would make me uncomfortable. None of them would make you uncomfortable. There are probably a dozen things in life that might make your uncomfortable, but not me. The second definition in Miriam Webster for "praise" is "to glorify (a god or saint) especially by the attribution of perfections." That would sort of match my definition of a praise song, a praise service, or the praise aspect of worship. I would eliminate the "or saint" part however. The "attribution of perfections" belongs to no man or woman. Heb. 11 certainly extols the faith of the Biblical heroes. It doesn't extol the heroes however. I don't believe I ever said that I don't think the folks should sing "Praise to the Man." I said I was uncomfortable with it. I also wasn't making it specifically about Mormonism, although I realize the context was and is predominantly Mormon, just by the very nature of the forum. If I were a Mennonite pastor and you came to my worship service. I would certainly be interested in knowing what, if anything made you uncomfortable. I would hope that I would show some empathy and react with kindness. I am constantly amazed on this forum with the utter lack of interest in how other Christians perceive your faith, doctrine, polity, etc. That is an "I" statement, not a "you" statement. I love this quote by Roy T Bennett - “Listen with curiosity. Speak with honesty. Act with integrity. The greatest problem with communication is we don’t listen to understand. We listen to reply. When we listen with curiosity, we don’t listen with the intent to reply. We listen for what’s behind the words.” Methinks that what you thought was behind my words was an anti-Mormon sentiment. I wish we could get beyond that. 1
bsjkki Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 10 minutes ago, ksfisher said: Q. If traveling on a plane, how do I stay safe? It's not the cabin air you need to worry about. It's keeping your hands clean. Monday's Q&A: How can someone with coronavirus (but no symptoms) infect others? Always be mindful of where your hands have been, travel medicine specialist Dr. Richard Dawood said. Airport handrails, door handles and airplane lavatory levers are notoriously dirty. "It is OK to touch these things as long as you then wash or sanitize your hands before contaminating your face, touching or handling food," Dawood said. "Hand sanitizers are great. So are antiseptic hand wipes, which you can also use to wipe down armrests, remote controls at your seat and your tray table." Q. Since a plane's cabin keeps circulating air, will I get sick if another passenger is sick? Most viruses don't spread easily on airplanes because of how the air circulates and is filtered, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. Modern commercial jets recirculate 10-50% of the air in the cabin, mixed with outside air. "The recirculated air passes through a series of filters 20--30 times per hour," the CDC says. "Furthermore, air generally circulates in defined areas within the aircraft, thus limiting the radius of distribution of pathogens spread by small-particle aerosols. As a result, the cabin air environment is not conducive to the spread of most infectious diseases." Still, try to avoid contact with anyone sneezing or coughing. And if you're feeling sick, cover your entire mouth and nose with the inside of your elbow when you cough or sneeze. https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/10/health/coronavirus-q-and-a-tuesday-march-10/index.html Good advice for those who are not high risk but for those who are they should not travel. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/high-risk-complications.html Avoid crowds, especially in poorly ventilated spaces. Your risk of exposure to respiratory viruses like COVID-19 may increase in crowded, closed-in settings with little air circulation if there are people in the crowd who are sick. Avoid all non-essential travel including plane trips, and especially avoid embarking on cruise ships. If COVID-19 is spreading in your community, take extra measures to put distance between yourself and other people to further reduce your risk of being exposed to this new virus. Stay home as much as possible. 2
Robert F. Smith Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 16 hours ago, pogi said: I said "children under 10" - babies and infants are included in that data. Making claims like this can stoke unnecessary fear and panic in the hearts of parents of babies and infants who don't know better. The last thing we need is to instigate even more hysteria than we already have. It becomes reckless when it is unfounded. The CDC and WHO all agree, there is no reason for parents to fear. We have absolutely no reason or evidence to suggest otherwise. To spread such claims is particularly harmful when there are reasons that sound believable, such as "babies have weak immune systems". That is a true statement and thus sounds reasonable enough to make such a conclusion...until you actually understand the science. The lay person who doesn't understand the many factors in play in how disease might affect infants, will likely run with it - but it is not based in sound medical science. It is, I hate to say it, "fake news". There is literally no evidence or data to support it and it is based on bad science. It is easy to prove false that babies are more susceptible to all disease because of their weak immune systems. I many cases, they are actually less vulnerable. I don't have faith in the worldwide stats either. I have even less faith in US stats. We are not even close to being up to par with the rest of the world with testing and reporting. It is embarrassing, frankly, that the wealthiest and arguably the most developed nation in the world can't test and track the disease like China has. To be honest, I am sick right now with every single symptom of Covid-19. With my line of work, I see frequent return travelers/cruisers who go all over the world, I very easily could have been infected from a return traveler from a risk area. Guess what? They won't test me. It's a freaking joke! In Utah, they will only test you if you have high fever and shortness of breath (the vast minority of cases) or if you personally have traveled to a risk area and have any symptoms. Well, that leaves an enormous gap for the virus to spread in our community undetected. The stats are simply wrong. But the limited data we do have is significant enough and good enough to make good judgments about who is at greatest risk. Out of 4,000 reported deaths world wide, not one single child under 10 has been included in that tally (that includes "babies"). Unless there is some world-wide conspiracy to not report infant and children deaths, it seems outrageous to suggest that babies are more vulnerable. How do you explain those numbers if they are higher risk as you claim? Those at higher risk will be dying more, period. This is not isolated to cruise ships and elderly homes in Washington. Why aren't we seeing any babies dying...anywhere? You trust the stats enough to believe that older people and those with chronic disease are at greater risk, right? So, why do you not trust those same stats when it comes to babies? The stats we have clearly are not giving us the big picture, but the numbers we do have give us a big enough picture to say with an extremely high degree of confidence that newborns, infants, and children are not at high risk for severe disease or death. I want to see reliable U.S. stats, not bare assertion. The reason why we still have silly billies claiming that life spans used to be much shorter than today is due to failure to recognize that infant mortality rates were the prime reason for the overall notion that lifespans were shorter. In fact, they were not. Most people who lived past infancy had a typical lifespan of modern man. Even today, the USA has such a high infant mortality rate (similar to a third world country) that it belies all the brave claims you are making. Due to overuse of antibiotics, and the lack of adequate pre- and post-natal care, America has a very high infant mortality rate. It is unconscionable. People don't want to believe it, so it must not be true. The soundest logic you're gonna get. https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/03/01/report-makes-recommendations-address-michigan-infant-mortality-rate/4902170002/ https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/03/01/report-makes-recommendations-address-michigan-infant-mortality-rate/4902170002/
Bernard Gui Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) On 3/10/2020 at 2:50 PM, Navidad said: I respect everything you said. It simply is a matter that I am not you and you are not me. Yes, any of those songs would make me uncomfortable. None of them would make you uncomfortable. There are probably a dozen things in life that might make your uncomfortable, but not me. The second definition in Miriam Webster for "praise" is "to glorify (a god or saint) especially by the attribution of perfections." That would sort of match my definition of a praise song, a praise service, or the praise aspect of worship. I would eliminate the "or saint" part however. The "attribution of perfections" belongs to no man or woman. Heb. 11 certainly extols the faith of the Biblical heroes. It doesn't extol the heroes however. I don't believe I ever said that I don't think the folks should sing "Praise to the Man." I said I was uncomfortable with it. I also wasn't making it specifically about Mormonism, although I realize the context was and is predominantly Mormon, just by the very nature of the forum. If I were a Mennonite pastor and you came to my worship service. I would certainly be interested in knowing what, if anything made you uncomfortable. I would hope that I would show some empathy and react with kindness. I am constantly amazed on this forum with the utter lack of interest in how other Christians perceive your faith, doctrine, polity, etc. That is an "I" statement, not a "you" statement. I love this quote by Roy T Bennett - “Listen with curiosity. Speak with honesty. Act with integrity. The greatest problem with communication is we don’t listen to understand. We listen to reply. When we listen with curiosity, we don’t listen with the intent to reply. We listen for what’s behind the words.” Methinks that what you thought was behind my words was an anti-Mormon sentiment. I wish we could get beyond that. Thank you. I doubt there are too many folks out there who are more familiar with how others see their faith as life-long LDS ( in my case 73 years and returned missionary in 4 Latin American countries) who have decades-long been involved with on-line LDS discussion boards (since the inception of this one and its predecessor). I have pretty much heard it all, including the stuff piled on by disgruntled family members. That said, I would not go into someone else’s church and be made uncomfortable by their songs or sermons. One reason I might be there could be to listen with curiosity and empathy. After all, that’s their religion and I hold fast to our Article of Faith that speaks to allowing everyone to worship however they wish. So, when listening to sermons and songs about Joseph Smith in an LDS Church, would one listen to understand or to find things that make one uncomfortable? With your extensive experiences in the LDS community, you probably have observed the feelings we have for Joseph and other prophets, including the Biblical and Book of Mormon prophets. I doubt that there are few that hold them in higher esteem than we.....but let’s note once more that we do not worship them. I have a hard time understanding your discomfort with hymns or sermons we might have about them. Would you also be distressed by the hymns To Nephi Seer of Olden Times or O How Lovely Was the Morning? Edited March 12, 2020 by Bernard Gui 2
pogi Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: I want to see reliable U.S. stats, not bare assertion. I am having a hard time understanding why you think deaths of children under 10 are not being reported anywhere. These are not bare assertions. The CDC and WHO don’t gamble like that with the health and safety of newborns. However, the original assertion that children are more susceptible is a bare assertion. If you are waiting for reliable US stats, you will be waiting indefinitely, unless they change testing criteria in the US. Surveillance efforts in many areas abroad are much more robust and reliable...we are not the best at everything. We have had more than sufficient time to prepare for the arrival of the virus at our door steps, and we don’t even have enough test kits to test everyone in a nursing home where people are dying by the dozens (and this is just getting started!). The ball is being dropped... Edited March 10, 2020 by pogi
cacheman Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 16 minutes ago, pogi said: I am having a hard time understanding why you think deaths of children under 10 are not being reported anywhere. These are not bare assertions. The CDC and WHO don’t gamble like that with the health and safety of newborns. However, the original assertion that children are more susceptible is a bare assertion. If you are waiting for reliable US stats, you will be waiting indefinitely, unless they change testing criteria in the US. Surveillance efforts in many areas abroad are much more robust and reliable...we are not the best at everything. We have had more than sufficient time to prepare for the arrival of the virus at our door steps, and we don’t even have enough test kits to test everyone in a nursing home where people are dying by the dozens (and this is just getting started!). The ball is being dropped... You've mentioned the significantly increased mortality rates with increasing age, which helps alleviate some anxiety in a lot of folks, and helps us know where to focus our containment and treatment efforts. I can't help but wonder what percentage of the fatalities in the 20 to 60 year old age group consist of health care workers. Even with protective measures, those on the front lines surely have increased (and even continual) exposure. I think of people like you, and my daughter-in-law (a nurse). I have a lot of respect for those that care for the sick and vulnerable despite the risks. I'm picturing in my mind the seemingly young and healthy doctor in Wuhan who succumbed to the disease. 3
Navidad Posted March 10, 2020 Posted March 10, 2020 18 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: So, when listening to sermons and songs about Joseph Smith in an LDS Church, would one listen to understand or for things that make one uncomfortable? I am listening with curiosity. Ok . . . . you're right! I went to church Sunday morning to listen for things that make me uncomfortable. I crave being uncomfortable. No you're not and no I didn't! 😀 But thanks for listening with curiosity anyway. As I said earlier I do find that sometimes I learn best by being uncomfortable. It causes me to try and figure out why and whether the discomfort is more coming from me or from the external stimulus. I often find it is a mixture of the two. That is what I tried to say in my initial statement. You are 73 and have had a long and faithful life. I am 71 and have had a long and faithful life. My wife and I have embarked on a new adventure to try and back up my reading about Mormonism with actually living with Mormons and spending lots of time on this forum. One of the primary reasons we moved to the colonies from San Diego when I retired was. . . well because of the colonies! Part of the adventure of living in a complex new environment is an inevitable discomfort. I voiced that discomfort on this forum yesterday. That is probably something I should not do here. In the future I will keep it to myself. Even as you said in your most recent reply, "I have pretty much heard it all, including the stuff piled on by disgruntled family members." I guess that just reinforces my sense that you believe you know everything I am going to say in advance. You can predict the motives for what I say, and can see into my heart for why I am even here or in the ward to begin with! I didn't realize you had interacted with a 71 year old Mennonite/Baptist in the past who moved to a foreign country to live near LDS colonies, who attends the ward faithfully, who speaks about LDS history at least 10 times a year, and who as a non-member has actually survived 2.5 years on this forum (just barely sometimes), and who has an absolute belief in the certainty of the Christian faith of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I am pretty sure there are a lot me hanging around who altogether provide you an accurate perspective from which to stereotype me with all those you have heard before. Hey, take heart, let me encourage you that at 73 years of age you are not too old to meet someone unlike anyone you have ever met before! Please allow me to say one more thing in the hopes of helping you (collectively) understand us (my wife and I). My wife is pretty strong. Yesterday she apparently broke down in Relief Society and sobbed because someone reminded her specifically and in person that she cannot possibly be filled with the Holy Ghost and have the gifts of the Holy Ghost since she is not a LDS church member. After a long and faithful life of spiritual maturity beyond almost anyone I know, she finally broke down from the discomfort of that encounter. Several of the kind ladies gathered around her after the meeting as she opened up to them. They assured her that the Church does not teach that only LDS church members are filled with and have the gifts of the Holy Spirit. That confused her because she reads a lot too. That was yesterday. Today her two ministering sisters came by the house. Nothing was said about yesterday. But this time her dear friend and sister broke down and sobbed in our living room. Apparently the end of last week they found out her husband, another dear friend of ours in the ward is full of cancer that he has no chance of survival outside of the Lord working a miracle. I wasn't in the room (in fact I was on this forum), but apparently she and her dear friend hugged and cried together over this unexpected news and potential loss. So, in a sense we are deeply involved in the ward from the perspective that it can hurt us; while we also deeply feel the hurt of those we love when they hurt as well. It is complex, and yes, at times uncomfortable. It is also an ongoing lesson in spiritual growth. I won't share my discomfort here anyone. First, it pales in comparison to what my wife felt yesterday and what her friend felt today. My discomfort is pretty much irrelevant and inconsequential compare to those. Please just don't prejudge us from what you have heard before. Please. 1
bsjkki Posted March 11, 2020 Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) From KSL State officials in discussion with church leaders about COVID-19 impact to general conference Government officials have been in meetings with leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to discuss potential impacts the novel coronavirus could have on the upcoming April general conference, Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox said at a Tuesday news conference. He was told that leaders would be meeting to further discuss the situation. While a decision about any changes to the conference has not been made, Cox said to “stay tuned" about any possible changes. The lieutenant governor said state officials have also had conversations with other faith leaders about responding to the coronavirus outbreak. The church previously discouraged members from international travel to attend the conference. Edited March 11, 2020 by bsjkki 1
Robert F. Smith Posted March 11, 2020 Posted March 11, 2020 7 hours ago, pogi said: I am having a hard time understanding why you think deaths of children under 10 are not being reported anywhere. These are not bare assertions. The CDC and WHO don’t gamble like that with the health and safety of newborns. However, the original assertion that children are more susceptible is a bare assertion. If you are waiting for reliable US stats, you will be waiting indefinitely, unless they change testing criteria in the US. Surveillance efforts in many areas abroad are much more robust and reliable...we are not the best at everything. We have had more than sufficient time to prepare for the arrival of the virus at our door steps, and we don’t even have enough test kits to test everyone in a nursing home where people are dying by the dozens (and this is just getting started!). The ball is being dropped... I think that you are pretending that we know what we in fact don't know yet. You have yet to cite reliable stats on babies, most of whom have not even been exposed. It takes time to gain a full spectrum view of the epidemiology. If, for some reason, babies are impervious to COVID-19, wonderful. But I have my doubts, and caution is certainly called for.
Teancum Posted March 11, 2020 Posted March 11, 2020 15 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Heaven help us if we can’t call for an end to politicizing a health crisis without being accused of politicizing a health crisis. The post I commented on by you was a partisan and politically biased talking point straight from Fox News and President Trump.
pogi Posted March 11, 2020 Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: I think that you are pretending that we know what we in fact don't know yet. I am only responding to defend accusations against me. I'll stop responding and let you believe whatever you want as soon as you stop making this about me. The data is reliable. We KNOW in a very reliable epidemiological sense that old people are at higher risk and should take greater precautions. Do you deny it? Guess what, it comes from the same data I am using for children. All major health organizations in the world agree that the data is sufficient to suggest that children are not at high risk, are they "pretending" too? I think you are unfairly denigrating their credibility. I am not the source of this information after all. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/children-faq.html 12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: You have yet to cite reliable stats on babies, Zero reported deaths under 10 years old is VERY reliable. AGE DEATH RATE confirmed cases DEATH RATE all cases 80+ years old 21.9% 14.8% 70-79 years old 8.0% 60-69 years old 3.6% 50-59 years old 1.3% 40-49 years old 0.4% 30-39 years old 0.2% 20-29 years old 0.2% 10-19 years old 0.2% 0-9 years old no fatalities This is based on laboratory confirmed cases and other published data. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ This is for China who has better surveillance than we do, by the way. The data matches in every region of the world this virus has hit. 12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: ...most of whom have not even been exposed. What are you talking about? Do most children have to be exposed before we can determine if they are a high risk group? That is not how epidemiology works. Have most people over 65 been exposed? Nope. This is more contagious than the flu! Over 100,000 cases worldwide. What exactly is your theory as to why you think they are not being exposed? Where are they hiding? If this was the flu, we would see lots of childhood exposure and deaths already. Kids are not somehow less exposed to this than the flu. Entire families and households are being exposed all over the globe. 12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: It takes time to gain a full spectrum view of the epidemiology. What do you mean by "full spectrum" view? There are over 100,000 lab confirmed cases in every region of the globe. Every age group has been exposed (with lab confirmed cases) enough to know if they are at risk. The data we have is more than sufficient to get a full spectrum view (in terms of age distribution) of how it affects different age groups. Edited March 11, 2020 by pogi 2
Robert F. Smith Posted March 11, 2020 Posted March 11, 2020 4 hours ago, pogi said: I am only responding to defend accusations against me. I'll stop responding and let you believe whatever you want as soon as you stop making this about me. The data is reliable. We KNOW in a very reliable epidemiological sense that old people are at higher risk and should take greater precautions. Do you deny it? Guess what, it comes from the same data I am using for children. All major health organizations in the world agree that the data is sufficient to suggest that children are not at high risk, are they "pretending" too? I think you are unfairly denigrating their credibility. I am not the source of this information after all. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/children-faq.html Zero reported deaths under 10 years old is VERY reliable. 0-9 years old no fatalities This is based on laboratory confirmed cases and other published data. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ This is for China who has better surveillance than we do, by the way. ........................ The data matches in every region of the world this virus has hit. What are you talking about? Do most children have to be exposed before we can determine if they are a high risk group? That is not how epidemiology works. Have most people over 65 been exposed? Nope. This is more contagious than the flu! Over 100,000 cases worldwide. What exactly is your theory as to why you think they are not being exposed? Where are they hiding? If this was the flu, we would see lots of childhood exposure and deaths already. Kids are not somehow less exposed to this than the flu. Entire families and households are being exposed all over the globe. What do you mean by "full spectrum" view? There are over 100,000 lab confirmed cases in every region of the globe. Every age group has been exposed (with lab confirmed cases) enough to know if they are at risk. The data we have is more than sufficient to get a full spectrum view (in terms of age distribution) of how it affects different age groups. I am glad that you have finally cited some actual sources, pogi, but I do not share your faith in totalitarian systems and their contempt for fact. You at the same time carefully ignored my previous observation that no babies were on any of the cruise ships, nor in the homes for elderly in Washington State, and that is where most of the infections first showed themselves for Americans. You are putting the cart before the horse in supposing that babies are not vulnerable. I sure hope you're right, but am amazed that you have such unquestioning faith in foreign stats. I want to see what happens stateside, after a decent interval. This is no time for a blind, devil-may-care approach to COVID-19. Caution is called for, not automatic, free-wheeling assumptions. I am glad that Americans are beginning to get the message that large gatherings are a very bad idea. Let's check in on this in a couple of months. I'll happily eat crow then, if necessary.
Recommended Posts