LogFAQs > #938530041

Nick_Saban posted...

Among other things. But political figures trying to use this crisis as a way to fundamentally change this country, it's going to evoke a response like what your seeing. I think an overwhelming majority of people were completely fine with the quarantine for 2-4 weeks to flatten the curve, but so far it's just been the government continually moving the goal posts. "2 weeks, no 4 weeks, well, no add 6 more weeks on to that, maybe in 2022? maybe never at this rate, who knows? " That's making people anxious.

Well maybe if the federal government got off its ass and actually created a sufficient amount of tests, distributed them to the states, set up federal guidelines for contract tracing, ensured protections and funds for medical facilities, etc., states would be in a much better situation right now and could start to think about reopening. Also, who specifically was saying it would take only two weeks. The most I ever heard officials say is something like "if we can force everyone inside for 14 days we could completely kill this thing" which would mean a full-fledged quarantine, not the looser social distancing that exists now.

Then the reason the conservatives are mad is what is being deemed essential is subjective and in left leaning states, some things that may not be truly essential that liberals tend to like are still okay while things that may not be truly essential that conservatives tend to like are banned.

I do agree there should be more wiggle room when deciding what is essential and non-essential. If only the federal government could put out a set of guidelines the states could follow so each state's guidelines don't seem so arbitrary and random.

If all social distancing guidelines are followed, an asymptomatic covid patient at a beach is significantly less dangerous than an asymptomatic covid patient at a grocery store that touched a few items he didn't purchase.

Yes but that same person also more likely went to the grocery store too. There are ways to get around funneling everyone through a few businesses, but those are more costly or time consuming that maybe nobody wants to take part of and certainly many people would object to it. But the other goal is to limit things that are open so that all those people who were in the grocery store at the same time then don't go to other open public places and spread it even more.

Take the example from Albany, Georgia. Reports seem to suggest that the virus spread so quickly in that town because there was an individual that went to two different funerals and then spread throughout different church communities after.

If people just follow social distancing guidelines(people should wear masks whenever possible and wash hands/use sanitizer often, keep 6ft away as much as possible, dont loiter around in stores) and we reopen everything that wants to open, we probably wont see near as much of a spike as some of you guys think. We just have to be smart about it. And for record, I really don't think these protests are smart but I understand why they're happening.

What evidence are you basing this on? I personally don't think it will be as bad as some people predict it will be, but I am not using any medical expertise to do that. I am assuming you too have no medical expertise. Maybe we should look at Sweden whose population is made up of individuals that trust their government more, listen to their government more, and did not enact any lockdown. Their total deaths and deaths/case ratio is much higher than surrounding Nordic countries.

Also, it would be great if people would follow all the guidelines. But many of these same people protesting are doing it without masks on while they stand right next to each other.