quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by muttleysgone:
I came to the conclusion back in March that this was mostly bullshit designed to strike fear into the hearts of the masses and bring them under control. Nothing since then has caused me to rethink this conclusion. I am in the "at risk" portion of the population, being 78 years old and having a mild form of COPD (chronic bronshitis). To hell with my governor and public health officials. I am going about my like as I have in the past.

Good attitude. We have wasted a year of our lives.

quote:

Originally posted by muttleysgone:
I have not wasted mine. I pay little attention to talking heads on TV. When our governor shut down the state and told everyone they were confined to quarters, I paid attention to what most people in my area were doing. A big sign was erected at the entrances to the city closest to me telling people to stay at home. They could all see it from their vehicles while travelling to businesses that our governor categorized as "life sustaining," WalMart, Home Depot, Target, and Lowes for some examples. While we were ordered to shelter in place, the lines at supermarkets to buy toilet paper were reminicent of a liquor store at 5:30 PM on New Years Eve, and the parking lots at the four life sustainers above were filled most days. When my government sent me a check, which I did not need, I did what they wanted me to do. I spent it. I bought a nice new deer rifle. A man can't possibly have too many deer rifles, can he? At every opportunity, I go outside to exercise. One of my favorite places to do that is my hunting camp. I can work up a sweat using my chainsaw, take a nice long walk and do inventory of game populations, or just sit on the porch, pop the cap on a foamer, and contemplate life as it is and would be if I were in charge. Life is good if you decide to make it so, and I am too happy with things as they are to pay much attention to politicians. My doctor hunts birds with me and my dog. He told me one day, "Keep doing whatever you are doing. It seems to be working for you." I am following his advice. By the way, he misses birds as often as I do.

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

A mistake which has been made almost everywhere is a failure to reliably test a large sample of the population to determine just how widespread the infection is among asymptomatic persons. It's not hard to figure out how to keep symptomatic people from spreading the virus, but if you don't know that someone is infected it's pretty difficult to isolate them.

How would one go about testing everyone? Would you have locked down NYC with the Guard and mandated 100% testing of all within the confines...isolating the ones infected? That is pretty much how veterinarians handle farms. Should people and municipalities be handled similarly?

Without the above (which was used in a few other countries), I have a hard time buying the testing yourself out of the disease argument.

And if you are going to test in the onset in high numbers...where do the “accuracy validated” easy/rapid tests (a necessity for this) come from to a novel antigen???

No disrespect meant...just food for thought.

Here in Idaho there are little white tents (empty now) that were to be used as remote testing sites. I figure if you simply staffed the tents on a regular schedule and put a sign that says “Free Covid-19 Testing” (and of course these are run by the local hospitals), over them, people will want to know empirically whether they are + or - and drive through.

Mass testing isn’t about force, like most things, it’s about removing the barrier to entry. Make it so easy to get tested (repeatedly if needed) and people will do it. And it will be cheaper than all that stimulus money.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

A mistake which has been made almost everywhere is a failure to reliably test a large sample of the population to determine just how widespread the infection is among asymptomatic persons. It's not hard to figure out how to keep symptomatic people from spreading the virus, but if you don't know that someone is infected it's pretty difficult to isolate them.

How would one go about testing everyone? Would you have locked down NYC with the Guard and mandated 100% testing of all within the confines...isolating the ones infected? That is pretty much how veterinarians handle farms. Should people and municipalities be handled similarly?

Without the above (which was used in a few other countries), I have a hard time buying the testing yourself out of the disease argument.

And if you are going to test in the onset in high numbers...where do the “accuracy validated” easy/rapid tests (a necessity for this) come from to a novel antigen???

No disrespect meant...just food for thought.

Here in Idaho there are little white tents (empty now) that were to be used as remote testing sites. I figure if you simply staffed the tents on a regular schedule and put a sign that says “Free Covid-19 Testing” (and of course these are run by the local hospitals), over them, people will want to know empirically whether they are + or - and drive through.

Mass testing isn’t about force, like most things, it’s about removing the barrier to entry. Make it so easy to get tested (repeatedly if needed) and people will do it. And it will be cheaper than all that stimulus money.

OK...maybe you are right...certainly debatable. But early in the game, with a novel antigen, where do you get the “accuracy validated” rapid easy-to-use PCR test kits? A magic wand? (No disrespect meant—just being a smart-ass)

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

A mistake which has been made almost everywhere is a failure to reliably test a large sample of the population to determine just how widespread the infection is among asymptomatic persons. It's not hard to figure out how to keep symptomatic people from spreading the virus, but if you don't know that someone is infected it's pretty difficult to isolate them.

How would one go about testing everyone? Would you have locked down NYC with the Guard and mandated 100% testing of all within the confines...isolating the ones infected? That is pretty much how veterinarians handle farms. Should people and municipalities be handled similarly?

Without the above (which was used in a few other countries), I have a hard time buying the testing yourself out of the disease argument.

And if you are going to test in the onset in high numbers...where do the “accuracy validated” easy/rapid tests (a necessity for this) come from to a novel antigen???

No disrespect meant...just food for thought.

Here in Idaho there are little white tents (empty now) that were to be used as remote testing sites. I figure if you simply staffed the tents on a regular schedule and put a sign that says “Free Covid-19 Testing” (and of course these are run by the local hospitals), over them, people will want to know empirically whether they are + or - and drive through.

Mass testing isn’t about force, like most things, it’s about removing the barrier to entry. Make it so easy to get tested (repeatedly if needed) and people will do it. And it will be cheaper than all that stimulus money.

OK...maybe you are right...certainly debatable. But early in the game, with a novel antigen, where do you get the “accuracy validated” rapid easy-to-use PCR test kits? A magic wand? (No disrespect meant—just being a smart-ass)

Of course I don’t have that answer except to say S Korea figured it out. How they did it, dunno. But even where we are now with the disease, CV testing should be easy to get. We’ve had a slight uptick in cases here In Idaho (supposedly due to bars being opened) so it’s set us back a little. If those folks who were in the bars could, over the next week or so, get tested, they could self-quarantine - and I think they would do it. I think the people will make good decisions when they have good info on which to make the decisions, it’s just that info is hard to get sometimes.